787flyer

Just a quick note, someone did a merge of the Level -D aircraft that was P3Dv3 compatible and merged it with the Quality Wings 757 VC (since the gauges wont work from the Level-D 767 as they are 32bit).

Hi Folks, Just a quick update. I have been messing around with another update of the GSX aircraft profile that includes autodetection of the GSX doors (passenger & cargo) for the MD-11F model. This is an initial test version ofr MD-11F pilots to try out. I do see some anomalies based on the LVAR variables that TFDi has made available to the community in which I need to follow up with them. MD-11F aircraft profiles available: Manual GSX door activation profile: Download the GSX profile from my Google Drive here: https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1hQTITrV1Jhd_-F9j5qZdY__oHtmkP6Fk?usp=drive_link New Door Autodetection-enabled GSX profile: Can be obtained from the FSDT forum: http://www.fsdreamteam.com/forum/index.php/topic,31881.0.html. Read my observations in the forum. Note: Silly me, I posted it in the MSFS sub-forum by mistake, but I have asked Virtuali to move it over to the P3D forum.🙄 If anyone is wanting to test this out new file out and confirm the observations I have been seeing, that would be really helpful. This is a first version and I know its not fully operational, but its a couple of steps ahead of the "manual" GSX profile I created. Related topic: I did log a support ticket for the Bulk Cargo Door not working of the F variant. The door icon shows on the EFB, but I never saw any physical movement on the external model. TFDI confirmed that this is a non-functional door and will remove that door option from the EFB in a future P3D update. Have fun!

I haven't seen any mention on what the base sim TFDI used for P3D development was, but based on the product features, I havent spotted anything that is a V6-only feature, so suspect it was developed with the broader user base of v4 and v5 and assumed it will then also work in v6. What I haven't heard is anyone that's flying the MD-11 with v6 as to whether there are differences in VC cockpit lighting seen.From what I have learned it requires tweaking of the aircraft .fx files for the VC to appear correctly in dawn and dusk conditions in v6.

Hi Glenn, that's a good resource to use in my view and I also dug this out to remind me of how to fly the MD-11 since I had purchased that aircraft for FSX many years ago. Also I found this useful article which I think should broadly apply to flying the MD-11 for those that have been flying something else. https://support.precisionmanuals.com/kb/a18/tips-for-boeing-pilots-learning-the-md-11.aspx

After updating the Navigraph FMS Data Manager and downloading the latest AIRAC (2407) , I did get a good route without messed up SIDS and STAR. I only tried one flight so far though with the latest software updates. The outdated AIRAC that the MD-11 ships with is completely useless. If you dont get an up to date AIRAC cycle, you can forget flying SIDs and STARS (without the need to resort to a lot of manual waypoint entry).

I dont think its memory leakage. When you operated the door or was doing the set up of the gsx profile, did you go to external view at all after clicking the icons in the EFB? It's this switch of views that typically causes the jump in VRAM. If you revert to the VC, after some time, the VRAM reduces again. Imaginesim's KATL is quite a complex airport so this will consume some VRAM as well. Your 6.3Gb seems about the same as I am seeing at a medium complex airport with weather loaded. I have been able to fly at 6.1Gb VRAM consumed and not have the sim crash. I have no idea what it would be like at a busy Heathrow!

Thanks for that. Did not realize the status had been colored coded.

Very nice tool. Thanks for developing it. Very intuitive and easy to read.👍 I will be using it for my MD-11 flights! A couple of things that may offer improvements: Is it possible to have the B744 and B748 checklists added at some stage? For the top section where the different checklists are listed, would it be possible to have those completed checklists highlighted in say a different color so its easy to determine current progress so its easier to resume where you left off? Thx for considering.

Interesting to see the differences between the LIDO and Jep charts. For me the Jep charts have the edge in being a little clearer in terms of having all the comms info in the top section of the chart.Also the approach and MAP details are clearly sectioned with the Jep charts making it easier to find/read. Also interesting to see that the LIDO charts only cover CAT C and D aircraft. As for the planner, it looks a little bit more awkward to use as compared to Navigraph's planner. For me, being able to adjust the suggested flight plan is something I regularly do because the Simbrief routes which I fly are not typical airline routes, so always require some modification that can easily be done in Navigraph's app. I will probably try this as a 3-day trial when a few more features are implemented.

As @Dave_YVR mentioned, its best to have your insertion point defined for the bottom most 3rd party addon that is not Orbx. Once done, anything new that Orbx Central adds (those that are truly Orbx developed, not their partner addons) will end up underneath the insertion point. Now the trick is not to mess around with that scenery that is defined as the insertion point. If that changes through your use of Lorby AO, then it is possible Orbx will move stuff around and be out of place. I usually dont have any issues with the Orbx stuff when installing regions or Orbx developed add-ons.I just let Orbx do its thing. Yes sometimes the order looks peculiar, but it usually works nevertheless. I do use Lorby AO , but its really not used for re-organizing Orbx addons. I am primarily using it to re-order other developers addons that I want to convert from .cfg entries to .xml entries or if new entries appear at the very top of the list which need to site a few places under in which case some re-ordering is needed.

Yes, altitude restrictions. The MD11 FMS does not use "A" or "B" but instead a "+" and a "-" to signify above and below for a given altitude. While one entry in the FMS with either plus or minus works, I have not been able to figure out how to combine them into a single waypoint. For example, "/3000A" (T777) >>> "/3000+" (MD-11) or "/ 5000B" (T777) >>> "/3000-" (MD-11). This works for me. However I am trying to figure out how you can enter the equivalent of "5000A/9000B" in the MD-11 FMS? I tried some combinations but none of them has so far worked. I have a sneaking suspicion the combo of two limits at one waypoint is not allowed in the MD.-11FMS but have not found any info to substantiate that.

Completely agree. Only 50% functionality compared to the MSFS version. No mention that the P3D EFB was going to be lacking features. I did log a Support ticket on this. They told me they will be working on adding future EFB functionality, but there was not ETA given. Not having Simbrief connectivity is a PITA although it provides plenty of practice for manually inputting all the legs into the FMC. I was glad to see that PDB is working in the FMC. I was able to define a few custom waypoints. I am not sure how you can enter both an altitude max and altitude min for the same waypoint in the FMC though? Re the GSX profile, I made my own for P3D. The MSFS version of the GSX profile for the aircraft has quite a few door misalignments. PM me I and can share the GSX config file I made. Its for the MD-11F though!

Press the Autoflight button on the MCP. This essentially engages autothrottle and LNAV at the same time if we are speaking "Boeing language". Pressing "Prof" button on the MCP will engage the vertical mode aka the equivalent of VNAV. Disengaging is done by the clicking the button on the Yoke and the clicking button on the back of the throttles with your mouse. In terms of mapping these buttons to joystick/throttle buttons , I have not found any info from TFDI so far.

BTW: Navigraph have released the MD-11 support for the FMS Data in the latest release: More info here: https://navigraph.com/blog/tfdi-md-11?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=2407_s&utm_content=tfdi-md-11 If someone can post an update as to whether this fixes the SIDs and STARS issues observed with the outdated AIRAC cycle the TFDI MD11 ships with that would be very much appreciated.

Good. I am doing the same as you Glenn. 👍It does not seem backwards to me. I did read somewhere that the EFB is more accurate than the FMC. I dont pretend to know all the field and obstacle limitations that can apply, but If I remember correctly the EFB should take these into account but the FMC not. Providing the FMC and EFB match within 1-2 kts of each other, the EFB take off speeds take precedence and are the ones I use. Of course it all depends upon the fidelity of the EFB you have at your disposal and what it can do. And yes, I use the Simbrief ones as a "ball park" figure so that when my aircraft payload and fuel is set, I have an independent source to help verify my plane is set up correctly. So its good to hear that we apply the same approach.

See my updated post from today on RealLight tests I have run.

When you say "not good", perhaps you could be more specific on your issue. Is it the colors, is it the sharpness of the text, is it artifacts you are seeing? What specific areas of the PFD are you referring to? My PFD looks like yours. I do find the text and the small scale graduations in the yellow band of the altitude tape to be extremely hard to read at least for my eyes when viewing the VC on a 3440x1440 monitor. What Texture Resolution are you running in P3D? Are Mipmaps enabled in your P3D settings? What monitor and resolution? This would be helpful to know.😉

Hi Folks, Related to the RealLight problem that is consuming vRAM,I would like to share the following with you: I did test this yesterday and as mentioned by @exeodus above its quite a significant saving of VRAM by disabling the RealLight.DLL file (found in the P3D /Gauges folder), but of course you will lose the night lighting in the VC and external light illumination. The savings for me were: within VC 5.5GB VRAM consumed and external view 6.1Gb consumed, so some headroom left if you have a 8GB graphics card or larger memory capacity. So I did try one other thing, by trial and error which was NOT suggested by the TFDI team! I preface this, that you try the following totally at your own risk based on some quick tests I did in P3Dv5.3 HF2. In the main P3Dv5 Simobjects/Airplanes folder you will see 2 or 3 folders related to the TFDI models. Caveat: I only purchased the freighter variant. Your sim may be different if you purchased the pax variant, so folder names may be different. I went to a folder TFDI_Design_MD-11F_GE. In this folder is a RealLight.XML file with some night texture settings and texture file mappings I discovered. In the <settings> section of the XML file you will see a line that defines the texture sizes. It reads something like this <...... size="4096,4096"> Now I changed this to "1024,1024" bearing in mind I have my P3D Texture resolution setting typically set to 1024 textures.I STRONGLY RECOMMEND that you make a backup of this XML file BEFORE making any changes! Result 1: The lighting works, but the readability of the text on the VC panels is somewhat poor/fuzzy at night, at least for my eyes. It did reduce VRAM consumption with approx 0.3GB more VRAM consumed as opposed to RealLight being completely disabled.So there is definitely enough VRAM headroom available in this scenario for an 8Gb card. So then I tried a compromise and set the texture settings in the XML file to "2048,"2048". I did NOT change my P3D Texture Resolution setting though! It remained at 1024 setting within P3D settings. Result 2: With this setting, I was able to see the panel text at night clearly and while my VRAM consumption increased, it was still OK. My VRAM consumption in the VC was stable at 5.8GB and with external view showing, a stable 6.5GB consumed at night. If you are viewing the VC or external aircraft during daytime then your VRAM consumption should be lower. I did not suffer any sim CTD while taxiing the aircraft. This was at Aerosoft's Cologne airport which has medium complexity. So my findings (preliminary) indicate you may(?) be able to run with the 2048 textures set in the RealLight.XML file which may give you some VRAM headroom in running a 8Gb GPU and flexibility to flying at night until TFDI can figure out a more permanent solution. If you don't do any night flying then disabling the ReaLlight.DLL may be a better solution for you as a temporary measure just to get flying and prevent sim crashes. I dont know if you will see similar results or not in your sim based on my quick tests, but I leave this up to you. Hopefully this may be of interest to some of you that are frustrated with not being able to fly the 3-holer in P3D right now. 🙂

Quick update: There is a small improvement in VRAM consumption with 1.0.1 version installed but TFDI have explained they believe the issue with the VRAM is the RealLight textures that are used to provide night lighting. I have asked TFDI if RealLight can be disabled if a user wants to try that approach while they figure out another solution. FWIW, I tried a different airport, this time Aerosoft's Cologne airport. It's a nice airport with some detail, but not usually very taxing/heavy on my sim PC. With 1024 Texture Resolution , 35% AI and no ASP3D weather running, in VC view I see 6.3Gb VRAM already consumed. As soon as I move to an external view, then I am at 7.0GB (running an RTX 3070 8Gb currently) and then the dreaded CTD occurs. EDIT: Suggestion is to rename Reallight.DLL to something else such as RealLight.OFF. If you decide to delete it, make a back up first!

Re #2, I can confirm the same issue. SIDS and STARS are non-sensical and have no match to the current AIRAC data. Tomorrow Navigraph should release the next cycle which should also support the MD11. I am hopeful that will resolve the SID/STAR issue. We shall see! If there is still an issue, please raise a Support ticket with TFDI please.

Just to add some additional info about the bus bandwidth question you asked. From what I have read, while a bigger bus such as 192-bit or 256-bit bus is capable of providing more capacity/throughput, there are also another factors to consider such as how fast the memory on the graphics card is working. These two together with how big the secondary buffers are can determine/impact overall performance from the GPU in handling data. Based on the latest Nvidia RTX 4xxx cards and later, having faster memory and a bigger buffer can also allow for higher throughput even if the bus itself is narrower e.g. 128-bit. I am not sure if those same principles apply to the ATI cards, but I would imagine its not holy dependent on just the bandwidth of the bus.Its probably best to look at some graphics card performance comparisons executed under controlled test conditions to gauge comparative performance rather than focusing just on tech specs of GPU cards. Good luck with your upgrade! 😉

FWIW: I have tried UT and Traffic Global in the past but found their software to be "clunky" and/or limited. With AIG, its pretty straightforward to get up and running. And my approach for loading AI aircraft in AIG OCI has been to decide upon a route and then Google the airport websites for departures and arrivals to see which airlines fly in. Then instal those airlines into AIG OCI. After several flights to different airports, you will be surprised how busy the airports can get. I typically am using an AI setting of 35-40% in P3D on most occasions. Oh and BTW, if you decide to use the AICompanion tool that Ray was talking about, it has the benefit of being able to "cull" aircraft if you are at a busy airport by setting the maximum number of aircraft to be displayed or a target FPS to be achieved. This also helps to optimize performance in the sim when you have a lot of AI aircraft loaded at some of the larger airports.

Certainly worth taking a look, especially when their AIRAC cycles come out. They do mention AIRAC cycle integration with most aircraft and well known developers. I will say having a Navigraph subscription, the FMS Data Manager for P3D is a great utility. Its really easy to update all aircraft with a couple of clicks. I hope AviaPlanner make it that simple.

Just run the installer again used to install the original aircraft. It should report finding a new version 1.0.1 is available first. Then accept the prompt to update.

So with an RTX 3070 and fix installed I get the following: At Randolph airbase (default P3D airport, no weather); VC has 5.5Gb VRAM consumed and external view is 6.1GB If I load up a reasonable airport (not one of the high traffic, complex heavy ones) such as East Midlands Orbx scenery and ASP3D (medium cloud settings) My VC starts at 5.8GB consumed however I notice this gradually increase as a flip between VC and external view with it finally maxing out at 6.5Gb. It does not seem to free memory up when returning to the VC. For the external view, I am stable with about 6.6Gb VRAM consumed. So the fix is a small improvement however it is on the limit of a 8Gb graphics card and it still significantly more VRAM than any other P3D aircraft I own. In comparison to what I have been flying with the PMDG T7, this usually hovers around 3.8-4.0Gb VRAM consumed in the VC. Anyway, I was able to take off now but I would imagine with a heavy scenery loaded such as EGLL or EDDF or KJFK and with AI loaded, you could still run into issues if you have an 8GB graphics card. There is some more work to be done I think by TFDI on this.