Wolkenschreck

Don't forget that you can run any FSDT scenery in demo mode for some minutes. That should give you some time to have a look at the airport in slew mode. But Rafal and Dan summed it up perfectly. My vote also goes to the Aerosoft version.

The current version is 1.0.0.6 and can be downloaded here: https://www.dropbox.com/s/q22cfj9114id0te/ATCAPI 1-0-0-6..zip?dl=0 ATCAPI 1.0.0.6 was compiled for P3D 5.2 and does still work with P3D 5.3. And here is a brief, extended overview with all the functions that were so far added: ICAO: ICAO name if you are going to set Active Runways and Approaches is needed. Only one ICAO is allowed at the moment. ActiveTakeOffRunway: Name of the active runway for Takeoffs for the ICAO entered above. If more than one entry is present, the sim will assign to each a probability based on the number of entries (2 => 50%, 3 => 33%, and so on) ActiveLandingRunway: Name of the active runway for Landings for the ICAO entered above. If more than one entry is present, the sim will assign to each a probability based on the number of entries (2 => 50%, 3 => 33%, and so on) ApproachName: (Optional for ActiveLandingRunway) and ApproachType (Optional for ActiveLandingRunway): Name and Type of the approach to fly for that active runway. ApproachType: needs to be present if ApproachName is entered. You can get this from your ADE information. If BOTH not included, ILS approach for that runway will be selected. EnableFastTakeOff: will line up and then take off. Faster than the default hold. AllowTakeOffDistance: (in meters), will allow AI to take off if an AI is landing same runways when the distance is < AllowTakeOffDistance (ex 6000 meters, will let take off if landing AI is further than 6000 meters) TaxiSpeedLimiter: is the limit to the 20 knots default speed. you can increase it (taxi speed on runways is capped at 35 knots by default AI behaviour) RunwayTaxiSpeed: will apply a new taxi speed ONLY on AIs vacating runways enableRollthenTakeOff: will let the AI lineup while the AI which lands and vacates the runway minCrossingRny: (in meters). Lets AI cross runways/taxi intersections if blocking AI is > than minCrossingRny. There are also other ground algorithms that prevent non blocking situations with AIs and airport scenery/simobjects isGUIVisible: turns on or off the GUI. Just leave it in 1 = On for the moment. voidTimer: stands for non-reacting AI traffic disappears after xxx seconds EmptyWeightLimit: prevents AIs, which exceeds the set weight, from landing or taking off from a runway (units are in Pounds!) TaxiSeparationMultiplier: will increase spacing between AI that taxi on the ground ATCModel: force certain ATC Models to land/take off on assigned runways. For example, use <ATCModel>A321</ATCModel> to assign all A321 to that runway. Or use an ! exclamation mark <ATCModel>!A321</ATCModel> to prevent all A321 to use a specified runway. And if you only want to use the app without and runway configurations, and just benefit from the improved traffic flow features, use a similar configuration like mine. <?xml version='1.0' encoding='utf-8' ?> <Parameters> <enableFastTakeOffs>1</EnableFastTakeOffs> <allowTakeOffDistance>6000</AllowTakeOffDistance> <taxiSpeedLimiter>30</TaxiSpeedLimiter> <runwayTaxiSpeed>29</runwayTaxiSpeed> <enableRollthenTakeOff>1</enableRollthenTakeOff> <minCrossingRny>1000</minCrossingRny> <isGUIVisible>1</isGUIVisible> <voidTimer>600</voidTimer> <TaxiSeparationMultiplier>2.2</TaxiSeparationMultiplier> </Parameters>

Some of the ORBX airports have this information in their user guides. For ESMS, you can see the full coverage on page 5: https://orbx-user-guides.storage.googleapis.com/orbx-esms-user-guide-50255d.pdf But you can't go wrong with Malmö or any product by Marcus Nyberg.

Default KMCO airport: I get the "Loading scenery objects..." window without any progress bar. However, after 4 to 5 minutes the sim finally loads the progress bar and does load the scenario. Performance at KMCO Orlando is very stuttery. Thus, I would guess that there could be some missing content/objects that the sim is not finding during loading.

Hi Ses, Since P3D 4.4 (or 4.5?) was P3D capable to render PBR content. Thus, any PBR object will load regardless of the sim version (well, some changes exist between P3Dv 4.x and 5.x). With 5.3, LM merely added PBR to content that was not yet upgraded to PBR (e.g., road vehicles, autogen buildings, default airport buildings). Same like FSL or PMDG did for their existing aircraft when they added PBR. Think of it that way: Client is similar to your OS (i.e. MS Windows). The client has all the processes and programs necessary to run the sim. Content = Simobjects (aircraft, vehicle). They will load in any sim version. Scenery = Airports, roads, waterbodies, etc. All are the usual BGL files and texture files that contain a compiled scenery. They will also work in any sim version. There are of course always exceptions and this is simplified. But the gist is: The client is what determines the sim. Hope this helps a bit. Christoph

He does. 😉 Yes, the combination does work. That's also the reason why LM just issues legacy client installer and not fully installers for previous versions. Just uninstall the client from "programs and features", delete your P3D.cfg and the shaders, and install the legacy 5.2 client. Et voilà...you're set. I do this frequently in the early stages after a release just to isolate such issue. Thus, I am liking going to repeat the process a few times until I find the reason for the microstutters.

Is anyone like me also struggling with more microstuttering in 5.3? (traffic disabled, same settings as in v5) So far, my start with 5.3 is a bit rough and I have reverted to the 5.2 client for the moment, which at least cured the microstuttering.

So, after some more testing I am fairly certain that my FPS drops are solely related to the road traffic slider. And this does make sense after a second thought: Seeing that all vehicles have now PBR textures, the sim has to render a lot more. Thus, users with more beefy hardware should not see such a big drop. Without the road traffic, FPS are NOT worse than in 5.2. For me, FPS are nearly the same as before. But, and that is something Sesquashtoo and jcorstjens mentioned too, the sim seems less stuttery. For the record: Full new install + all add-ons registered via the add-on.xml method. And sorry for hijacking this thread so much today. Enough from me for the time being.

Well, I have just turned off HT again and restarted the sim. Entries were reverted back automatically to AffinityMask=15. So, the sim does check at startup for any change. However, I do not know what happens with an individual affinity mask that correspondents with the processor settings. But the whole setting would not make sense if we could not adjust it too our liking. Thus, I assume individual affinity mask should be respected. That's something for the hardware experts to check and not a noob like me 😅.

Not sure if this is any longer possible. The sim now creates automatically an affinity mask in the P3D.cfg. The values I posted above for my 7700K (4 cores) were all created by P3D without my input. With HT off, the sim desired to have this setting: [JobScheduler]AffinityMask=15P3DCoreAffinityMask=15MainThreadScheduler=0RenderThreadScheduler=2FrameWorkerThreadScheduler=3 After turning HT on in BIOS, the sim went for this: [JobScheduler] AffinityMask=255 P3DCoreAffinityMask=255 MainThreadScheduler=0 RenderThreadScheduler=2 FrameWorkerThreadScheduler=4 I never used any AffinityMask before, so I can't judge how optimized and suitable the selection is.

Thank you, Steve! Same result for me. I used 30% in 5.2 and had no problems. Moreover, I had a Simmershome' tweak in 5.2, which brought back the ORBX Vector traffic to secondary and territory roads. Thus, enabling all roads in 5.3 seemed reasonable to me. But in 5.3, road traffic seems to have an even bigger affect on FPS. My whish for 5.4: RoadTrafficThreadScheduler

Interesting. I noticed that too and first suspected an add-on. But thanks to the XML method I was able to test/deactivate quickly and even at a modest add-on airport I noticed the FPS problem. In 5.2 locked to 29FPS, now with the same settings around 16FPS or worse. And that with the default aircraft. To me, however, it does not seem very fluid. Oh well... I will now activate Hyperthreading again and see if the automatically set entries are not optimal for my system (7700k, HT still off): [JobScheduler] AffinityMask=15 P3DCoreAffinityMask=15 MainThreadScheduler=0 RenderThreadScheduler=2 FrameWorkerThreadScheduler=3

Ground textures were NOT updated with PBR. I had a quick look at the textures and none of the ground textures have any of the PBR maps (albedo, metallic, emissive, normal, etc.). However, textures for objects and buildings now all come with the new PBR maps. Thus, the points stated in the changelog are correct. No reason to abandon ORBX Global and OLC yet. But for ORBX Global Buildings HD, Trees HD, and Terra Flora it might be worth to first check out whether you like default PBR or not. But I am very happy that we got a new update.

Steven, Good question. And I should have been more transparent about this. Sorry. The man behind DigitalDesign is Evgeny (registered here as the user "Digital"). However, his native language is Russian and he is very good at reading in English. But for the writing, some help is always appreciated by him. That is where I do help him, as he is a personal friend of mine. For DD, I do also the beta testing / quality control, English-speaking support, and I help Evgeny with the research of reference materials and pictures. Moreover, the AFCADs for P3D and the SODE-VDGS configurations are done by me. However, I do not get any paycheck from DD. I just do this for my friend as a favor. Disclaimer: I get the scenery of course for free. Thus, I do sincerely not know if a Commercial tag is already required? But of course you can add the tag, as other users deserve full transparency about my function/involvement with the company.

Gunter, Never mind. You raised some valid points and as a customer you can expect that the products work. Therefore, I can absolutely understand that we all need to voice our frustration from time to time and we can stand it.🙂 Regarding LOWS, I have some good news for you: I showed this thread to Evgeny and he agrees that Hangar 7 needs some update. We put this on our list. But as I already said, he had to make priorities and for the current version was the effort put on the PBR features and the additional landmarks that are relevant for the approach. But I have to respectfully disagree with you about the elevation bumps and, to some extent, about your teasing about our quality control. Are the products perfect? Not at all, as we just have seen with Hangar 7. But we really try out best. With the undulating terrain in MSFS we as a community have seen a new tendency to overdo the slopes. Some developers will present you a roller-coaster ride as runway and call it a day. Evgeny tries to find a realistic balance here and I would say that he succeeded with this at LOWS. For the new Leipzig, to name another example, Evgeny showed me, with a lot of proud, how the runway now follows the MSFS terrain. You know what happend? I showed him cockpit videos were one could clearly see that the runway does not have such pronounced differences and he, consequently, changed all the work. Thus, we really try put a lot of effort in such small details that help to capture the atmosphere of an airport. And believe me when I say that the biggest critic of the products is Evgeny himself. He is never happy with the modeling and at some point I just have to stop him. However, something is still not working with your ortho. Believe that I do not try to trick you with a angle. I once again made a screenshot of exactly the same position. That was also something Evgeny instantly noticed when I discussed your issues with him. Regarding your criticism, if think everything is said and we can agree to disagree. And frankly speaking does it make me a bit sad that you still imply that I try to trick you with my screenshot.. But I really want to get the scenery properly working for you. Hence, feel free to visit our forum or write an email.

Soon 🙂

Jeff, At which airport?

Guenter, I have to say that your thread surprises me a bit. First of all: We have an official support forum which you can find here: http://forum.simrussia.com/index.php?/forum/199-english-speaking-community/ However, I noticed that we need to add the link to the ORBX page, as only Simmarket lists it. Thus, my apologizes for the inconvenience. But if you have showed up there or contacted us via email, Evgeny or I could helped you with your issue with Leipzig. But as other users already said: Photogrammetry needs to be turned on. Yes, no scenery is free of bugs. But we are not total fools and would not dare to release such stuff you have seen due to wrong settings to our customers. 🙁 The same applies to LOWS: The screenshots you have posted of the aerial do not represent our product. I assume turning on photogrammetry should fix this for you too. I have include a screenshot of the same area. Nonetheless, I have noted down the issue of the wind sock. But even with enough time available we can only fix bugs that we are made aware of. The reason is simple: Would we have noted it before, we would have not released it that way. Lights are a bit tricky. as the SDK tools are still a bit sensitive. Evgeny tries his best to do them as tidy as possible. But the truth (at the moment) is: It was a tad easier to create HD custom grounds for P3D. Lastly, a personal opinion that is not specifically directed at you. But we try our best to evolve with every release and do not just recycle old assets. For example, Evgeny is updating at the moment most of the buildings at Leipzig. But in the end, it is still a flight simulator. The question needs to be raised what level of detail the user can expect for a certain price level. Hangar 7 at LOWS, as another example, is not the usual destination and most users park on the opposite end of the airport at the passenger terminal. Commercially, it would have not made much sense to model a fully detailed interior. Would I have liked it and have we discussed it internally? Yes, actually multiple times. But instead, we opted to model landmarks like Hellbrunn Palace, which is a visual reference point for the approach. With MSFS, new details and possibilities are introduced to the sim. Uses rightfully expect them but most are also now used to lower prices. We need to find a balance here and in my opinion we found a fair compromise were even old FSX users (i.e. for EDDP Leipzig) can update their product to MSFS for only 10,- EUR.

That would be nice indeed, However, MEX was done by David Aquino (Dreamflight, Flightbeam Quito, etc.) for Taxi2Gate. On Facebook, David announced a MEXv2 some time ago. But priorities shifted a bit towards MSFS (even though some new P3D airports like MROC and MDPP were announced half a year ago).

Gaya has done LGKO Kos: https://orbxdirect.com/product/gaya-lgko I know some users are unhappy with the performance of said scenery. However, I have not faced issues so far (but only using a 1080p resolution). If you go for Kos, it can be extended with a freeware photoscenery: http://eyalsimdesign.weebly.com/freeware-scenery.html

Finally! I was really waiting for this airport. Just installed it and had a brief look: Visuals are excellent and performance is very good (day + night). I do really like the Airbus plant with all the custom static models. Moreover, the scenery does blend very well with ORBX's OpenLC Europe. To sum it up: Well worth the money, for what I could even redeem a few Flightbeam Points, and a lot new destinations within Europe. 👍 I think I know the first flight that I will be doing to Toulouse...

Hi Tim @timest , Reed @rstough , I know you guys are working hard on Technical Update 2.6 and Weather Force, for which I am very thankful. Just wanted to check back with you if you could already look into this bug regarding REX SF's stratus clouds and the shadow anomaly? Knowing that this is not you official support channel I am more than happy to open a ticket with you if you wish so. We can also hook up a Zoom/TeamViewer session to troubleshoot the problem if you wish so. More than happy to help to finally solve this longstanding issue. Please let me know if you need any further information. Thanks and best, Christoph

Hi Ron! A minimum weight was something we had in our minds during the design and testing phase, but with limited time on Federico's side was the priority the maximum weight. Maybe something for a later update. Hey Alex! Never saw something similar during testing. Is there any airport where I could check the weird taxi patterns? The taxing into each other-issue could be related to the taxi speed. Most AI FDEs have too weak breaks, which will show such behavior on long and straight taxiways. But the config.xml you posted is outdated. Federico included a <TaxiSeparationMultiplier>2.3</TaxiSeparationMultiplier> for me, which increases the distances aircraft will keep between each other on the ground. This should help a bit to reduce the problem. I will need to take a deeper look into the FPS problem, as I could not recreate it on my end now or during testing. Could you or Balint give me a time and airport where I can recreate this? Thanks.

Henning, Could this be VATSIM/IVAO traffic you are seeing? Some of the codes (e.g., OEO711) look a lot like virtual airlines one will find in the networks.

The tweak is still working. Add the following lines to the [GRAPHICS] section of your P3D.cfg: [GRAPHICS] DAY_THRESHOLD=55000 NIGHT_THRESHOLD=4096