Jump to content

jwenham

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content Count

    1,194

  • Donations

    $0.00 

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by jwenham

  3. Posted

    Thank you Ron and Jim.  I use AS2012, but not UT (WOAI for me).  I've flown twice since I posted, and tried using AS to check weather at the destination airport about 170 nm out, and then using Refresh AI button.  It could be a coincidence, but it worked OK both times.  On the 2d flight, I was flying into KATL, where I usually experience the ATC chaos.  I would be told to expect runway 26R, and I would hear ATC also telling AI to expect runway 8L.  This time all traffic landed towards the West.  

     

    Jim, I'll try your settings and report.  Again, thank you.

    B4 using the settings I posted and when I had no issue it was luck of the draw that the landing winds were close to my aircraft location winds which made everything work fine. The times I would see the landing problem was always when the destination winds were opposite my current location winds at the time RC picked a runway. With my settings I posted and with opposite current location winds from my destination winds I still was handed the proper runway from RC. Hope it works for you too!!

     

    Jim

  4. Posted

    Like many others, I'm very happy with RC4 and have been an RC user since the beginning.  So, with this posting, I'm not asking for a fix to RC4, only seeking information that maybe could be derived from a civil and meaningful dialog.  

     

    First the disclaimer for the forum police:  I've searched this forum for this topic to the best of my abilities.  I'm a real world private pilot, so I know some about aviation.  Have been using flight simulator, and other flight sims, since the Commodore 64.  

     

    I've noticed that occasionally FSX (and possibly RC) selects a runway that would not be selected in real life due to winds (beyond acceptable tail winds).  Not an issue for me since I can always ask RC for a runway of choice.  Is RC taking the lead from the default FSX ATC in determining the landing runway(s)?  It is evident there's no ATC that is aware of all the airplanes in its airspace and that all ATC decisions appear to be stand alone, but not so much on the landing runway.  Interested in what the experts know about this.  Thinking that it would be great to "help" FSX ATC a little, besides modifying AFCAD files, is there a way to set the destination's landing runway ahead of time?  I use AI Smooth to part the AI ways for me, so that's not what I'm asking.  

     

    Regards

    I have spent MANY MANY MANY, too dang many hours trying to improve this issue as well. After all my testing and setting this that and the other I have come up with a combo of setting that works well for me. If you want to give it a try here is what I do:

     

    Active Sky:

    Check - Force Destination Weather Zone

    Check - High Priority Processes

    Check - Direct Weather Control

    Check - Create Additional Stations AND Enhance Route Coverage <------- (These 2 settings seemed to help the most)

    Set - Dynamic Rate of Change to 0

    Make sure to enter your flight plan into Active Sky. I do this B4 I start FSX but not sure if that matters.

    Also make sure you have LOCK to CLOSEST selected.

     

    Ultimate Traffic 2:

    Weekly Traffic Density - I keep it @ 50% all the time

    Daily Traffic Density - None - Zip - Nada - 0%

    FSX Target Frame rate - OFF

    Max Alt Ground Traffic Visible - 18,000

    Distance to Spawn Ground Aircraft - 25 nm <-------(Very Important. With the weather settings above, your destination weather will be set when you are 80 nm                                                                                         from your destination. With a setting of 25 this gives Active Sky PLENTY of time to get the destination weather                                                                                   in place B4 your AI are added there. This will help greatly with head on landings at your destination as well as                                                                                   wrong runway assignments at your destination)

     

    These settings have worked best for me and maybe they will help you also. The wrong runway problem is NOT the fault of RC nor is it the fault of UT2 but is a product of Active Sky and how the weather is added to the sim. If you are not using RC or UT2 then you would not see these problems at all. The above ONLY needs to be used if using RC AND UT2 (at least for me).

     

    Good luck !!

     

    Jim

  6. Posted

    I think the main problem that causes AI traffic to land at the 'wrong' end of the runway is the limitation within FSX in that it cannot store weather information accurately over a distance of more than 30-40 miles, therefore packages that are creating AI traffic and allocating a runway more than 30 miles away are often likely to be incorrect. It is partially down to memory limitations within FSX which is understandable.

     

    Anyway in real life the runway direction is likely to change at the last minute and in my experience often when you are actually in circuit. Makes things more interesting when other aircraft are landing at the wrong end, just make sure you taxi quickly to vacate!

     

    Regards

    Cheryl

    I never really had the AI issues till I started using a 3rd party weather engine. I like to fly with AI and I really like what your software does but I want to make sure that my AI issues dont continue if I switch to OPUS. Again. FSX with no 3rd party weather works with no issues. The demo version cant be tested fully in that aspect.

  8. Posted

    I currently use ASE and have constant issues with the way the weather and my AI traffic play with each other. I use UT2 for AI and also sometimes use Radar Contact but lately have just been using charts and such flying SIDS/STARS. My question are:

     

    1) WIll OPUS work with Radar Contact ?

     

    2) will my UT2 AI and Opus work with each other or will I still have the problems with AI landing opposite end of the runway ?

     

    The only mode in ASE that will guarantee both will work is to use standard mode but we all know what that causes.

     

    Thanks !!

  10. Posted

    ***** UPDATE *****

    Well... sending ASE to the system tray was not my issue. It turned out to be a VSYNC issue. Who would a thought??  I use Inspector and recently updated to the latest cough..cough.. greatest. With the new inspector I MUST set the same VSYNC setting in GLOBAL as well as my FSX profile. After doing that I have had no problems and I have been flying all day. 

  11. Posted

    Last week I did several flights after a short break from FSX. ATL to TPA, TPA to BOS, BOS to JFK and LAS to LAX... all with no problems. Then I decided to do LAX back to LAS and this is where my problem started and it took me 2 days to figure it out and thought my experience may help someone. What was happening was I setup to depart out of Gate 56 out of LAX. I did everything as I always have and was greeted to a FSX crash. I rebooted and tried again only to crash again and then again and then again. Now, I dont know about you but when this kind of thing happens I MUST find the cause.... its in my blood and its what drives me crazy at times. Anyways.. I tried this and that and this again with no solution. I was able to start at other gates just fine but gate 56 and a few others would crash every time, I eliminated the problem being the PMDG 737 as it would crash even in the trike. I then noticed I had no crash without running ASE.... Hmmmm I said.... ASE was confirmed as the problem after many many attempts to resolve my issue. I posted my issue on FSDT's forum with no resolution found. Well... after 2 days of pulling my hair out I found out that if I minimized ASE and not send it to the system tray WA-LA ... no crash !!! This was verified time and time again.  So ... why would sending ASE to the system tray cause FSX to crash as opposed to minimizing it??

  14. Posted

    That did it for me after actually looking close as a picture of someone's Inspector setup. Mine was at like 4 I think and I could use BP-0 like I thought I could. Set it to 1 and poof, gone.

    yep ... I have suggested it several times now and every time people say it removes the spikes.

  16. Posted

    What you are asking really can not be done. I asked about this when UT2 was being developed and the reason it cant be done is that the number of AI also represents the AI that are in the 50 or 60 mile AI bubble that FSX has. I use UT2 which uses real world schedules and I have it set to 55% for airline and 0% GA. THis setting for me gives me the best compromise as far as performance versus traffic amount.

  19. Posted

    Anisotropic will give better sharper distant textures and this is the setting most people are using. We set it in the Nvidia CP to Anisotropic 16x and Trilinear is selected in FSX. I actually have my FSX set to Anisotropic and have it set in the NVIDIA CP as well which is where the level is set, in my case 16x. As far as which one is better for FPS?? why not just try it and see?? I doubt you will see any FPS difference at all.

  20. Posted

    First off... welcome to AVSIM !! Now, you said you set your BufferPools to 850 mb ?? That is way wrong. I have a 260 and I find it best to use:

     

     

    [bUFFERPOOLS]

    PoolSize=0

     

    Secondly, a SLI setup for FSX has been proven to cause issues.

    Thirdly, and you may not want to hear this but it is the truth, 2 ghz CPU for FSX wont cut it. To be able to enjoy FSX you need a Quad Core CPU running @ 4ghz

     

    With all that said this does not mean you wont be able to USE FSX but.... FS9 may be a better option until you upgrade your CPU. Try to disable SLI and start out with a CLEAN CFG and go from there.

  21. Posted

    Dont have SLC or IAD, but I just installed the KCLT update. Glad I made a copy of my original CLT scenery and texture folder cause the "update" gives you the HORRIBLE looking landing and approach lights at night time. After the install I did a quick slew around at night facing the runways and they look like a horrible mess of overly birght lights. So bad that the runway looks like a solid sheet of light, not at all realistic. Runways are a lot harder to spot at night time and look nothing like that in real life. I didn't have any issues with the original KCLT so I will be going back to my last version. Plus they didn't even include the newest runway.

     

    These guys really need to do something about the runway and approach lights. They did the same thing with the KATL update before they made the new version and I had to revert back to the older one. Makes you wonder what they were thinking when they design those lights if they think that it looks good or realistic. Maybe they should do an intro flight at their local airport at night to see how runway and approach lights really look like then revisit what they did. Doubt it though.

    Gotta love ImagineSim..... NOT !!!!!

  25. Posted

    :lol:

     

    Oh boy.... Time for a break from this hobby! What a bunch of grumpy 'ole simmers!

     

    No wonder this hobby is dwindling. We argue about every stinking thing... :LMAO:

    Wait till you want support from ImagineSim or think a update or a patch is needed.. then you will understand. Glad you like your new purchase and that you are happy with it its just that ImagineSim has left a bad taste in alot of peoples mouths.
×
×
  • Create New...