him225

I have AF=245 on quad core with HT on, however the problem is win 7 is utilizing core1 for its programs while core3 lies parked with core2 under light usage by p3d. I expected win7 to use core3 but for some reason it is using core1 with already heavily loaded core0. Why is this so? Is there a way to free up cores 0,1 without unchecking each running program in task manager every time I run p3d? I already uncheck the addon apps from running on cores 0,1,2.

AI, ATC, Sound system - all left untouched so far with their obvious bugs as it was in fsx

The major performance hit caused by ai traffic is at busy airports when numerous of them in view causing rendering of large amounts of geometry. I was able to fly with ai and complex planes at 20+ fps with only a cpu upgrade (of 2x benchmark) where previously it was a complete slideshow.

I do get the requirement of a way for confirming latest atis between pilot and atc, I do not suggest otherwise or pilot stop using atis and rely on atc for weather. I imagine things would function mostly as they do if pilots were not required to confirm knowledge of latest atis to atc. I am just wondering of the stage at which the confirmation is done, why not at clearance delivery (which would be first contact with atc?) or at takeoff clearance? Any particular reason why baro pressure is stated separately as well when already mentioning the atis code?

see if you are touching max usable vram, if so try lowering settings (resolution, AA, texture size, etc) to have more headroom

T2G LTBA - the surrounding varying elevation and autogen make it an interesting site to look at. Good on fps as well. T2G terminals have the best appearance (OTHH buildings look great), FT does better overall with nice tone and ground (their YSSY does it best). Bridge ZGGG has some fine looking terminals too. But considering the standards they achieve in graphics and accuracy, I find their afcads (tweaking aside) even on the better ones generally leave something to be desired.

Sorry I edited the post to be more specific while you replied. I thought of the issues you mention, but I think the call serves as an assurance and wouldn't lead to as much operational problems.

Just tried it in the sim and it matched. Hadn't realty given much attention to the atis designator at the beginning before. How useful would this be though (except for minimizing conflict with expected departure runway) as ATIS/conditions might change by the time aircraft reaches the runway? For the purpose of pilot awareness/flight safety I would imagine it be more appropriate to mention it when asking takeoff clearance, or during clearance delivery if it is more about flight planning?

what does it refer to when pilot asks atc for taxi route to departure "..with "Charlie" ready to taxi IFR"? At first I thought it could be the taxiway the plane is at but that doesn't seem to match up in the sim.

Basically the reactions in the recent thread on the not so formidable latest hotfix led me wondering a bit in this direction. Though some responses here seem to merge LM abandoning ESP with LM abandoning simulation in general, post #8 was roughly the line of thought that occurred to me and there are some good to know points in other posts I came to find in that regard. There has been development in 5 years, I cant complain as MSFS had full stopped it. But as a simmer I think though there have been significant changes which have allowed for good flights, too little has changed in too much time, which makes me feel LM is willing to do only so much to the sim. Though I hope to see some major improvement in the future, what looks probable to me is nothing revolutionary might happen. In that case how long before LM stops putting up with all the bugs/issues/limitations that they did not create, is what I was thinking. Food for thought exactly, but apologies if it sounds criticizing or negative. I for one am not much affected by those major issues probably because I do not use FTX and other heavy hitters, and enjoying simming like never before. I do however miss the original MSFS scene and sometimes cant resist dreaming about what future iterations to the present day might have looked and run like. It was sort of an explosion of features and functionality that started to happen perhaps beginning fs2002 that got halted with fsx before it could complete in following iterations. I get reminded of it whenever I hit bugs/quirks in P3D/FSX.

Is it also possible that somewhere down the line LM get fedup and abandon p3d/MS esp development due to never ending and impossible/too consuming to fix issues? There must be a limited commitment to how much they want to modify the ESP, else by now they might also have reached an fs11/12isk level of improvement.

AI Monitoring and Taxi Speed Controller (AIDirector) by Joe Oliveira, its there in the library. Includes source code as well. Says it controls AI taxi speed on runway, taxiway and turns. Though it says is for p3d 2.2, I gave it a shot anyway as it works through simconnect, but didn't produce any difference on 3.3.5.

just tried with the 4.957c, still not resolving any conflicts

after updating to latest p3d+fsuipc aiseparation is not resolving any conflicts, was working fine with p3d 3.3.5 + fsuipc 4.955

If that is the loud humming sound, interestingly it comes from both IAE and CFM engines. IAE ones have a sharper N2 sound though, while the other one has a bit finer like the 737s. The neo ones are so quite on takeoffs compared to both, fan buzz is very dull to almost non existent and sounds like a distant 777 from behind. Could be shallower preferred climb profile on the new FMCs.

In using multiple runways, how about distribution based on parking types and codes?

Not sure what UT3 could bring new other than bug fixes for disappearing AI on water and perhaps the resetting traffic on accessing sim options. An actual clear approach option would also be welcome as the present one is just the reset traffic option renamed which deletes all AI and cause massive stutter as they spawn again. They could also expand the content by including cargo carriers, but they just as well can do that in the current version with schedule updates.

If you manage to keep your cool so that you know what you are doing probably you could fly through whatever is possible with the computer part (I.e. programming the autopilot). Manually you might be able to keep it under some control in flight, but takeoff and landing you are almost going to crash, as even in the real world they are more of instinct (built from experience) than real time mindful control. So no amount of flying information (which includes flight behavior experienced in the sim) is going to be useful in those phases more than serving as reference and checkpoints.

Does the thrust work with mouse wheel too or does it always require a hardware throttle like the AS A320 does?

It seems what improvements can be made to the graphics engine/performance with fsx have been reached for present technology in p3d 3.3. Then it is good time to move focus to sew together broken/incomplete parts in sound/AI/ATC etc portions of the sim and make it complete as a whole before moving to x64.

Now that it is mentioned this is mainly going to be another modified fsx: Lots of bugs and possible improvements in AI traffic behavior as - slow crawl before takeoff, slow exit after landing, AI logic on crossing runways and taxiways, parking logic eg cargo aircraft parking on gate if at has same parking code as of its passenger airline, prioritizing runways for landing/takeoff based on aircraft type, parking type/codes, the list is endless only how deep you want to go. AI engine sound needs correction aswell, it has bug where sound logic malfunctions when many AI active at the airport. Many AI related customization options possible as - adjustable timeout period, taxi speed ranges, limiting AI by number or fps. LM don't seem much interested in this portion of the sim as they probably don't see it much useful in their purpose, but lets see what changes this sim brings. Also how about improving turbulence, it is so basic that for some detailed aircraft addons it becomes a bug.

No I meant updated model as in AI model from a different developer for the same aircraft. For UT2 would only require reassignment of repaint on existing addon schedule if everything work normal. But didn't go well when I changed existing repaint assignments to the new AI model.

I recalled why the problem with 787s happened. I had initially assigned them to camsim model after I created the schedule, then I decided to change all 789s to new fspainter model and reassigned them in UT2. So both problems happened after I updated the aircraft model. Probably not reliable to change repaint assignments then on an existing schedule.

I am using mix of default and new models/repaints some of which I added when last I created the addon schedule. I too was doing update of VIR and BAW for their 787s, rest all aircraft were already existing. The BAW 787 although appeared at heathrow did not appear at an airport until I removed and reassigned it in UT2. I also updated cathay cargo 744f to the faib models from aia in an existing addon schedule. The faib PW variant had two liveries, although I added both set to unlimited after removing the aia one, only one of them appeared until I removed and reassigned the missing one again to the list after which it began to show up.

Could anyone explain how they replace an old addon schedule with a new one for an airline in UT2? Until now I just removed the old db file before I finalize the new one in power pack. After that opening in UT2 most repaints from the previous set are still recognized and I just add the missing ones. But I realized that aircraft of some liveries and some legs fail to appear after this, if I remove and add them again in UT2 they work again. If it is the correct way then it would seem to have all repaints and legs work properly after replacing a schedule every aircraft in the list must be removed and added again.