• Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

282 Excellent

About OzWhitey

  • Rank
    "Who's the best pilot you ever saw?"
  • Birthday February 23

Flight Sim Profile

  • Commercial Member
  • Online Flight Organization Membership
  • Virtual Airlines

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Interests
    Aviation, simulation, medicine, technology

Recent Profile Visitors

2,595 profile views
  1. If you’re serious about VR, it’s madness to return it after 3 days. You need to give yourself a month or two to fully adapt. Your brain will also adapt somewhat to the resolution, and things will become easier to read. if you’re trying to avoid motion sickness, the modern Zibo is not your friend either. You need rock-solid 45 frames per second. If you’re flying X-plane, stick to the 172, at least until you’re fully acclimatised. Use oculus tray tool to lock to 45 fps, and make sure your settings allow you to comfortably get more than this. These days, i would have no problem with a 3-hour flight. 3 days in, that’s not something that i could have imagined.
  2. I think we all know that P3D can’t be run on max settings. OP is asking for specific advice in light of his system. OP, that’s pretty much my build, which is not a very common one around here. 5820K is a good processor, but you move from that at 4.3 to a 9900K at 5, it is a solid improvement (check cinebench single core benchmarks, for example). I’ve been pricing 9900K’s myself this evening, am pretty sure i’m going to make the upgrade. if you’re upgrading your processor, you’re upgrading your mobo, of course. PSU and case can be recycled, and you could theoretically reuse the DDR4 - i’ve thought about it, but will be uograding to 3200 DDR4. Your 980 would be a weak graphics card in the 9900K build. I upgraded from 970 to 1080TI a while back, and it made a great deal of difference. I’ve personally held off from uograding for the past 4 years as i haven’t been convinced that the available processors were enough of an improvement to justify a change from the 5820K (which is an underrated flightsim CPU imho). For me, the 9900K finally has enough of a performance differential to (probably) justify the upgrade.
  3. OzWhitey

    Is adverse yaw well modeled in P3D?

    I think there was something about adverse yaw way back earlier in this thread? 🙂 I've been paying particular attention to the modelling of this on my last few flights. I like the idea - mentioned in an earlier post - of fixing your gaze on an object on the horizon, banking into a turn without rudder, and seeing how the nose of your plane moves initially in comparison to your chosen landmark. Having being going through a bit of an X-plane phase in recent weeks, I tried it out on the Aerobask Robin DR40 and a couple of other planes, and it seemed to be modelled OK. Someone who's flying P3D this week - particularly the A2A birds - should chime in. I'm pretty sure the A2A Commanche models it OK, but I think I'll go back and check.
  4. The problem is that it's well known that the UT2 dev previously disappeared for years, and so people were suspicious when UT live came out that development would again stop abruptly - which it did. Despite my sympathy for the developer's personal situation, the product remains unfinished and I see no signs of progress and don't necessarily expect any in the near future. I've personally given up on this program for now, we'll see happens down the track but I'm not holding my breath. Flight1's response to this situation has further dissuaded me from recommending the product to others. I did buy Traffic Global, and really like it. Frame-rate friendly and easily populates my airports with traffic. Finally, I've used PSXseeconTraffic in the past and have previously made a number of positive comments about it on these forums. It's the only "Live" traffic out there, and provides a unique experience. Good to see Nico here - thanks mate for a great program!
  5. There’s no trick re: where to put bgls. Put em in a “scenery” folder wherever youmlike, and add it via scenery manager in the sim. Id put this item up near the top of the scenery order. i updated the p3d v3 default libraries with those fro p3d v4, just in case they were better optimized. But this step is not necessary. avoid using library object that are not p3d v3/v4 default, at least at first. I’ve found that quite a few dom;t show in v4, and some hurt performance.
  6. OzWhitey

    RTX 2080 ti P3D benchmarks?

    Thanks Chris. That’s solid data in a thread that is mostly pure speculation. Appreciated.
  7. EFB sounded like it would be cool in VR, as long as you can interact with it. 744 is a good VR plane, so sounds like the -8 may be even better.
  8. How are the frame rates? Any decrease from the -400? Any microstutters from the extra systems that have been added? i’ve flown the -400min VR a fair bit on the past, and am wondering if there’s any downside to the the -8’s added complexity.
  9. OzWhitey

    AI Traffic/ General Performance

    Not that I could quantify, Zane. I found them both to be performance friendly. If I had to choose, I'd say that PSXseecon was the better of the two, but I imagine that it depends on the amount of real-world traffic that is being injected by that program.
  10. Have you noticed any problems with photoscenery using platter drives? I've got basic 7200rpm HDDs (added 3x 6TB for photoscenery a few months back), and they seem pretty good for ortho in P3D (and x-plane). I notice some slowness to load the textures with 12.5cm per pixel in P3D, but it's pretty good at 25cm per pixel and above. I haven't really noticed an improvement when I put the ortho onto a SSD. The reason that I ask is that I'm always after better ortho performance, but i'm not convinced that a modern internal 7200rpm HDD is the rate-limiting step - though If it is in some circumstances, then Optane would be very interesting!
  11. OzWhitey

    AI Traffic/ General Performance

    Yes, that's a fourth option that I've tried. The need for an ongoing subscription means I'm not using that at the moment, but it is performance friendly. VOX ATC is a fifth option, that works well in terms of frames. As for Traffic Global - there's a comment above that it's only frame rate friendly because of the low amounts of traffic. That's kind of mean, but I almost typed that myself in my initial comment! However, it's more than that. Traffic Global populates my airports with dozens of aircraft, and hardly seems to affect frames at all, even at 100%. Yes, there's less aircraft flying that in MT6 or UT "Live", but I think the models are also well optimised for P3D v4. If you want traffic and great frames (without any stuttering) - which is what OP wants - at this point in history I'd gp with PSXseeconTraffic or Traffic Global. Traffic Global also has the advantage of being currently developed, unlike MT6 and Ultimate Traffic.
  12. OzWhitey

    AI Traffic/ General Performance

    VR P3D flyer, so I’m always after high FPS and no stutters. Road traffic has never been great in ESP, I basically don’t use it (unlike x-plane, where it works well and looks great). I normally struggle to find a good ai traffic solution as well. However, right now i’m actually happy, as Traffic Global is very kind to frame rates and doesn’t seem to degrade performance substantially. So I’d suggest that’s perhaps worth a try. I have UT2, UT Live and MT6 as well, but at the moment traffic global is the best solution for me due to its minimal impact on performance (i think partly due to better optimised models for p3d v4).
  13. OzWhitey

    Are you a real world pilot (P3D users only please)

    Hmmm...flight simmers dissing “drone’ pilots as being “toy operators”... I sometimes fly what you call a “drone”, using a first-person view headset. It’s actually an enjoyable way to experience an aspect of flight with minimal time and financial commitment (which is not to say it replaces GA flying). Personally, I find any form of aviation fascinating. Oh, and the reason I use quotes around your term “drone” - these craft are regulated by aviation authorities, and are correctly known as RPAs - that would be remote PILOTED AIRCRAFT. 😊
  14. OzWhitey

    GTN 750 - which one ?

    Thx - good to know, I'll try it again some time then, as I noted, the current documentation (from a a file downloaded this evening) states that it only supports earlier versions, as above. The Flight1 version seems more popular with ESP-platform users. As Bert says, it works really well in the Bonanza, and the GTn is a great piece of kit - having the airport taxiways etc available is a splendid feature.
  15. OzWhitey

    GTN 750 - which one ?

    Paul, I just redownloaded the RealityXP GTN, as I haven't used it in quite a while (was hoping to be able to give a better opinion). So far, I haven't been able to get it to fire up in the Bonanza at all. I think it's not connecting properly to the Garmin trainer, and I haven't been able to solve this after 30 minutes or so of tinkering... If I were you, I'd upgrade to the GTN complete. It's working really nicely now with P3D v4.3. Not saying the Reality XP dosn't work as I haven't put in enough time yet to work things out, but I note that they say: IMPORTANT NOTES: The GTN 750 requires to separately download and install the "Garmin GTN/GDU 620 PC Trainer software" (supports v6.41, v6.21, v6.1.1) A quick Google for the 620 PC trainer software just goes to a dead link. The current Garmin trainer is v6.5, and I'm not sure if RealityXP supports this. Another RealityXP fan around here may know the answer!