Hippo

Thanks for that. In this case, the airport (LEMG) heading is corrected (from 32 to 31), and the navigation point that the SID is based on (NESDA) is added by Herve's update. I assumed the problem I was having was due to the latter, and had no idea that it could be because of the runway. I guess the lesson is update the data in the sim if possible.

P3D 4.5 latest revision, VoxATC 7.43. I was not getting a SID as expected when using a flight plan from Simbrief, using recent Navigraph data in Simbrief and in VoxATC. Then I installed Herve Sors's updates, and I did get the SID as expected. This was for a flight in Europe. I had experienced this before (years ago) and resolved it in the same way, but I thought VoxATC now only depended on the flight plan data and not the internal P3D database.

Thanks for replying. Since no-one else seems to be experiencing this issue, I can only guess it's something very specific to my system (which runs everything else well and is stable), and will continue to try and eliminate other variables (e.g. add-ons) for now.

P3D v4.5, VoxATC 7.43, Windows 10 v 2004, using Majestic Q400. Wondering if anyone else is seeing this or might have any suggestions as to what might be causing it. Sometimes, when I am asked to change frequency, there seems to be a pause of around 5 seconds (when I am supposed to read the frequency back) where VoxATC appears to be unresponsive: it doesn't immediately respond to my voice, and nothing happens if I push the button I've assigned to e.g. close/open the VoxATC window. Everything else in the sim appears unaffected. Eventually, the prompt telling me to input the frequency comes up, and I can carry on as normal. In other situations, the response time is fine (immediate). I don't recall having had this issue before, but I've been away from P3D for months now. There is a timing issue reported with the Q400 on Majestic's forum which has been blamed on v 2004 of W10, maybe this is related?

I installed selecting my D drive and I now have the following folders added / changed: D:\WpSystem\S-1-5-21-2341396985-2659671921-2183058994-1001\AppData\Local\Packages\Microsoft.FlightSimulator_8wekyb3d8bbwe\<several_folders_here> D:\Program Files\WindowsApps\ I'm unable to see the contents as I don't have the required FS permissions. (I assume the game executable is here). C:\Program Files|WindowsApps\ was changed at the same time but I can't browse that either. D:\Program Files\ModifiableWindowsApps An empty folder C:\ProgramData\Microsoft\XBoxLive (from its name I doubt this relates specifically to FS2020) %localappdata%\FlightSimulator %localappdata%\Microsoft\WindowsApps\ More FS2020 stuff in here I have the MS Store (i.e. not Steam) version of Standard. There are probably more locations I've missed. It would be nice to have a locked thread where this type of info is collated. Does anyone know if things will break if I take ownership and change the permissions of the WindowsApps folder?

IIRC it just allows the move of the entire installation to another drive. It does not allow for the change of the folder structure.

I installed my packages to d:\FS2020\Packages*. You are given the option to choose the packages location during the installation. I would recommend not accepting the default. I can't remember now whether it's possible to change this location after installation. However, you could backup the packages folder, uninstall fs2020 and reinstall. When it starts to download packages, stop the install, and copy the files in from the backup. Then restart fs2020 and it will all work. I've just done this moving my install to another PC, and not wanting to download over 90GB again. To expand on what the previous poster said: https://knowledge.autodesk.com/support/autocad/troubleshooting/caas/sfdcarticles/sfdcarticles/The-Windows-10-default-path-length-limitation-MAX-PATH-is-256-characters.html The registry key already exists on my W10 install (set to 0). I haven't tried this, as I don't have this issue. But from what the PP says, it seems that FS2020 is using file access routines that can't handle the path lengths anyway. A bit of an oversight if so. (* and the caches to d:\fs2020\cache - why I used a two folder structure)

What I did is adjust my view pitch as desired, set it as a custom view (ctl-alt-0), and use that view (alt-0) as my main view. I'm not aware of any other way of doing this.

I am a huge fan of VR, and it's my own preference. But (imho and a few 100 hrs flying real aircraft), a large screen(s) for the outside world, combined with a physical cockpit and exported instruments, for now, provides a better approximation to the task of actually flying an airplane. For those dedicated enough to take this route, it's nice to have the options there. Hopefully it will be included as FS2020 matures. At the very least a "no-cockpit" view will make an appearance?

Since there will be many on here who take this much more seriouly than I do (e.g. cockpit builders, who REALLY know what they're doing), I just wanted to get some feedback as to whether my assumptions and methods below are sound. There is much talk on forums such as this of "realism". However, a realistic sense of speed and scale will never be achieved if actual FOV is not matched to sim FOV. Large screens make this, just about, practically possible. Doing what I've done (below), I am very happy with the result. My eyepoint is currently 103 cm from my 50" TV, which has a width of 109 cm. Basic trig tells me that my horizontal FOV is 56 deg. I loaded up a plane on a runway. Yawed it (w/ a/c moving slowly as possible*) so that a distant object lined up with one edge of the screen, I then yawed again so that it lined up with the other edge of the screen. I then adjusted zoom so that this yaw resulted in a 56 deg change on the HSI. For me this results in a zoom of 75. This results in a cockpit panel that "seems" huge, but is mathematically correct, considering the panel should be nearer to me in reality than the screen is. *Slewing would've been better, but is it possible to slew while in the cockpit? I couldn't find a way to do so. EDIT: Zoom seems to relate to vertical FOV. Is there a "formula" to get the vertical FOV from the zoom number?

I also see what I would describe as black triangle slivers, mostly over water bodies. I suspect it's caused by photogrammetry objects (e.g bridges). Turning photogrammetry off in the settings makes it go away. Whether one wants to or should do so, is a discussion for another day.

Re-read. Point taken. Sorry, no offence intended.

Agreed, our experiences (and setups) are very similar. I didn't mention it in my previous post, but I also tried turning off everything internet-related*, as well as all traffic, etc. I don't think I ever got over 60 fps. I find it remarkable that at bare minimum on everything, I'm still seeing such a "low" fps reading - pretty sure it was still all being limited by one CPU core; certainly the GPU wasn't doing very much (~40% iirc).. *iirc correctly I did this is at the same time as running low + 1080p as I described, and not at 4k. I might double-check later. P.S. Thanks for replying and making many interesting observations.

Thanks, but you appear to have misunderstood the main question I was asking*, which was, in summary: Does anyone else find it strange that changing graphics settings makes such a small difference to fps? *Apologies if the point got lost in my ramblings, or if I did not explain myself clearly enough.