Pe11e

I've applied 3 years ago lol, never an answer. Had to go with ORBX.

To justify the price....

How's the standard engine version in terms of flight and fuel consumption numbers? I should maybe fly that one until turbo charged is tweaked properly.

34gph, at FL250, and 25% mixture? Wow, just wow. I thought it won't gonna go over 20gph, at most. Practically only 10gph less than a turboprop, for example, TBM900, that is (way) larger and heavier. I'm missing something here.

No issues, except slow download speeds (max between 9-11mb/s), which is really slow considering their Legacy package size.

Bought the plane last night, just before the sleep (14 hours ago), and did a short 10 minute flight just to get a taste of it. I think I tested 0.1.4, since 0.1.5 was out like 8-9 hours ago. Nevertheless, for that short test, I loved it. I took turbo version for a pattern, and the engine behaved a lot different than in Aerobask version. The only thing that was a bit off, was that "sticky" rotation on TO. I hated that in P3D and FSX. COWS and A2A have that smooth takeoff feel that I believe, will be introduced here in the Legacy too. I have one question - does the addon simulate hypoxia effect? For example if we don't seal the cockpit, and fly 12k+ feet? I like the wind sounds of the unsealed cockpit though. :)

I'm on verge too to get FSW Legacy, even in beta state. I love the aircraft, have the Aerobask version in both XP11/XP12, but the lack/simplicity of systems/engine modelling isn't attractive to me. In Aerobask version I can lean the mixture so ITT goes pretty high and gal/hr lowers to like 6-7, at 200kts. I'm quite sure that is not the case in RL, well at least not without consequences at pretty high ITT. I actually started flying mediocre addons in both sims less and less. When there is no penalty for bad engine and systems management, I lose interest. People on XP forums say "you get what you paid for", referencing to the price of Aerobask Legacy which is around 45$, and I'm quite sure FSW goes way more into details for the same price. The only difference in the platform, and the foundation for the flight modelling.

I don't find this addon high quality as of yet. I immediately noticed pretty bad sound transition after the fuel is introduced during engine startup, and most importantly, engine startup is not right, NG stabilizes too fast (also acknowledged by RL pilots). If you look into how HotStart TBM engine is starting, you will immediately notice a difference. Also, the addon uses default G1000 suite, which lacks few pages from real M600. Of course, it's up to M600 dev to introduce these pages, as of course, G1000 dev team can't make it universal for all aircraft types. Those are only the things I've noticed by watching the feature list, videos and screenshots. Is it worth 45 bucks? Maybe, but not yet.

No worries, happens to the best of us. Speaking of ActiveSky, its trademark is a sudden change of weather, in both MSFS and XP. It's simply how it works. It loads new METAR data every X minutes (depends on what we choose in the options), and some weather stations apparently change METAR data on every 30 or even 60 minutes, so for example during approach, weather can change from CAVOK to 6/8 cumulus, and it ruins the immersion. I've learned to ignore that, but it's not easy when you know that default weather depiction has (had) smooth transitions.

What ASobo update? This is X-Plane forum. Asobo has nothing to do with X-Plane. Also, Active Sky exist/supports both MSFS and X-Plane.

I don't want to stir the pot, but I think you switched the forums or Laminar Research with Asobo. 🙂

Does it happen also with ActiveSky that uses METAR?

True. I have 3090 and no issues with rBar ON. 24GB of VRAM rules. Nvidia's policy to push low VRAM on anything that doesn't end with 90, is just a lame move to make you throw more money. I mean 4080 or 5080, look at the prices, but those cards have 16gb of VRAM.

I had this issue when I was using faulty USB 3.0 internal card. Switched to another USB port(s), and all fine.

Hm, it seems that I solved it, at least mostly. Set power mode in nvidia CP to max performance. I didn't touched nvidia CP settings after updating drivers couple of weeks ago. And last but not least, have set texture resolution in 2024 options to High (was Ultra). Now it stutters only a bit when I pan, but it doesn't' freeze the sim as before, it's much much better.

I wrote it few posts above, it seems it does happen also without any traffic, FSLTL or default. On all addon airports too. Now I'm testing on default airports, and it doesn't happen. So, the issue seems to appear when I'm on addon airports, with a lot of details and high textures, etc.

Yes, using it always. TLOD is 50 on ground.

Oh well, I misjudged it. Now I'm testing the sim without FSLTL at addon LYBE, and it does the same without any AI. I should change the topic title lol.

How do you setup 2024 to use FSLTL models? You are using internal online traffic built into the sim, yes?

I'm so tired of MSFS2024 mega stuttering on and around airports with FSLTL active, especially when I pan the view. My sim works fine at 50-60fps in dense areas (addon airport + FSLTL), but for example when I pan the view and look down at the pedestal, then after few seconds pan the view back up to look at the gates with all the AI, I can characterize it as frame freezes, not stuttering. FPS literally goes from 60 to 1-2 fps for couple of seconds, so I end panning the view 180 degrees instead just tiny bit. It happens every time I pan the view, and then pan the view back to look at the gates where the AI is, but it happens also without AI I think. Video uploaded to show it better. Maybe I should test it with FSTraffic, to make sure it's an FSLTL issue only.... Those frame freezes don't happen during flight, at all, it's super smooth. Any fixes for that? I'm aware that 32gb of RAM could be the issue (it shows 26gb used in overall), but the sim certainly loads something when those frame freezes happen, and I'm not sure why it happens every time I pan the view. 12900k + 3090 + 32gb RAM, sim on M2. EDIT: I now tested it without FSLTL, and it behaves the same, strange. So at the end it's not connected with FSLTL or AI, at all.

I have Quest 3, 12900K + 3090, and via Virtual Desktop High or Ultra preset, XP12 barely runs at 36fps in VR, just barely. GPU is screaming. When I unlock fps in VD, it shows ~40fps, so it's on edge even on default airports, no AI, and Aerobask DA50 (not fps hungry unlike Toliss or Zibo). I wonder will latest VR update bring FPS number a bit up, so I can lock to 45fps (with frame reprojection of course). It's strange since in MSFS I see usually 60fps in COWS DA40, Ultra preset in VD.

Edited library.txt in "Custom Scenery\AEP\", found the whole block of listed car objects that match the names in "Custom Scenery\AEP\Objects\Vehicles\Cars\", for example "Camry_Blue.obj", "F150_Black.obj", "Rav4_Red" etc, and deleted that whole block. Sorry, can't remember in detail.

Have to ask, are those gateways from OpenSAM or...? For some strange reason that addon doesn't work in my XP12, can't find out why.

I agree, it was harsh from my side, I apologise. It was better to write "not true in my case".

Well, no fps impact is a lie. I loaded default LYBE with default Citation, same gate, no AI. The proof is on my comparison screenshots. First one is all default, second with AEP v2. Since the numbers are small, it's 70 vs 54fps. Not a small difference imo. After taking these screenshots, went and disabled all static cars in AEP v2 library, got 3-4fps back (around 58fps now). I certainly do not care about static cars behind terminal buildings, etc. You can test it yourself easily too, just load the same situation with and without and look at the FPS (ctrl+f). Maybe FPS impact on better systems than mine is negligible, but there is certainly an impact as a lot of smaller clutter is added around the parking spaces. And honestly I don't mind, airports now look awesome, XP12 never looked better.