pmb

Independend on what some hardcore simmers think, I feel Erich isn't completely mistaken. Fall polls will show. Kind regards, Michael

I think this is an inherent issue by Prepar3d. When I take off form KSFO and fly South into the Silicon Valley, Moffett field, KSJC and San Jose Downtown come up black and stay black for a couple of seconds before getting textures. The same applies if I take off from Niagara and fly into Toronto over Lake Ontario, where the Toronto City center is black for seconds. TextureMaxLoad is often suggested but does not help on my system, I tried it already. I vaguely recall LM having stated in a contribution on their forum there is an issue with black textures and they are investigating it, but this has been long (i.e. several subversions) ago and obviously has been forgotten. I have given up on this (and a couple of more annoyances) for now. Kind regards, Michael

I agree. 30 Hz monitor, fps unlimited, VSync and TB on in sim. Crystal clear landclass-based scenery, even in a few (rare) areas where I had blurries up to versions 3.x. Photo scenery (France VFR) tends to be more blurry, but according to several threads at the LM forums this seems to have other causes than the fps setting (and remains blurry if I limit fps internally, which I tried). I should add this is low and slow. I can't speak for the big iron. Plus, I have stuff like AS running over a networked machine. No panel on display, using a hardware panel driven networked as well. No AM used, HT on, process priority of prepar3d set to "high". Kind regards, Michael

Do you run PSXSeecontraffic and UTLive in parallel at the same time...? Aside the technical possibility, I think UTL planes would crash into PSXSeecontraffic planes and vice versa. Otherwise, I have both of them installed and used them interchangeably (until my subscription expired). Kind regards, Michael

Thanks Nico, for inquiring alternatives. Concerning me, I am not sure this would help. As soon as you leave an area you've already been in, traffic will cease. It might be interesting for people often flying similar routes (maybe VAs), but probably not for me. Kind regards, Michael

That's my big issue, too. Otherwise I fully agree to you, and the author of PSXSeecontraffic put quite an amount of work into improving it (while keeping PSXSeecontraffic freeware, it's only Real Traffic you have to pay for). Unfortunately, there doesn't seem to be an alternative source providing canned traffic for at least a few hours to link into PSXSeecontraffic. Kind regards, Michael

Yes, it works with PSXseecontraffic. It served me very well for some time. Notably, PSXseecontraffic can be run networked, different from all other AI programs I know and providing the best performance over competition. Despite, I did not extend my subscription. Real Traffic once had a very nice feature of storing traffic for 2 days backwards, which seems to have been gone now. I often fly in Europe, after work, at night, where there is virtually no RL traffic on airports, notably smaller ones, making it more or less pointless for me. Kind regards, Michael

I very rarely see blurries using Landclass Scenery and even ORBX TrueEarth looks pretty clear, why ever. Blurries are usually a result of CPU limitation and can't be cured by reducing shadows, de/activating high-res textures or such, or even switching to a better GPU. I find it helpful to run Prepar3d with process priority set to high. Can be set using SimStarter, Process Lasso, or even a simple batch file. Photo Scenery in general is another story, but I gather the impression (according to LM on their forum) there is a deeper issue in Prepar3d4.x which can't be cured from the user's side. Kind regards, Michael

I use SimStarter which comes with an integrated Affinity Mask calculator where you choose the active cores and it inserts the proper lines into the config file. I tried a few popular settings for my machine time ago, but none of them gave me a really great advantage. Kind regards, Michael

But you wrote you took off Prepar3d from cores 0 and 1 using Process Lasso. This isn't exactly an Affinity Mask, I know that, but I think it's not unsimilar either. Although, if applying an AM, I wouldn't mask out cores 0 and 1, but core 1 alone, at best (which is the least used among my cores without an AM anyway). Kind regards, Michael

I get more and more confused. It's my impression all those threads go in circles. One ends up with the definite conclusion you MUST apply an AM, at least if running with HT on. The next one ends up with the agreement to NOT apply an AM, but use the internal limiter (or whatever it's called). The third one suggests to run the internal limiter at unlimited, but VSync/TP on and set the monitor rate to 30 Hz, if possible. The next one concludes using an external limiter and VSync/TP off and not use an AM. And so on. I think it's a continuous optimization within the magic triangle Stutters | | Blurries Low fps You always shift the center of gravity more to one of the three but at the cost of the two others. The only way to escape is better hardware anway. And to provide a more positive feedback. After quite some experiments, I found the best overall experience on my system (see signature) monitor set to 30 Hz, internal limiter unlimited, VSync/TP on, no external limiter. No AM either. (I have quite a number of programs like Active Sky/ASCA/Skyforce/FSFlightControl/SPAD.neXt shifted to a networked machine). This works well, as long as I can maintain the 30 fps, which I can under most "normal" conditions, but not in heavy environments/with AI/bad weather, where I just have to live with a few stutters (call it long frames, if you like) now and then.I Kind regards, Michael PS: I just recalled, I completely forgot that nice FFTF factoring in.

I think it's been missing already for a longer time, probably since 4.0 And yes, I miss it, too. Kind regards, Michael

I have to add 19% VAT to all Simmarket purchases, so in my case it's indeed 45 €. Plus, these subscriptions are staggering. Here's FS Tramp, next comes Real Traffic (required for PSXSeecontraffic), than add all the Adobe apps, don't ask me when MS will provide Windows as a Service (R) exclusively. Don't forget your Internet Security App. etc. One bad day you will wake up detecting all those subscriptions are higher than your income. That's why I avoid subscriptions where I can (not always possible, unfortunately). Kind regards, Michael

I have known and used FSNavigator, which was excellent at its time. I can tell you exactly, why I do not use the sucessor FStramp: It's not because of the price but because the author dedicately refuses (yes, I asked him) to make it network-enabled. I use FSFlightControl which I can display on my 2nd machine and which I am happy with. But even if you find FSFlightControl too expensive, there are freeware alternatives working over a network. Would it have been network-enabled, I might well use it. Its functions and display are quite nice. Kind regards, Michael

FSW didn't diappear because some people comdemned it. It disappeared because of mismanagement and greed of DT from the very beginning hindering their co-operation with nearly all 3rd parties, including freeware developers. I do not condemn AeroflyFS2 at all. Neither does Paul (see above). I just found it inappropriate calling Paul a troll just for being critical. I use AeroflyFS2 myself and enjoy it to some extent. I even wrote quite a number of very positive statements here at AVSIM (search) and more in German forums. Plus a very positive judgement on the Steam page early on, still visible and unmodified. However, I now see a lot of shortcomings staggering which should have been dealt with and which I am afraid will never be resolved given the present speed and style of development. IPACS have an excellent rendering engine indeed, visually and performance-wise. However, I am afraid their style of development will not be successful and may end up the same way as AeroflyFS1 if thy don't either (i) enlarge their development team, and/or (ii) outsource certain aspects. I recall an interview with the 2 main developers in a German flightsim magazin from I think 2012 on AeroflyFS1. The editor-in-chied told them they will not succed if they didn (i) make the whole world accessible, (ii) co-operate with 3rd parties for those aspects they can't resolve themselves. My example of the Saitek FIPs was on purpose. I heard (from other devs) the number of variables available via their interface is too limited yet for this purpose (and others). Why didn't they contact e.g. Logitech to develop the interface and drivers in a joint effort? It should be allowed to voice this, shouldn't it? Kind regards, Michael