Jump to content

xgunther

Frozen-Inactivity
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content Count

    69

  • Donations

    $0.00 

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by xgunther

  1. Posted

    Hi, today I was planning a flight from KLAX to PHNL. PFPX was not able provide a valid solution for ETOPS as There is no land between Los Angeles and Honolulu. I was wondering how real life airlines were finding a soul to to this, anyone has an idea?

     

    Cheers,

     

    Murat

    PHTO and KMRY are frequently used. 

  9. Posted

    You must remember that TCAS doesn't display "every" a/c within range. It is selective both in reality and in the sim. Its decisions are based on: "interesting" / "quite interesting" / "very interesting".In other words if it doesn't consider an a/c to be a potential threat you won't see it.vololiberista
    Well then apparently TCAS finds VATSIM traffic less than amusing. Har. Har.

  14. Posted

    That is the point and objective of flight simulation. To make the experience as real as possible down to the wire. If your reason is because your system cannot handle it I understand (consider pc upgrade) but we should encourage the advancement that PMDG have started so that others will follow suit. (such as realistic bouncing wings on taxi). PMDG has done what I would consider as revolutionary simulation advancement and it is for the better of the FSX platform.
    Uhh...yeah, I'll sacrifice some FPS for wingflex, because that is something that should be simulated, not a high definition smudge. I can easily stick my finger in olive oil and smear it on my screen for the same effect minus the higher demand on my system.

  15. Posted

    This release was intended to be system intensive and accurate and directed to simmers that was looking for exactly that.If you want a lighter version of the 737, just Google 737 for FSX and you will have plenty of options.
    A little arrogant for someone who can't read very well... He is not talking about taking out systems, he is simply asking if it is possible, moving forward, to optimize some of the textures and 3D aspects of the aircraft.
    Going and spending 500-1500 on components or a new computer to make a 70 dollar add on work as advertised is not financially feasable. If it can be made to perform by making changes in texture size, that option must be explored first. $1,500 would buy me or a computer to make this one add on run, or I could buy 21.5 weeks worth of FOOD for that amount. I'm pleased that for some of you, spending 1000 is something doable for you, but please understand, not all of us are as well off.
    You said it pal.

  16. Posted

    Christos, Not sure why you want a comparison if you don't own either the 747 for FSX or the NGX but from I have read here if the 747 for FSX runs well enough on your system so will the NGX. At least I hope so as the 744X runs well on my lower end laptop and I would like to think the NGX will do just as well. Gerry my specs - Toshiba Dual core 2.66 cpu, 4gb RAM, NVIDIA GT230 video (1Gb), 15.4 screen running Orbx SP4, and MyTraffic, REX V2 (no weather).
    Think again.

  19. Posted

    Guys, Vin and myself just tried multiple times on our machines to reproduce what you guys are talking about here - we can't. Both of us see the EXACT same average framerate loading the 747 first as we do just loading the NGX alone. The entire idea honestly doesn't make any sense to us - the 747 and NGX don't share even a single bit of code. The NGX is 100% made from the ground up. ---- As an aside here too because this mistake is annoying and makes us look like bad programmers - please stop using the term"memory leak" if you don't know what it means. Low performance does not = "memory leak". A memory leak is a very specific situation where RAM is getting used up infinitely because the program is not releasing its already allocated memory. A real memory leak will eventually crash the computer as all the RAM and all the disk swap space gets used up. There are no memory leaks in the NGX, we ran it for days straight during testing without any issue.
    In no way are we implying that PMDG has bad programmers. In fact, we all think you guys are brilliant, this aircraft is beyond amazing. But I'm going to have to disagree with you Ryan. When I load the 747X before the 737NGX I do see a noticeably nicer frame rate. I understand that the two share no code, so it may be something within FSX, I'm not sure. And as my aside: early on, someone on the team had mentioned that the frame rates were comparable to the MD-11. This was the deciding factor for me, but after flying around I quickly noticed that this was not the case, not in the least. And when I fly around on VATSIM, I have people PM me and ask if I am experiencing good frame rates..I say no, and every single person I've spoken to has the same issue. You guys have worked tirelessly on this aircraft, and it shows. But not everyone can afford a supercomputer, especially in this economy, to run it somewhat smoothly, and the MD-11 comparison has left a bad taste in my mouth. Though I admit I should have waited for some user feedback before purchasing it. I apologize for using the term "memory-leak" incorrectly, but I think code optimization should be one of the key points in moving forward. That's my opinion, and you can disagree with me all you want...that's fine; I'll just hold off buying the expansion packs. And one more thing: When a large percentage of your customers are expressing frustration about an aspect of your product, it is rather insulting to act as if we are making it up...that reflects more negatively on a company than "bad programming." smile.png

  20. Posted

    I usually find these threads ridiculous, but I think I may have to agree with the OP. I feel like I'm barely flaring and almost landing flat.
    Agreed. It is off, but it is very very slight. If you've ever driven on the 405 past LAX, you'll notice that, for example, the SWA 737's seem to be a bit nose down vs. a 757-76-etc which glide almost 5 degrees nose up attitude. I find this only to be a problem when executing an autoland, but if you fly it manually, the last few hundred feet you can pitch for speed and power for altitude to get a realistic flare.

  21. Posted

    Good 2d panels are still needed, not everyone has a super computer able to get good fps in a 3d cockpit. Teo Halfen
    I think the 2D panels are pretty darn good. But, Mr. Bob Loblaw (ha!) suggests that they didn't include the throttle panel due to code complexities, however this area of coverage is very limited in code complexity. You have throttle positions, fuel cutoff switches, spoiler position, and trim. Doesn't seem like it would be too hard to implement.

  22. Posted

    I really believe there to be a memory leak somewhere. It is just super weird to me that I can have a pretty constant frame rate, but then it'll drop to 9 fps for a second or two, then back up, then back down, etc etc... I don't have the *best* system, but I get a constant 30-40 FPS with MD-11 and 747x with settings nearly maxed out, but it gets really jumpy for me with the NGX. I have all the settings down to the *bare minimum* and it's still all over the place. And yes, I've done all of the suggested optimization techniques.

×
×
  • Create New...