Murmur

That reshade message is not in my log files.

Hi Jan, from your experience, how accurate are performance tables for airliners in real life? 99%? 90%? I assume each aircraft is a bit different from the other, e.g. engines can be brand new or "worn out", etc. I wonder how much those factors can move the performance away from the theoretical data tables. In addition to, as you mentioned, all the other variations like external conditions, etc.

🤣

Try installing the demo version in another folder and (without any plugins, addons, or modifications) see if you still have the stutters. Then add mods one by one in the demo and see which one causes the stutters.

I just spent some time in XP12 to generate cumulus clouds, post the screenshots here, compare them with the cloud picture posted by Greazer, and then discuss with him why it's unreasonable to expect that X-Plane will flawlessly reproduce in every detail each one of the 50+ subtypes of clouds existing in real life, taking probably an inordinate amount of development time and FPS performance cost, both of which would be better spent in other areas of the sim. But then I realized I can't be bothered.

"There are no cumulus clouds in X-Plane 12". Meanwhile X-Plane 12:

Yeah, he probably used a different prompt than what we hypothesized, hence the different results, but it's been written by AI, no doubt. Everything smells too much like it. Anyway, it's great that we humans are still able to detect AI more than AI is able itself!

So I wasn't the only one thinking the same! The opening image is also 100% ChatGPT, as is the rest of the article. He also forgot to delete this:

Yes they have. They're working on a next-gen scenery which will apparently be raster based instead of vector based. This doesn't mean that it will necessarily be equal to MSFS scenery, but it will likely be significantly improved. We're probably talking still a long time though. Likely not during the v12 release.

That appared to be superficially similar, but was different. The old autoexposure darkened the whole view when there was a bright external environment, despite the sun being in view or not. Whereas, a simulation of sun blinding would be done differently: it would only manifest when the sun is in view (maybe when it's near the center of the screen, as it was in X-Plane 10, IIRC ) and it would mostly cause a decrease in contrast and detail. X-Plane 10 did a decent job in some situations, as can be seen from the above screenshot. The fact that autoexposure and the modeling of sun blinding are two different things can be verified by the fact that even with the old autoexposure feature (i.e. before 12.2) X-Plane 12 would have produced basically the same screenshot as 12.2 above.

EDIT: double post.

Even taking into consideration the limited brightness of our monitors, something could be done to model sun blinding in a flight sim. Infact X-Plane partially did that in the past. Here's X-Plane 10: VS the latest X-Plane 12.2 beta: Now that they're in the process of completely revisiting the lighting engine, maybe they will decide to improve on this aspect too. In case, that would be another unique feature among flight simulators.

Yes, probably with a realistic FOV you would get better results with my tweaked real values than the default. Another use case would be VR. In theory the enlarged default diameters would be more noticeable in VR since it should have a 1:1 FOV ratio compared to real life. EDIT: anyway, let's discuss beta 5 here, if anyone is interested in this issue let's make a new thread.

True, but it's a different issue. Indeed, X-Plane already (correctly) uses a large "bloom" effect around the sun to make it appear brighter, as we perceive it in real life. This is not affected by changing the above datarefs. In sim, the actual diameter of the sun can only be seen around sunrise/sunset, when it's a lot less bright. Yes that's exactly the reason why they intentionally made them smaller when I reported it as a bug some time ago. But then they made some changes, so I don't know if it's still intentional or if it's now a bug.