jrw4

Actually I don't think that there's a restriction that requires the tablet or remote to be on the same network. Symlink reports the simulator position back to the Navigraph servers on a regular basis and from there remote Chart apps on tablets, etc., can track that position wherever they are connected. It's all quite seamless and amazingly reliable. If memory serves correctly, Symlink works with all of the major simulators, too.

For those who are less interested in the legalisms, etc., and more interested in flight simming itself, I can report that temporarily renaming the Community folder before starting MSFS in anticipation of the update and then deleting the newly created Community folder immediately after updating and quitting MSFS while changing the name of the original back to "Community" yielded a working flight sim, at least for me. Having reported that, I can also say that I have never in the past bothered with this and cannot recall an occasion on which a problem ensued, so this is a novel situation, at least for some of us. No big deal, but certainly avoidable with even a short public beta. Indeed, I can't imagine a way to avoid such glitches without that beta, but others may be more clever.

Isn't the obvious approach here to remove the other add-ons, go back to a clean Community folder, and test your performance as you add back the various experience enhancers? Have you tried that yet and if so what did you learn?

Is this what you are looking for with regard to holds? This is produced for the real unit, but this function should be reproduced well by either of the MSFS add-ons (or at least certainly should be). Not too sure about the HILPTS, but I don't see why those couldn't be flown using just the entry and then onwards by flying direct to the defined holding point and then the rest of the procedure.

In the US, at least, there is federal regulation of antennas under the OTARD rule (https://www.fcc.gov/media/over-air-reception-devices-rule).that allows house or condo owners to place satellite dishes on their own property so long as their diameter is under a meter. So far as I know, this supersedes local laws, deed restrictions, and HOA regulations. Ugly has nothing to do with it. Good luck.

Apparently, yes. https://www.x-plane.com/2024/02/introducing-the-x-plane-store/ I do agree that MS seems to have been slow to implement a user supported scenery gateway, but I do recall reading somewhere that this is more difficult to do in MSFS than it is in XP, perhaps because of the extensive use of AI and photogrammetry.

Is it even possible to determine the extent to which these issues can be attributed to what's going on in the last mile, i.e., between our homes and our ISP vs. between the ISP and the CDN vs. between the CDN and the Azure cloud? And that doesn't even take into account that many MSFS users report using a VPN for one reason or another. How do we know who's at fault on a given occasion? My own experience with MSFS networking has generally been very favorable, which may say more about the relatively fast connection provided by Comcast to my community here in Florida than it does about the Azure cloud and its associated CDNs. Or not. I really don't know. I'm just guessing here, but I would not be surprised if there was more variability in the quality of our local and regional networks than there is of the cloud service provided by MS. We recently signed a new contract with Comcast, and my internet connection, in general, seems to be working more reliably than it did previously, pretty much eliminating network interruptions in MSFS as well as other applications including streaming. Does anyone have data that demonstrates that the problem lies with MS and not somewhere else in the network chain?

I did install it yesterday because the release notes indicated that it fixed the problem of Nvidia Container consuming significant CPU resources in Task Manager. It has done that and also fixed the non-display of GPU utilization in the various overlay displays. Otherwise I can't tell any difference.

I did try AIG models once, but found the process to be remarkably complex and somewhat overwhelming. I like flight sim, but not so much computer fiddling, especially because I realize that maintaining these challenging add-ons can be demanding. I like simple and I greatly value the drop-dead beautiful images I get with HDR and 4K. Others will feel differently, no doubt. Either way, PSXT static aircraft are well worth trying. The system works remarkably well and installation is simple. The fps hit can be significant, however, depending on individual preferences and existing performance, or so it is in my case.

I did try running at a lower resolution yesterday. There was no significant difference, but thanks for the various ideas.

Good point, and I do run MSFS at 4K, so maybe that's part of the problem. It's so hard to compare performance between different systems, because there are so many different possible combinations. Let's see how MSFS2024 does in optimizing performance.

Thanks, @Dave_YVR I'm using the FSLTL models. My system specs are in my signature. It's not the latest and greatest by any means, but it's not a potato, either. I see a significant decline in fps at what seems like relatively low airport parking settings. For example, at default KSFO gate A5 with the PMDG 777 engines off, I see the fps decline from around 40 fps to below 35 at airport parking = 10%. That gives me just two airplanes at 1600Z on Friday. If I raise the parking to 50%, fps drops to 22. Just a minor note, but I see that when I turn PSXT on, the GPU utilization drops significantly, perhaps because the graphics pipeline is limited by the main thread bottleneck. Not what I would have expected. To me, at least, t's not worth the trouble to display a couple of airplanes using this tool, while maintaining acceptable frame rates, but like you say, those who have more powerful systems will make other decisions.

I must be doing something wrong, because on my system, using PSXT to display static aircraft seems to have a significant impact on frame rate, at least at large airports with a/c like the Fenix or PMDG models. I don't use it for that reason. It could be that my system and choice of operating parameters puts me very close to a critical threshold that is crossed with this product. I also don't use third part airports, etc., probably for the same reason.

Also reported here

Totally impressive, but could you share with the community the identity of your internet provider so others might be warned? It sounds like they have way better bandwidth in the last mile to your location than they have to the rest of the world except your VPN. I didn't know that could happen so thanks for sharing. Is this a common situation?