Rob Ainscough

Moderator
  • Content count

    7,098
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    21

Rob Ainscough last won the day on February 23

Rob Ainscough had the most liked content!

About Rob Ainscough

  • Rank
    Director of Development
  • Birthday 07/16/1964

Flight Sim Profile

  • Commercial Member
    No
  • Online Flight Organization Membership
    none
  • Virtual Airlines
    No

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://www.robainscough.com

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Concord, CA
  • Interests
    3D animation (Cinema 4D), Auto Racing (Lotus Cup USA series driver/owner), Racing and Flight simulation and Flight.

About Me

  • About Me
    Software Engineer, Auto racer, Building of stuff, Video Editor/Creator, Music creator, BETA tester ... always very busy.

Recent Profile Visitors

9,766 profile views
  1. I understand the frustration ... for DL and SSAA and 4K that's all GPU bound. This is actually a good thing because GPUs still have headroom and continue to get significantly better. But for the CPU side, Intel/AMD just aren't pushing for higher frequency, they're going the opposite direction with lower frequency and more cores. 64bit provided about 25% FPS gain due to better threading performance inherent in the architecture which also has more registers. There are optimization methods that can certainly help GPU bound, DX12 EMA mode with SFR support and multiple GPUs ... but that's really only going to help with tasks that are GPU bound (like DL, SSAA, 4K or 5K or 8k). But "progress" is happening, slowly, but it is happening ... I look back at XP10 compared to XP11 and go wow what a difference ... same with P3D V4.x looking back and FSX or P3D V1.x and go wow what a difference. Progress is happening, but development teams for flight simulators are MUCH smaller these days ... fortunately the 3rd party content provider market seems to be getting much larger ... who knows, maybe a time will come when most 3rd party content providers don't need a regular day job and can work full time on FS products? I remain the eternal optimist. Cheers, Rob.
  2. I'm well aware of the question and my response is the same, no need for the jabs. You'd be better off demonstrating dynamic lighting On/Off in P3D V4 rather than using a 3D shooter because the implementation of dynamic lighting varies considerably where many different techniques can be used with a variance of results and quality. The "lighting" presented in Arma 3 is specific to Arma 3 (or whatever engine it uses) ... for example deferred rendering is faster based on where it happens in the render pipeline but has AA limitations and Transparency limitations and shadow limitations (think XP11) and requires high bandwidth, older GPUs don't support multiple render targets. Forward rendering (think P3D V4) operates the render in different way but has less restriction around AA and transparency and render targets but is slower ... and then there is the combination of a little of both. DL implementation that will vary, such as being able to see shadows that a light sources generate ... 3D shooters may implement this, but Flight Simulators (the ones I've used) don't. A 3D shooter is often "enclosed" (distance) in a very specific poly count world tuned to work with current middle tier hardware, therefore lighting for that world be it static or dynamic or a little of both and not be representative of what one might see in a Flight simulator. Here is Dynamic Lighting from P3D V4: P3D V4 DL external (GSX vehicle lights up the aircraft): P3D V4 DL on VC (VC becomes lighter as the aircraft moves under the light): P3D V3.x without DL (notice the aircraft stays dark as it moves under the airport light) Cheers, Rob.
  3. And what's your view distance? Are you able to traverse the entire planet? It's always a mistake to compare 3D shooters with Flight Simulators. Cheers, Rob.
  4. Already built into P3D V4.x for the most part, used by many that do full scale cockpits or serious trainers. Cheers, Rob.
  5. Couple of comments: 1. All 4K monitors I've used will operate at 1920 x 1080 so not sure why there is any "regret", just because someone has a 4K monitor doesn't mean they have to run their game/sim of choice at 4K? 2. You can "reduce" AA settings in 4K, I wouldn't eliminate them completely unless your working with a very small size monitor. The larger the monitor size and the closer it is to your eye position the more noticeable "jaggies" will be. For large screen monitors at close view eye positions, 8K would be enough not to require AA. But, there is ALSO additional technology coming down the line and/or or already released (for 1080p) where AA processing will be done by the monitor and not the GPU. Cheers, Rob.
  6. I think most simmers understand Vic, acceptance however is a different matter. The FPS/GPU/CPU/Add-On analogy put into Car and Top Speed terms: I want to go faster in my car (PC), I press the accelerator to the floor (framerate = Unlimited) but I can't go faster than 150 mph. Solution, I buy a faster car (GPU/CPU) that can do 200 mph. All is great in the world, then I add passengers (add-ons), and luggage (more add-ons) and my car can't do 200 mph any more, it can only do 180 mph ... I add a trailer hitch and trailer (even more add-ons) and my car can only do 160 mph now, I put a Tesla X (FSL A320) on my trailer and now my car can only do 140 mph. Idea, I'll make my car more aerodynamic and tape up the hood and door seams, remove the front spoiler, remove the rear wing, and button up the underside with single sheet of aluminum (tweak .cfg files) to reduce drag ... I can do 148 mph ... ugh not enough, I start to remove parts from the car (turn down graphics settings) to reduce it's weight like, radio, speakers, nav, seat belts, air bags, plastic trim, electric door motors ... now I can do 161 mph, ugh, still not enough ... With that said, my FSLabs FPS performance is very good but it really depends on what airport/location I'm testing it at ... and that's not FSLabs performance drain, that my other add-ons drain ... Orbx SoCal with FSDT KLAX and UTLive at 90% with most graphics settings maxed is going to = 19 FPS no matter aircraft I use, from a Piper Cub to PMDG 747. So FPS claims without any sort of context or data isn't really much anyone else could use or go on if they need help finding the "sweet" spot which is really just a compromise of settings and/or add-ons used. It's always been this way and will always be this way, BUT, that doesn't mean one can't compromise and find a working solution ... experiment. Cheers, Rob.
  7. They append a "\" in the Add-on.cfg (similar to what A2A do) and this will cause some issues (it did for me) with P3D V4.2. FYI. Hopefully they update their installers. Cheers, Rob.
  8. I must admit, I didn't fly this aircraft as much until the recent free FSLabs update supporting P3D V4.2 ... performance is excellent, sound is excellent, visuals are excellent, systems are very deep ... I didn't know much about "Laws" (flight control modes) until I got into this aircraft ... Normal, Alternate, Abnormal Alternate, Direct, and Mechanical Backup. So has anyone tried "Mechanical Backup"? The laws: http://www.airbusdriver.net/airbus_fltlaws.htm Cheers, Rob. EDIT: Looking forward to the Concord for P3D V4.
  9. A few things that might help you out: 1. No need to dump the monitor, most 4K monitors will operate at 1920 x 1080 (which you can set from within P3D V4.x) 2. Dynamic Lights requires a good GPU, but running MSAA 2x or 4x should provide fluid experience in "most" airports, some airports are not well optimized for Dynamic Lights so performance will vary significantly 3. You didn't mention anything about the 5 screens of graphics settings and add-ons you're using so not much to go on for anyone to provide assistance 4. Make sure you update FSUIPC to latest version that doesn't cause performance problems with P3D V4.2 ... Pete is still working on it With exception of AF2, other simulators like FSW, XP11, P3D will not work well if you max out the graphics with many 3rd party add-ons active. If you're expectation is that you can max everything out (graphics and add-ons) that's NEVER go to be viable with Today's hardware ... maybe 5-10 years from now, but don't expect flight simulators to go dormant and not continue to push the graphics/performance boundaries. Simulators aren't "games" ... "games" (3D shooters and the like) are limited specifically to meet a certain "average" performance requirement ... everything about the game will be aimed at (and limited to) running well on middle tier computers and those games typically need to operate at 60Hz or higher due to the rapid motion involved in playing the game. I find it refreshing that flight simulators are looking to the future and aren't handicapping themselves to average hardware of the day ... it's a win win for everyone. As hardware continues to evolve prior generations drop in price considerably providing an opportunity for those wanting to spend less on Flight Simulation while also providing a "reason" for those who want to spend more on a Flight Simulator. Everyone benefits, it really just a matter of time shifting to meet one's budget. Today's $1000 GPUs sell for $300 tomorrow when the next best generation of GPUs is released ... and so on and so on ... it's a win for everyone, just a matter of waiting or not waiting. But if you compare "like" settings (remember Max setting in P3D V3 = Medium setting in P3D V4 in terms of visual similarity) from P3D V3 to P3D V4, you should see about a 25% performance increase in P3D V4 and maybe a little more in P3D V4.2 with the right GPU. If you're not sure what I mean by "like" settings where P3D V3 Max = P3D V4 medium ... it means settings like Autogen Draw Distance is about the same (buildings displayed within a radius of view point) when P3D V3 is set to Max vs. P3D V4 at Medium ... so P3D V4 at Max will display buildings considerably further out from the view point which will of course increase CPU/GPU loads. Same applies for Autogen density sliders, Level of Detail Radius, and the use of High-resolution Terrain Textures ... these all increase CPU/GPU work loads as the extend the visual display/render distances considerably with increased number of building and tree density. So long as Flight Simulators continue to be improved with active development work, we'll always (without exception) be chasing hardware upgrades to leverage the abilities of flight simulators. This is GOOD, not bad ... fortunately we have the ability to compromise our settings to come up good FPS and good working visuals ... for those who enjoy Dynamic Lights will turn down other graphics settings (i.e. shadows, reflections, AA) in order to use that "aspect" of the simulator. Recent aircraft and scenery releases have really emphasized the "rise" of flight simulation, I'm not seeing any "fall". Cheers, Rob.
  10. This is a very well done aircraft, agree on the sounds ... once triggered they seem to fade out slowly ... very strange, is this accurate to real world version? External sounds are off with a strange pitch shift as one moves around the aircraft. But otherwise, the visuals and immersion is very well done ... love the rain effects on windshield and the lighting up of clouds as I fly thru them using HiFi AS4 is very realistic. VC and external visuals are extremely well done (even the 2048 res VC textures are excellent). The internal VC lighting is better than the TDFi 717 and it's using their RealLight system. Flight model definitely feels different than other aircraft and it responds well to turbulence ... lots to learn about this aircraft as I'm currently on aircraft overload with the FF A320, FS A320, and now this gem LS MD-82 ... not sure what I'll do if PMDG release their updates/aircraft soon, and then Aerosoft's A330 ... too many quality aircraft and too little time. So far, this aircraft has provided a immersion feel in bad weather that I've not experience in any simulator platform and/or aircraft to date (and I have many) ... but I might be bias as I'm a bad weather hunter when I do my flights. It is missing a cabin. There are a few other issues but most likely my learning curve on figuring it out (couldn't get it to hold my AP speed). If they could address the audio issues, I'd give this aircraft a 9 out 10 and a bargain at this price point. I'm sorta surprised more people aren't posting about this aircraft? Cheers, Rob.
  11. Some of the best "learning" tools I've seen used are the ones that provide a interactive checklist that the user can follow, the user would check the item and the view will pan to the action and show the operation (be it a switch, knob, button, or just visual check). No need for any "external" training be it video or manual, all self contained in product and the user would just activate a "training" mode and select a session (be it cold and dark start, to taxi, to takeoff, to departure, to cruise, to approach, to shutdown). The only other product I've seen that tackles this task but on less complex aircraft is FSW ... IMHO, they're on the right track in regards to getting the novice involved. There is certainly a disconnect between novice users that I personally believe is bad for this "hobby" (more novice users = more money for developers = more products and better quality products) ... there is an "elitist" mentality around operating "study level" aircraft ... in fact, I really don't like the term "study level" (used by many reviewers) as it suggests a certain level of intelligence requirement which is actually NOT needed with proper training tools. Of course, such a training tool requires coding and more development costs ... however, I'm surprised that someone (content provider) hasn't picked up on this and provided "interactive" training tools. We have "elements" that are close such as products from FS2Crew (on the FSX/P3D side) that operate as a helping hand, but not as an actual training tool. From technical standpoint, I'm pretty sure both platforms can support such a method of training, it's not terribly difficult to code but does take some time as checklists for the various stages of operation can be extensive. But they would go a long way removing the stigma around "study level" aircraft and make it more accessible/desirable to everyone from the novice to the experienced. More accessible = more users = more money = future development = hobby growth/improvement. My 2 cents, Cheers, Rob.
  12. I've had some time in both FF A320 and FSLabs A320 ... didn't notice much of a difference in Yoke sensitivity ... seemed about the same in both platforms (I'm using a Yoko Yoke). The only oddity, and probably my biggest complaint, I didn't like in the +/- switch operation in the FF ... becomes a big problem when you're trying to do a lot quickly in those "busy" stages of flight. Fortunately I'll be mapping all the FF controls to my GoFlight gear via Steve's GIT product so it will become less of an issue, but I would have preferred a better method of manipulating the switches and dials. The audio on the FSLabs A320 seems much better with just about every operation emulated ... FF A320 seems to be missing some audio queues and just too quiet. On the FPS front both are very good with the FF version having the edge but that's hard to compare given the different platforms and graphics options ... i.e. if I turned down some of the options in P3D V4 to match my XP11 settings, then P3D V4 would probably win the FPS race, but since I lock to 30Hz/30 FPS it's not that relevant as both hit 30 FPS with lots of add-ons and weather. As mentioned the Airbus A320 is relatively simple to fly "normally" compared to 737, 747, 777. I'm no A320 expert, but I have gone over the various videos/tutorials available and like many have suggested, it has to be the most "automated" aircraft in it's class ... I guess the challenge is when things go wrong ... I'm not there yet. Don't consider this a review, just some input. Both are exceptionally good and I would consider the FF A320 the best of the best for commercial aircraft in XP11, yes even better than the IXEG 737 (with 1.21 update). Cheers, Rob.
  13. Funny, my wife said the same thing ... but I love hill/Mountains also ... I have a Mountain in my backyard so I regularly bike up/down it (only about 4000 ft). Cheers Rob.
  14. Walking around your small country is on my todo list, best way to experience a country. I’ve only made short visits and those were work related or stop overs. Cheers Rob.
  15. I'm happy to report performance with this FSLabs A320 update is outstanding in P3D V4.2. The new effects are brilliant, from the APU startup and haze to contrails...still refreshing myself on the manuals. Cheers, Rob.