Pete Dowson

Those aren't updates of anything in FSX-SE itself, only the part of the Steam software which is loaded first and which then loads FSX-SE. This part is invoked by the substitute FSX.EXE module, which is not the "true" FSX.EXE but the steam wrapper. The steam envelope is updated regularly to keep it abreast of the other parts of steam, including its downloadable FSX-SE content, so it can advertise it and provide easy access to it, but that's all. There have been NO FSX-SE game updates since version 62615 was released about 18 months ago! The changes which concern you have been wrought by something you added, probably ORBX, with which the order of its layering is very important. The way it does it by default messed my system up -- both FSX and FSX-SE. Just check your Scenery.CFG file and start a process of layer elimination. Or search this forum as someone did actually publish a scenery layer list in the order which works well. Pete

Just set the Ground value very low. 0 for instance will delete no ground aircraft. Pete

MY VAS free is probably a lot better because I only use a simple aircraft -- a 738 designed specifically for use with ProSim737 external cockpit software. There's no cockpit panels or systems simulation withing the sim aircraft. And I'm using FSX-SE. I have also used P3D but I find, for the amounts of traffic I like and the sort of scenery I use, FSX-SE is faster and smoother. My comparison above was intended as just that, a comparison between UK2K and AS EGLLs. There was nothing implied there about performance generally, it was just a side-by-side comparison in otherwise the exact same circumstances. Pete

I did some more thorough comparison tests recently. On my system, with otherwise exactly the same settings for everything, UK2000 EGLL starts out dismally slow. Around 12 fps. It works up slowly over time to get to an eventual satisfactory 22/23 fps with an occasional 33 fps. (My tests a done with the user aircraft circling in a 360 so all views are encompassed). AS EGLL, it is the other way around, almost. It starts off at around 30 fps or even better, and gradually slows down to an eventual 18-20, with again a few very short excursions into better rates. The VAS usage for me is so similar as to be not worth worrying about -- a fairly constant 1509 VAS free (1050 max block) for UK2K and 1473 (1089) for AS. Really, with this being the case, UK2000 EGLL is best for departures (assuming you start cold, so you are at the airport for a while before moving), whilst AS EGLL is much better for arrivals. A drop to 12 fps when on approach to EGLL, along with stutters whilst it all gets drawn and populated (remembering I like plenty of AI) is very irritating and not conducive to a good landing. And things can only get worse when update my screen to 4K resolution from the 1080p I currently use. Regards Pete

No, I get the same sort of different performance on my main Flight Sim PC with FSX-SE and lots of traffic. On my other slower (development) PC UK2000 is slightly faster, but there's not much in it. I don't know why it's the other way around on the main PC. Pete

Can't find anything on "Nat Crea", but I'll ask Nat Vis for a quote for a consultation. Thanks. Pete

Good here generally, but with us leaving the EU I worry that a lot of those regulations will be ditched (as a "barrier to trade" -- and profiteering). I hope not. Yes. One or other of the LG OLEDs I think -- 65OLEDB6V, 65OLEDE6V or the top model ("signature edition") 65OLENG6V. No acrobatics in my 738 cockpit! I've been trying 30Hz with the projection and it does seem maybe a little smoother, if I limit FS to 30 fps too. Three screens are better as you don't have the bezels in the centre, obscuring runway centre lines and so on, but the height then is nowhere near enough for my view from the cockpit. It would be different if I had room for a wrap-around view, but as it is I can only accommodate a straight, or maybe slightly curved, 10 foot width. My alternative to a two screen solution is to wait and hope that 4K short throw projectors become available reasonably soon. The only ones I found are the Sony at £50,000 or their ultra wide angle short throw projector coming out in the US in April at an estimated $25000. Pete Dowson

It's a "Palit" (installed by the place I got the PC built, and looks to be the same -- 1 HDMI, 1 DVI and 3 DPs. I am using the DVI at present for 1080p on my projector. Not sure whether the TVs I'm looking at can do 30 Hz. They'll be able to do 24 Hz to match DVDs of films, so probably. Though I'd be happier at 60 Hz. I note the emphasis on "certified". There's a load of such adapters on Amazon, but most certified at 1080p. Some 4k ones only do 30Hz. Here's the only one which seems to do the job: https://www.amazon.co.uk/Plugable-DisplayPort-Supports-displays-3840x2160/dp/B00S0C7QO8/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1486118382&sr=8-3&keywords=Certified+Displayport+to+HDMI+4K Thanks for the advice! Made me look further. And I might go for the 2 card solution in any case, but an adapter is worth a try first. Pete

I have zero 4K screens. I have a 3440 x 1440 screen. I tried to emulate the effect of 2 x 4k screens by using the nVidia facility to multiply the resolution by 4. See results above. Not sure it's a really valid test, but it seemed to bear out what I've been told about resolution vs performance. Another problem I can see with what I want to do. I think my 1080 card has only one HDMI output -- the others are displayports which aren't supported by 4K TVs (I've not found a PC 4K monitor of the size I'd need -- 65"). So I might have to get another 1080 as well. Pete

Well, I decided to try some tests by using the nVidia driver's "DSR" facility, which allows you to increase the resolution of the image being sent to the video card up to 4x, with it then being reduced by the card back to your screen's capability. The results using my worst-case scenario, using my 4-year old development PC not my new faster cockpit PC are shown below. I used that PC because the screen on it is a high resolution (but below 4k) Dell curved one and I can get closer to the change from 1080p to 2 x 2160p: Both sims were at UK2000 EGLL with loads of traffic (my limiter is set to 250), and the in-sim settings are those I use generally on the cockpit. At native resolution 3440 x 1440 FSX-SE: 42 fps average P3D3.4: 32 fps average At 3X (5958 x 2494): FSX-SE: 33 fps average P3D3.4: 29 fps average At 4X (6880 x 2880): FSX-SE: 32 fps average P3D3.4: 27 fps average The 3X setting gives less pixels than the 7680 x 2160 of 2 X 4K screens side-by-side, but the 4X setting is more pixels. So the above results are encouraging. I'm staying with FSX-SE for now because in the tests it was smooth whilst P3D was very jerky. I think P3D does not like UK2000 scenery at all, and it isn't very fond of AI Traffic either! Pete

I want to upgrade my 1080p simulator screen to 4k. I'm thinking of replacing my 10 foot wide projection screen with two 4k UHD TV screens *. I need two to get the same or similar 10 foot width of view, suiting the hardware cockpit. I know my system can handle 4k scenery view output without any unacceptable performance degradation, but I cannot test with 2 such screens, and obviously don't want to go down this route if the results are going to be unacceptable. So, if anyone has tried or is actually using FSX, FSX-SE or P3D with two 4K screens connected to the same PC and displaying one or more Windows from the simulation, can they post some information about resulting performance, please? Pete Dowson * The reason for this is that I need short-throw projection, else the cockpit itself gets in the way. Short throw 4K projectors are almost non-existent. I found a Sony one, but that was priced at a whopping £50,000!

I don't know what add-on problems you had with FSX-SE, because all of mine run perfectly -- except AES -- at least they all did once updates for GSX and Active Sky came out (which was pretty fast). For many add-ons using SimConnect you need to install the FSX versions of SimConnect, but that's easy enough and already done if you have or had FSX installed beforehand. The main problems most had were to do with installation. This is no problem for new FSX-SE users without a previous FSX installation as FSX-SE looks like FSX in every way that an installer looks for. I find FSX-SE significantly faster and smoother in the sort of use I put it to -- no fancy add-on aircraft, no panels on screen, just scenery, and plenty of AI Traffic at busy complex airports. P3D has gradually got better, but I still find it too jerky and less smooth than FSX-SE as well as rather slower FPS wise. Additionally the anti-aliassing is terrible unless you set all sorts of options for it which slow it down further. For airliner flying, airport to airport, eye candy like shadows are really not so important. Just good performance and smoothness with busy airports and with typically cloudy British skies! ;-) Pete

It isn't an App but an assignable control, and it just uses the same deletion facility that the Limiter uses. I've never had a report of any crash using the facility in FSUIPC. Please report it twith details on my Support Forum, but make sure you are using the current release first, please. [LATER] Oh, I see you subsequently clarified that you weren't talking about the Zapper. Pete

No, they will be added after you enable the Limiter by setting a limit in the Miscellaneous tab of FSUIPC options. With the setting left at its default of zero (0) the option is disabled. Pete

The display library is for a dialogue window, not a normal separate window like the wnd library one. I'm not sure whether you can set a dialogue window to be always on top. I'll have a look ... ... well, TurboTop works on it, so I guess it is possible. All this ought to be in a separate thread, as it is nothing to do with the title, AND on my Support Forum, please. Can you post again over there? [LATER] Get WideClient 6.999z4 and the latest Lua library package from my Support Forum shortly, and check the "display.create" function in the library documentation. There's a new parameter. Pete

Actually, "TurboTop" works very well and has the advantage you can use it for any window. However, I checked my Lua "wnd" library code and strangely I found I'd implemented three functions which never got into the documentation! These are wnd.title wnd.hide wnd.show. I've now added these to the library documentation, but also I extended wnd.show to provide these extra functions (previously it just showed a previously hidden window): Maximize (WND_MAX) Minimize (WND_MIN) Restore (WND_RESTORE) Make Topmost. (WND_TOPMOST) So, just download the latest Wideclient (6.999z3) from the Download Links subforum on my Support Forum, and edit the VAs display lua program you are using by adding this line after the wnd.open line (assuming that still says w = wnd.open ...): wnd.show(w, WND_TOPMOST) Pete

It isn't a facility built into the Lua libraries at present. I might look to see if I can add such an option. Or possibly there's a way of doing it though a Windows command executed via the Windows shell -- you can shell commands to Windows using the ext.shell function. There are third party programs that provide this function too, eg https://www.actualtools.com//hfiles/atbsetup.exe but that one isn't free! There's also this: http://www.howtogeek.com/196958/the-3-best-ways-to-make-a-window-always-on-top-on-windows/. That does recommend on Free way: TurboTop at http://www.savardsoftware.com/turbotop/index.asp I'll let you know if i can add the option into the Lua library. Pete

Thank you. Are you volunteering? FSUIPC4 was created in 2005 and has unfortunately been continuously maintained since then. I don't even remember half the code from then. 12 years is a helluva long time for such a project, and free updates throughout. I'm 74 now and I really want to go fly my simulator and maybe work again on my model railway, neglected for most of that time. That would be nice. For me, really, P3D has been a bit of a curse I'm afraid. I feel I owe it to my users to support it, yet, so far, I myself have no real interest in it. FSX-SE wasn't so bad, being only a small change from FSX and the changes did eventually cease. P3D seems never ending. When do I get time to do "unit-tests", whatever they may be (I'd need to Google)? :-) Pete

Yes of course. It is an FSUIPC feature. All of its facilities are for FSX primarily, P3D latterly. Pete

It was the blank "FROM" field which made me omit them. As for the Transponder code in theTO position, that's down to some special code which I think I was asked to add some time ago, commented "It should have flight plan by now, but hasn't, so substitute Xpndr code for Dest ICAO". I don't recall why this was required I'm afraid. Thanks for letting me know. I'm not releasing 4.959p generally as a full new install build, 4.960, should be ready for Monday or Tuesday -- probably the latter. Pete

Good. It was a bit of a guess, just going by the picture you supplied (thanks). So does TrafficLook show local VOXATC traffic too, now? Pete

Thanks for the pic. I'll see what's up. I assume they all have positions (latitude, Longitude, Altitude?). I can't see from the pic. Be odd if they didn't but just to be sure. I might try that if there's nothing I can deduce otherwise. Thanks! Pete I think it might be the lack of any airports. FSUIPC wants the departure airport at least, but it could work without it. Can you try this test version please? FSUIPC4959p_TEST.zip Thanks Pete

I've looked at my code, and if the state string is null, FSUIPC just assumes "Sleeping" state. Whilst that isn't good for some aspects of what the data is used for, it shouldn't affect the limiter in any way. It will be acceptable as a good ground deletion candidate. The state is ignored for airborne aircraft. So I don't know why you aren't seeing the limiter working correctly for you. Note also that UT2 creates AI Traffic, with plans, and everything works okay with its injected aircraft. Does my TrafficLook program see the VoxATC traffic okay? Pete

Not sure why null status tags would stop me seeing them. Can you show me some of the entries from Traffic Explorer so I can check, please? BTW, the fixed 4.959n is now up on my Support Forum. Pete

Yes, thank you for confirming that. I think the explanation is as now explained in my edited message above -- 4.959m. Pete