Thomas Andersen

I am currently using OpusFSX in P3D 3.3 and it seems to be working very nicely. I am only using the camera portion though. As a opus camera user would there be any noticable benefits in upgrading to Opus FSI?

And another example: 29Palms sceneries are awesome, like their latest Samos which offers a very challenging approach in super nice scenery setting. The scope of the scenery looks comperable to ORBX Dubrovnik, but 29Palms value for money seems much more appealing. Dont get me wrong, ORBX are free to price as they like, and I am a big ORBX fan owning all their regions and some of their airports. And some will tell me that 40 USD is what they spend for a few drinks, and hence is nothing...But I dont enjoy paying "full game" price for an airport.

I wish ORBX would price their airports more in the 20 USD range, like many of the Aerosoft sceneries. Ok, you can argue that ORBX in general has the best quality, but at least for me 20 USD is the optimal price point for a airport. Its only a very few airports I like to use all the time. The other ones are lesser frequent destinations.

Each to their own but I couldnt care less about whats going on inside the terminals. For me its a complete waste of resources, both computerwise and developerwise. What I care about is smooth and stutterfree flight. The poll seem to indicate that the majority think like this. In fact I wish there would be more developers focusing on creating larger areas with scenery and airports. Instead of a development team spending all their time on getting every single detail on a specific airport correct, I wish more would focus on creating plausible or reasonably realistic renditions of airports and scenery areas (similar to the ORBX regions but perhaps in a smaller scale). Spend a third of the time on each airport and instead give me 3 airports for the price of one, so to speak.

I am not as pleased as the crowd here. Sure I am thankful that we have a simulator that gets continued developent, and combined with great addons we have an amazing flight simulator. However it could be better. That the flight dynamics code have not received a major revamp over the course of a 10 year period, says something about the niche character of this market, where market size is not high enough for someone to dare making significant investment in optimizing the code. As a private pilot I can tell that practising crosswind landings in P3Dv3 leaves a lot to be desired compared to real life situation. In P3D once correct path on the extended centerline has been established, very little correction is required even in windy and gusty conditions (say a 15 knot crosswind). In real life I find myself constantly making stick adjustments to stay on the right path. In particular in real life as you are flaring the plane, and as speed is bleeding off, I might have to do quite significant adjustments to stay on path. I dont see this effect in P3D, even when using active sky next and nice addons like the a2as. I am quite happy with what I've got, but things could have been better

If fps has not improved with the latest sp, I guess I will keep waiting for the PMDG version

I am also having troubles with SLI in P3DV3. FPS 30-30% lower than non-sli, and with many stutters. Using the latest nvidia drivers.

Adamson, I agree fully that flying through smooth air in a real plane can also be described as "flying on rails". The issue is that most of the time when I go flying a GA plane in Norway in the real world, the air is not smooth. Typically theres 10 knots wind or more at surface level, and 25+ above 3-4000 feet. Then theres a lot of ground obstacles creating turbulence. All this leads to me actually having to constantly make corrective control inputs to maintain desired flight path, in particular on approach and landing. Very often in FSX/P3D, I find this not beeing the case even in strong and gusty winds. Btw I am flying "state of the art" P3D aircrafts like A2Aa 182 and PMDG 737NGX, so I assume these flight models are among the most realistic ones.

TrafficPilot, I think XP10 gives me a better sensation of actually flying through air, especially in light wind conditions. But overall I still prefer P3D. XP10 pitch control is waaay to sensitive. And wind seems realistic only at very low speeds. Add 30 knots and the 777 wordliner gets tossed around like a model plane. I am using Active Sky next, but didnt discover the enance tubulence feature before now. That added some more dynamism to gusty crosswind landings. Thanks for the tip! Thomas

I am student pilot with 30 hours - so my experience is far less than yours for sure. But it didnt take me many hours in a real airplane to come to the conclusion that P3D/FSX IS "flying on rails" compared to the real thing. Case in point: Consider an approach with 10 KN crosswind with a few knots of gusts. In FSX/P3D as you are approaching the threshold and flaring the aircraft, very few control inputs are required to maintain horizontal and vertical profile. When I practice touch and gos in the real world with the same wind conditions, a lot of control inputs are required to maintain a stable approach. In my opinion a real world landing is far more challenging than a FSX landing

P3D is my favourite sim, but X-plane 10 comes much closer to simulating flight through air. Having said that, the xp10 flight model generally seems to sensitive, especially pitch control.

The stuttering is in particular strong when looking to the side from the cockpit. No stutter at all with your setup? In fsx that same situation is super smooth. Any tips on how to get rid of the stutters is appreciated

I am getting 25 fps easily with the 737 ngx...but it stutters a lot..kills the immersion

I am running a 4790K overclocked to 4.5 ghz and with a GTX 780, so I wouldnt call that weak. I am getting excellent frames with default aircrafts, the A2As, the majestic dhc8 (all in ORBX regions - but off course not in urban areas with max autogen). With the T7 I am getting 20-30 FPS which per se isnt that bad, but at these FPS levels P3D stutters a lot, killing the immersion. In my experience and with my system, FPS locked at 30-33 FPS with vsync off gives the most stutter free flight - unfortunately I am not getting the t7 to show me these frames not matter how much I dial down the graphics settings Tweaking tips are most welcome!

Hope it performs better than the T7 in P3D

I purchased MS Flight when it was released, but have since lost the file. Is it possible to redownload or repurchase the sim?

I uninstalled two of the 3 simconnect files I had - but the stuttering is persisting even with default aircrafts. Now I will try a complete reinstall of P3D as I remember stuttering was less of an issue when I first started using P3D v2.5

Well said and I fully agree. Default aircrafts performs super smooth, but the pmdg 777 is horrible stuttering mess. The stuttering kills the immersion. I have tried all kinds of graphics setting, but dialing down does not seem to improve the performance significantly. And I got the 4790K and a GTX780, so I would say decent hardware. In FSX SE the 777 is smooth as butter.

In my experience DSR has greatly improved visual quality/antialiasing of P3DV2 - gone is the horrible shimmering and jagged lines that stick out like a sore thumb Now if the stuttering issue could be resolved, I would be a happy camper!

Sadly this is my experience as well. P3D is getting better and better, but I too havent been able to cure the stutter problem. Moving from P3D to FSX SE makes its very apparent how much more smooth it performs. And stutters are a real immersion killer! I agree, P3D has made flightsimming move forward, however looking at the state of the art graphics of blockbuster games makes you realize that we flightsimmers are missing out.

Yup, I turned off the FO side to improve performance. And yes I installed it to 2.5, following instructions on this thread http://www.orbxsystems.com/forum/topic/92626-ftx-global-in-prepar3d-v25/

A few more screenies from this wonderful simulator...this time with ORBX Norway

Shadow quality medium Terrain cast: 20 km Object cast: 3000 meter (only internal vehicle) HDR on

Dont have the time or patience for 8 hours flights..prefer to keep the flights short and sweet even with the 777. But no OOM within 2 hours at least. That was definately not posible with FSX on high to max settings

Yes Phillip, the 777 behaves very well in P3D. Generally between 20-30 FPS with high settings (so a big penalty compared to less demanding aircraft, but still super flyable). If I turn the settings down a few notches I can maintain 30 fps. And I have never had a OOM or crash, something thats a big problem for me with FSX Steam. The shadows are a nice bonus too