odai

Hello Apologies if this is in the wrong forum, feel free to move if so. I have physical copies of the PMDG Jetstream and MD-11X addons (published by Aerosoft) that I am looking to sell. Do the end user software licenses permit this, and will there be any issues with activation on the buyers' machines (I have installed these addons already on my current system but since uninstalled them again after migrating to P3D from FSX)? Thanks! Odai Koukash.

Thanks for your response! I suspected as much - I'm guessing the only drawback is that I would need to reinstall whatever addons are installed into the main directory (so FTX Global and I'm guessing every aircraft addon) whenever I need to reinstall P3D?

Hello I recently installed P3D v3 and am slightly confused as a first time user regarding the procedure for installing addons. I was running the following addons before moving from FSX: - REX Weather Architect - REX Texture Direct - MyTraffic 6.0a - FS Global 2010 - Orbx FTX Global As I understand, the official LM stance is that all addons must be installed outside of the main directory for P3D. This was fine for most of my addons, as the content is in directories outside of the P3D folder. However, FTX Global was installed inside the main FSX folder. When I uninstalled then re-ran the installer for FTX, and selected P3D V3, the program created the content folder inside of the main P3D folder (I don't recall any option to install to another directory). I haven't tried any aircraft addons yet. Does this procedure (installing into the main P3D folder) cause any issues? Thanks Odai.

Unfortunately there still doesn't seem to be any response from Burkhard. Given he was actually online on Thursday it would be reasonable to expect him to at least post a message explaining why there is such a delay in technical support, this is terrible. I'll keep trying, but in the meantime is there any chance anyone here knows how to disable the default traffic in P3D without using the communicator (given the option to do so is greyed out for some reason)?

That seems to be a very recent change, last I checked it was 18th May. Fingers crossed for a response soon.

Apologies, I thought I'd responded to this. I did see the indexes rebuilding message, but it didn't seem to make a difference to what was actually being displayed in the sim. In any case, I've since moved to P3D and uninstalled FSX:SE. I've tried reinstalling my addons into P3D but am now having issues again with MT in P3D. Specifically, most of the options in the communicator for P3D V3 are greyed out, even after "localisation". So at the moment I'm unable to disable the default traffic in P3D. I've posted on the MT forum, but am not holding my breath for a response from Burkhard, who seems to have disappeared.

I noticed - might be responsible for my lower FPS. Still got a lot of playing around with sliders to do. Am I right in saying that autogen objects are no longer rendered using the CPU, as they were with FSX?

Just been playing with cloud cover and seeing its effect on the ground shadows. It looks incredible - this is exactly what a sim should look like in 2016! Time now to try and get my addon content installed.

So I purchased and downloaded P3D, and so far I am very impressed with the base package. I can't believe I bothered struggling with FSX for all this time. CPU usage looks a lot more even and GPU usage is far better - it maxes out GPU and VRAM usage on my GTX 960. FPS aren't great with all the eye candy but I'm hoping this will improve significantly when I upgrade to the NV GTX 1070 soon.

It would be a cleaner way to ensure the registry entries and surplus files are removed (assuming the uninstaller works correctly). Copying the mesh files only takes a couple of minutes. :smile:

Thanks. To save myself time, I thought about simply uninstalling FSG2010 but copying the actual mesh folders beforehand. As I'm only interested in the mesh, I could then just replace the folders in a new directory and point the sim to those. Would this work?

Thanks for the replies guys. Has Prepar3d fixed the issues with scenery popping in FSX? I notice I forgot to mention that I also use FS Global 2010. Will using that in P3D simply be a case of just installing P3D and pointing the scenery library to the folders in the FSG 2010 directory (outside the main sim folder)?

Hello I am currently using FSX:SE with the following addons: - REX 4 Weather Architect - REX 4 Texture Direct - Orbx FTX Global - My Traffic X 6.0a Unfortunately the various visual issues with FSX are just killing the realism, and having become accustomed to the graphics in more advanced sims like X-plane 10 the problems with performance and visuals in FSX just don't cut it anymore. I'm therefore considering switching to P3D v3 instead, although I want to make sure this would actually be an upgrade. Any general feedback as to whether the shift is worth it? Some specific concerns I have are regarding GPU and multi-core CPU utilisation, have these improved over FSX SE? How about things like scenery popping? This is extremely jarring in FSX SE (and in the vanilla MS version). Thanks!

Thanks again for all the input guys. I am also a little confused as to why disabling the Mytraffic Scenery layer doesn't appear to do anything to fix the issue, but I guess I'll just have to wait for the developer to shed some light on that. I've tried leaving the layer below any addon scenery and about propeller objects as per the manual, but this doesn't make any difference. For the time being, I have created a new folder in the same directory and just moved all the files associated with the airports which I have 3rd party scenery installed for there.

Thanks for the responses guys. Will give it a while longer on the MT forum for Burkhard to reply. I have tried leaving the MT layer in various positions, this makes no difference. As mentioned on the other forum, disabling it does nothing either. However, I went into the Mytraffic\scenery folder and found 4 files with EGLL in the file name. I moved them all out of the folder and now I no longer have the issue with overlapping buildings. I initially only removed the "BR2_EGLL" BGL file, but this didn't fix it. Once I'd moved the others, including EGLL_KA_OBJ and EGLL TOWER BEACON, the issue was resolved. So it's just a question of figuring out what these files do and if it's safe just to leave them in the scenery folder after renaming them.

Hello I recently dropped £30 on a download of MyTraffic 6 for FSX at Simmarket. Unfortunately I had a lot of issues with the product and so tried to register for an account at the simflight forums (which is where the official support channel is) - this took a while due to problems getting my email verified (ended up having to create an account using a different domain). During that period I was basically without any support as there was no other way to contact the developer. I brought this to the attention of Simmarket, and asked for a refund given the product was unusable and there was no way to contact any kind of support. A few emails later they didn't seem to understand the issue and kept insisting I use the form of support listed in the product documentation (which is outdated but clearly states the simflight forums, as it always has been). Anyway I managed to finally gain access and posted about the technical difficulties on the forum. However, that was a week ago and there hasn't been a response. It also seems the developer (Burkhard) hasn't actually visited the forum since 18th May. Any suggestions for what to do in this situation? Pretty fed up with the product, the manuals are well out of date and nothing works as it is supposed to. Pretty appalling for the price tag. I did consider just filing a claim through Paypal for a refund but am not sure how well that would go when the payment was for a download. Odai.

Hello I've been using flight sims for as long as I can remember, but since gaining my PPL a few years ago one thing I've stopped doing in FSX is using either the default or third party conventionally controlled aircraft (i.e, any aircraft other than the FBW Airbus). Manually controlling these aircraft is absolutely terrible - due to the lack of control loading it is extremely difficult to get a sense of the control inputs required. Trimming for example is usually just a case of releasing the controls then trimming until you have the attitude you want. For pitch, I often do end up just flying it with the trim wheel. Everything feels extremely unnatural. Instrument flying in the light aircraft is practically impossible - it's just too difficult to hold a stable attitude. In real life, even the big jets with hydraulically powered controls have at least some form of 'artificial feel'. One solution would obviously be to just use force feedback enabled joysticks - but for some reason there doesn't actually seem to be any in production at the moment? It would seem there isn't much demand for them, so how are people able coping without them? Odai.

It may not be as complex as a sim loaded with additional content, but even the bare-bones DTG Flight School sim we should be able to see whether DTG have improved the hardware utilisation in terms of multi-threading and GPU usage.

Sorry if this has been covered already (can't find any specific reference), but have there been significant improvements in terms of performance? It's no secret FSX is abysmally poor at efficiently utilising multiple physical and logical cores, and also that the GPU usage is very low. Have these things been improved upon for Dovetail's new releases? I recently built a new system around the i7 6700K and GTX 960 (as a stopgap for the Pascal cards), and I'm amazed at the level of detail and performance improvements to be had in much more modern sims like X-plane 10. XP10 looks incredible with the new hardware, whereas it seems like I'm struggling with FSX:SE nearly as much as I was almost 10 years ago when I first installed FSX. Hence my apprehension when I heard the new sims are built upon the old FSX code.

Hi Martin, I've looked at the following video of the preview build for Flight School, and it seems an issue present in FSX involving the vector roads is still there: It's visible throughout the latter part of the video, but a good view of the problem is at about 22:19 in. You can see a road running straight across houses/fields/small roads etc in the underlying texture. Have to say this is an incredibly jarring effect when not flying at high altitude. Is there any plan to fix this for either Flight School or the main sim product coming later this year? Thanks.

Hi Martin Any chance of some feedback on the following question I posted previously? Thanks!

Hi there, Many thanks for taking the time to answer our questions. I have a few of my own if you don't mind. Firstly, are there any plans to improve what you might call the "airfield environment" in DTG Flight Simulator? In FSX, it's pretty dry and certainly kills the illusion when all you have on the ground are a few plain service vehicles randomly zooming around the airport and a broken jetway docking system. Quite often I just start a flight at the threshold of the runway and finish right after landing. There are plenty of addons that seek to improve this in FSX (such as GSX), but it's all very disjointed/arbitrary and there isn't much incentive to use it. It would be great to have something more uniform and integrated, so that these features are represented across all airports and are more easily part of your "workflow" when carrying out a flight from start to finish. For example, timed boarding/servicing and a realistic pushback system that is linked to the sim's ATC system (so that you'd, for example, need a "push and start" clearance before commencing the pushback). It would also be great to see AI traffic do the same, kind of like how current default traffic can call jetways in vanilla FSX. It might mean the end of AI aircraft magically reversing out of a gate and suddenly spinning on the spot after getting a taxi clearance. Secondly, will the ATC system itself be updated? It's incredibly dry as it is with nothing in the way of regional variation or emergencies etc. Worse, it's often impossible to fit into the default ATC system if you want to fly a realistic IFR flight plan with SIDs, STARs etc. Finally, you mention you already have something you wish to announce on the scenery front so I'm not sure you will be able to answer this one, but I'll try anyway! As I understand it, In FSX, the scenery system places 2D textures that are selected according to a landclass file, and 3D autogen objects are placed accordingly on top. Unfortunately, the two often clash and the result looks awful. For example, 3D trees and 2D trees from the underlying texture in the same place, or 3D buildings right in the middle of wide roads in the texture. Vector roads are similarly poor, they'll often run right through things like buildings and car parks in the underlying texture. I appreciate the need to use some texturing to reduce the number of actual 3D objects being loaded, but it would be useful to have more consideration for how the two interact. I find that the "plausible world" scenery in X-plane works great. It might look a bit more dry, but it is certainly less jarring to look at than what is present in FSX and is much easier to accept with everything blending in correctly. Is there anything similar planned for DTG Flight Simulator? Thanks again!

Excellent! I'd seen that FB post before but assumed the 747-8 was going to be another copy of the 744 after seeing the VC shots (they look identical). It hadn't occurred to me that the 747-8's cockpit in real life is similar to that of the 744, for some reason I'd just assumed it was in the same style as the 787.

Hello Apologies if the answer to this is hugely obvious, I've been out of the loop for a long time. I understand that the PMDG 747 addon was recently discontinued due to the future release of a new, reworked version of the software. With the previous line up, there was an option to purchase a 747-8 external model but if I recall correctly it was simply an aesthetic change and the underlying systems, cockpit, sounds, physics etc were all identical to the 744. With the upcoming "747 v2", will the 747-8 be modelled uniquely to the same level of realism as the 744 or will it just be another aesthetic model change again? Thanks Odai.

Thanks for that. I'm assuming all I need to do is select the 'scenery' sub-folder for each of the 'regions' (ASI, EUR, LocalMeshes etc) and have separate entries for each of them? Is there any particular preference for where to have them in terms of priority?