FlyBoyMike

Thanks for that. I've downloaded the files and copied them to my EZCA2 folder and will give it a try. Do I still need to keep the 'turbulence effect scale' setting in AS2016 as 35?

So managed to work out that it was actually the Ezdok 2.0 profile causing this problem as the effects processor settings send additional turbulence data to AS2016. Turning these down seems to have fixed the problem. Does anyone who uses Ezdock 2.0 have these settings turned on at all when using AS?

Hi, I just recently purchased AS2016 and installed it in P3D 3.4.22.19868 running on Windows 10 64-bit and have performed a few test flights in the NGX. I'm experiencing quite negative affects of turbulence on the aircraft once airborne causing it to bank left and right wildly during climb, this gets progressively worse near cruise and almost impossible to maintain straight and level flight. I'm not sure if it's AS2016 causing this or something else such as FSUIPC but I have just updated FSUIPC4 to 4.97 (P3D 3.4) to try and fix it without any success. So far I've tried the following. Turn down turbulence scale, wind turbulence effects, and wake turbulence in AS2016 Update FSUIPC Confirmed turbulence and thermal effects are disabled in P3D Confirmed wind smoothing is disabled in FSUIPC So far this is the only aircraft I've tested with AS2016 and it's been a while since I've flown it but I don't remember these effects being so bad with ASN. I've also just updated to the latest version of the NGX (1.20.8413) via Operations Center.

I managed to pick up their 777 base pack the other day as I want to occasionally fly the -200ER type with three engine variants that's been missing from the rest of my fleet (I already own the PMDG 777 types). Have to say I've enjoyed it so far after a couple of short flights. Not as detailed and in-depth as the PMDG but definitely flyable with no major issues so far. $10 USD well spent.

The winds aloft generally seem OK however they seem fairly inaccurate when flying over oceans. I did a flight from NZAA to RKSI the other day crossing the Pacific and had a tailwind almost the whole way when there should have been headwinds, this greatly affected fuel burn and I ended up a bit heavy on arrival. Midway through the flight I would disable xEnviro and turn on default XP 10 weather, then compared the winds with the ones reported on SkyVector for those altitudes and they were the same. Both sources use NOAA so would expect them to be accurate. I then turned xEnviro back on and got the tailwinds once again. Everything else about xEnviro so far is excellent and it produces some stunning visuals and effects however I do hope the devs put a bit more focus on areas such as wind data.

Awesome shots! Yes the weather depiction off coasts is great however I was referring to flying over open ocean. I noticed on several occasions that no weather was being depicted, but I may be wrong as I'm currently flying just north of the Solomon Islands in the Pacific enroute to RKSI and the cloud coverage looks really good right now. I'm still a bit concerned about winds aloft over oceans as I should have a light headwind when I currently have a tailwind instead.

Has anyone noticed that when flying oceanic routes xEnviro no longer depicts correct winds aloft and cloud coverage? I've done a couple of flights over the Atlantic and Pacific oceans recently and noticed the sky is always clear and winds are not reported correctly. Other than that absolutely been loving this product so far. It would be a shame if oceanic weather is not covered as it would limit my flying to only over the continents.

Interesting. I did notice it happen only in variable wind conditions. I also started noticing stutters and pauses after their most recent hotfix especially during cloudy and overcast conditions. I'll try without the time sync option and see how it goes.

I've started using this again now since it became supported on X-Plane (used to use FSGRW with FSX but then upgraded to ASN) and absolutely love it. It's great to finally see a decent weather add-on for X-Plane with proper upper air winds, no abrupt weather updates and proper depiction of dewpoint on METAR (unlike NOAA plugin). I was getting random disconnects from the sim before but the hotfix has since fixed that. I find that there actually is some turbulence. It's a lot more subtle than what you get with NOAA plugin or FSRealWX but it's there, I did a flight in the JAR A330 last night from LTBA to LSGG and it was definitely there during cruise over southern Europe.

I've since worked out that the problem causing the pauses I was experiencing was related to X-Camera plugin. Are you using it by any chance? Might be worthwhile to update it to the latest version as it addresses an issue where excessive CPU time was being used.

Hi Doug, Thanks for the info and heads-up about the Win 10 consumer preview. I actually have an ISO image of a tech preview I burnt to disc a while back but haven't had a chance to install as yet, is it the same thing or have they come out with something newer since then?

Does anyone know if this issue still exists with FSX SE running Win 8.1 or have DTG managed to fix it?

I've been using X-Camera for weeks now and it's probably the best and most useful plugin I have especially since I use TrackIR. It doesn't cause any crashes or performance issues although the earlier beta I was using did cause a lot of stutters and CPU spikes this has since been resolved after updating to v1.0. This is an absolute must have IMO!

I haven't yet had a chance to download and try out the update so hopefully will get some time this weekend. So far I've been very impressed with this aircraft and has become one of my favourites in X-Plane. I actually quite like the updated the cockpit textures that came with the previous update. Love those screenshots! Are you using any additional scenery for Sydney area? I notice a nicely detailed city centre in the background of one of them.

Great shots! I actually thought that was the JARdesign A320 NEO at first. Have you tried that one as well? I'm wondering how Peter's A320 compares to that one as I've been considering getting it as well.

Have to agree. I have the PMDG 777-200LR and 300ER and can't get enough of them! I also have the one for X-Plane as mentioned and even though it's nice it doesn't seem to be as representative of the real thing in terms of systems as the PMDG offering. Your line of work sounds very interesting though. I would love to get the chance to use a full size sim be it a 777 or something else. I live in Australia on the east coast and the only 777 sim as far as I know is located at an airfield all the way in Perth used for training by Virgin Australia.

I'd happily try it out. But $200....just seems a bit steep, would have to be a significant improvement over FSX. Apparently they do some sort of trial where they will give a refund if not satisfied? I also don't really have any aircraft to test it with (only have the FSX version of A2A C172) unless I install the Aerosoft AXE which seems to work on it. I do find the flashing textures and popping autogen annoying from time to time but have learned to live with it. I notice that many people who move to P3D always had problems with stability in FSX, my FSX DX10 setup is very stable and has been for a long time. I think I've only ever come across an OOM once and that was over a year ago. Hardware is also a concern for me particularly in graphics. I have a GTX 560Ti 2GB and find that it struggles to maintain good FPS over time in XP10 with HDR and all the settings I want for a good experience. I can't really afford to upgrade at the moment.

If ORBX is cigarettes then PMDG must be meth. I can't break away :ph34r: As for the weather in XP10 to me having an external engine such as FSGRW would be a huge improvement considering how much 10.30 has already improved in all other areas, it's a shame this will no longer happen. If I was to completely ditch FSX for XP then all the features and accurate weather depiction of ASN will really be missed. The biggest problem I have with P3D is the price. I wouldn't buy the academic license knowing that I'm not eligible so only option is the professional one for $200 (more since I have to pay AUD) which I can't justify knowing that underneath it is still the same FSX/ESP engine with HDR, a new UI and a few other visual improvements.

I have a 560Ti 2GB and it also struggles to maintain the FPS using the settings in XP10 that I'd prefer to fly with including HDR and decent level of FXAA. I've actually put XP to the side for the time being until I can afford to at least upgrade the graphics card. Flying without HDR just isn't much fun :(

Sounds like it might be the next Win 7 where Win 8 was another 'Vista'. I'm downloading the ISO now and will try it at some point. I'll be really interested to see if flight controllers no longer drop out like they do in Win 8.1.

I've recently just come across this problem the other day trying the latest 10.30 release. I notice that RC2 just came out but have only used RC1 so far. After taking off on a flight in the FF 757 (haven't had a chance to try other aircraft yet) I notice that the sim will pause momentarily as it updates weather and cloud positions, this has always happened to some degree but never as frequently as it does now. The pauses now last much longer than before, sometimes for up to 15 sec being very disruptive to the flight and the worst ones happen during climbing and descending with almost constant pauses. I'm not sure if anything has changed in this most recent beta release but previously I've never had these issues flying the 757 or any other aircraft, I also had a quick look at Task Manager in Win 7 when these pauses occur and notice all of my CPU cores (4 physical and 4 HT virtual) are maxing out at 100%. At first I thought it might be SkyMAXX Pro 2.0 as I just recently updated to this but this problem also occurs using the default XP clouds. I thought it might be an issue with the way XP injects default weather now but it also happens when I use EFASS UltraWX. Has anyone else experienced similar issues? At this time I actually get better performance with my FSX DX10 setup.

+1 I've been turning random system failures on the 777 on my flights a lot lately. A good one I did recently was VHHH to RJTT and about 2 hrs into the flight the PFC's malfunctioned and the FBW went into 'secondary' mode which meant no AP for the remainder of the flight. The flight controls also felt a lot more sluggish in this mode, really had to put a lot of effort in to keep straight & level. I highly recommend people try flying the 777 sometimes in modes other than just 'normal', makes you realise just how dependent you become on FBW. Of course the problem I find with failures is that if you do decide to do a long-haul flight you'd probably have to sit in front of it the whole time in case you wake up in the morning with the plane floating in the ocean somewhere

I sometimes think that us simmers who take the time to properly learn to fly complex airliners like the PMDG's are still really only seeing the tip of the iceberg. There is still only so much that we can do in our limited PC environment especially considering that we still probably aren't following exact procedures and skipping many other routine tasks including exterior inspections, maintenance logs, position reports during cruise, regular fuel cross checks, keeping an eye on weather etc. I'm sure pilots don't just sit around and twiddle their thumbs or talk about wives/kids during cruise. There's also the fact that we sit here and fly these aircraft ourselves. In the real world you would never do this and would have to learn crew co-ordination skills by working with other pilots etc. The airspaces themselves would also be much busier (even busier than most events on VATSIM or IVAO) requiring you to frequently divert from the 'magenta line' or even go into holding patterns (I wonder how many of us ever use that function in the FMC) and this is where you fuel planning actually becomes critical.

I purchased the BBS A320 two years ago and have since given up on them. I then noticed that later on they released the A330 which at the time I thought 'NO WAY', I'm not going to go down that road again and was disappointed they decided to start working on another product before finishing the first one. I've been installing the updates they released over time for the A320 just to see how it's shaping up and been disappointed every single time prompting to uninstall it again. Taking it for a quick flight I always got this feeling of still flying an incomplete half-baked product that I paid $60 AUD for - the price you would pay for a complete v1.0 product. Last version I installed was 0.80 to see the updated and revamped VC textures and actually found it looked worse in some ways. I understand that by purchasing their products you are essentially agreeing that it is an incomplete product still I beta with 'great things to come'...some day, but I think that's a sneaky way of them covering themselves from any trouble by saying 'well you knew this from the start and agreed by purchasing it'. On the other hand it seems they do provide refunds under certain circumstances.

I think they might be making the assumption that because the majority of their user base aren't real 777 pilots (which is probably true) then we won't notice the difference. Not everyone uses more than one platform and has both the PMDG and FF 777's like we do so a lot of people who only use XP will only get exposure to the FF 777. As much as I like XP for it's fluidness and visuals especially at night time I still find that overall the PMDG 777 gives me more of a sensation of an actual 777 than the FF does, not just in terms of visuals but also consistency with the real aircraft in terms of systems accuracy (electronic checklists, TO de-rates, FMS inconsistencies etc). The FF may have a lot of systems modelled as well but after a bit of study you do notice they aren't entirely accurate.