BeechPapa

Flew the X-Plane demo a few times, still having it on my HDD, but because of the unfriendly UI and general foreignness of it, I haven't touched it in a long time. However, the 'livliness' of the airplanes always stuck with my memory. People have often compared the physics of XP10 to FSX, saying X-Plane was better at simulating the general physics of an airplane when detailed performance information was not present, while FSX was better when you had all the performance info and charts filled out. And as FSX addons get better, and weather gets more realistic, FSX began to feel very "lively" in its physics as well. Flying a Real Air, A2A, or PMDG plane through ASN weather is night and day compared to default planes through default weather. As I understand it, FSX also allows developers the ability to program more advanced systems, making possible planes like the NGX or 777. However, the curiosity about X-Plane is still there for me. If anyone has advanced experience in both sims, please share - especially in respect to FDEs and physics - how the best of XP10 addons and the best of FSX addons compare. Not trying to start a skirmish please, just really honestly curious what the nuances are here and what the benefits are in each sim in regards to aircraft specifically.

Don’t be alarmed, those are just censored expletives, a sign that FS98 is flabbergasted by the FPS you are getting. Please refer to the definitions below for FS98 FPS Meter nomenclature. “?!?!, those are good framerates” = high framerate, 200-300% of monitor’s actual refresh rate, above the threshold for owls to differentiate from reality “Holy !?!?!?!? !?!?” = ‘uber’ higher framerate, theoretically capable of causing seizure in most humans “!?!?!?!? !?!?!?!? !?!?!?!?” = The event horizon of FPS experiences. FPS are so high, each frame exceeds the speed at which neurons can fire, even possibly exceeding the speed of light according to unproven theoretical physics, and thereby incapable of ever being revealed in the physical dimension of time and space. Also known as "Dark FPS".

I don't know what the correlative options are in P3D for Aircraft Realism Options, but it might be a good idea to make sure you have those sliders set correctly, or "enable automixture" or "unlimited fuel" unchecked.

A while ago, on some thread, I started helping a man with Saitek hardware issues and it immediately became apparent I should be talking with him on the phone to expedite the solution. We traded numbers, and what started as tech help evolved into a friendship that spanned many different interests (far more than Flight Simming) and multiple generations. Bill is in his 70’s, I am in my 30’s. Quite a separation in generations, yet Bill is easily the younger spirited person between us. His constant curiosity for new experiences has pushed me out of my old, stodgy ways on many occasions, convincing me to relinquish by FPS obsession and enjoy the joyful aspects of flight simming, and new addons that expand those horizons. It was Bill who finally convinced me to install AI ships (which has been extremely rewarding) and to finally get the GTN750 (also rewarding). His openness to new experiences extends to far more than flight sim, he is an avid gamer, and a man with many experiences in life and stories to tell. And I can’t begin to tell you how nice it is to finally have a real human being to talk to who is actually interested in this stuff. Unfortunately, we are located on the East and West coast of the USA, so talking on phone is our only option - though we have flown together in multiplayer. Though Bill used to sell computers, some of the aspects of the modern computer world are beyond his current technical expertise. And with many of the addons that I convince him to buy or addons he eventually convinces me to buy (we are sort of like enablers for each other, which has been mutually bad for our wallets) there’s a good chance he’ll need some kind of guidance. Some of the information he needs is available in the manuals (some of those manuals being over 1000 pages long), and some of it is just in community knowledge found in threads (which are admittedly locatable by Google search, but would take possibly hours of sifting). Bill certainly has more wisdom than me by a long, long shot – wish I could have that kind of wisdom myself, life would be a lot easier for me - but I do have the ability to find new information more quickly, and absorb it into memory. He could spend hours digging for some morsel of info in a manual that a 5 minute phone call (that I would personally enjoy) could take care of. My point is this… if I were to point Bill to Google whenever he needed help, including when he originally asked the question about his Saitek hardware as a “stranger” on the forum, I wouldn’t have the incredible friendship that I do with him now. And every time he needs some help figuring out an FMC or GPS that gives me another excuse to chat with him and catch up on life. By denying people help, you deny your own possibilities of having new experiences in life, meeting new people, or bringing those people into the community. And on a final note, just looking at this issue pragmatically, if Google search was capable enough to answer every single question – the Oz of the Flight Sim world – why have a forum anyway? I can’t tell you how many times I have Googled information only to find multiple threads filled with “Google it” posts. Oh, the irony.

Tom, reading this made my heart sink to the floor. It’s difficult to find the words. You planted many thousands of seeds of passion, respect, and love through multiple generations of flight simmers. I cannot express enough how thankful I am for your contribution to the community, how much AVSIM means to me, or how painful it is to be reading this news right now. My thoughts and prayers are with you.

I have FSX on a separate drive, but still keep UAC off to avoid the constant alerts. But I can understand why some people might prefer to keep UAC on.

No problem, glad it worked.

Most FSX users run with User Account Control disabled since it can disallow certain actions such as editing files and makes installations more prone to error. I would try disabling UAC first, and if that doesn't help try looking at the file permission for the cfg in question.

GTN is certainly more intuitive and comprehensive than GNS. Thanks to GTN 750, my Duke Turbine feels like a mini-airliner not just in performance but also avionics capability. That being said, I still have GNS (530) installed in most of my planes, the GTN I've only put into the Duke Turbine. My reasons are: - RXP GNS has integration into more VCs. - GNS is still more common in real world rental fleets - GNS is more challenging to use, and GTN can become the center attraction for instruments. GNS kind of just fits into the panel without grabbing too much attention away from steam gauges. - On the GTN I haven't found a way to completely disengage (despite turning off GPWS) certain warnings like sink rate. This can be really annoying if you are practicing post stall maneuvering or aerobatics. It is for this reason the GTN will never see the inside of my Lancair Legacy. GNS has an off switch. Perhaps an on/off switch never made it to the GTN due to legal concerns by Garmin. - GTN can be more performance-impacting than GNS due to having more click spots. Overall, they are both great units that reflect their real life counterparts with great detail. It couldn't hurt to experience both, I feel they each compliment different aspects of flying.

Fairly sure deleting default planes will affect default traffic, but I could be wrong about that. Many a time I've felt the same way you do, especially in JS4100 which really can be a royal pain sometimes. I've discovered now why airlines like to monitor pilot proficiency over time and keep them limited to extremely similar types. Just a few weeks away and you can really feel like a beginner again in any airplane. On the other hand, with ability to fly so many types in FSX, good luck sticking to just a few.

That is something that continues to amaze me about the platform, that it can simulate such a wide range of activities. One type of flying is not like the other. Many people have an entire sim world based on military aviation, some on purely retro aviation - including scenery for both. And some people are even using FSX as an open maritime world for sailing simulation. The possibilities are endless. My two favorite forms of aviation are bush flight and commercial medium/long haul, two opposite sides of the spectrum. My interest in both has led me to other areas of aviation, namely aerobatic, GA, and regional turbo prop operation. It has amazed me to see that I can accurately simulate all forms of aviation I wish to a very exacting degree. Really incredible things have been happening recently in weather, flight planning, avionics, and scenery. These developments, along with the continued breakthroughs toward realism by aircraft developers, has led to an astounding flight experience. To repeat my previous sentiment, my biggest limitation is my own lack of imagination in deciding a flight plan.

I’m starting to come around to the idea that I should pick my 3 favorite planes –a nearly impossible task- and just fly those. Or even better pick just one, if my attention span could handle that. I jump between planes so often I forget the nuances of each, and there’s always an adjustment period. Mastering one plane would be quite rewarding. Too many options, too much fun to be had in too many types of planes in too many different places around the world for me to stick to one though. For many years, people complained about FSX not supporting certain features, and now that almost each and every one of our whims is provided for, we complain that our cups are running over. My hardest decision now is just choosing where and what to fly. And what a wonderful decision that is to make!

AI ships added a whole new dimension to my flying. The difference it makes in tropical environments like the Caribbean or Maldives is amazing. Suddenly the environments of these paradises come alive with cruise ships, freighters, and sailboats all over. So much more believable now. The models are so well crafted, I can't help but pause the sim while I fly over them to scope out all their micro-details.

Still on 1.012. I'll give 1.013 a shot. If I still find the cockpit too dark, I'll start another thread on the Majestic forums.

Everyone's too busy flying it. :smile:

No problem. There's always someone willing to help out around here. Whether we actually do or not is anyone's guess, but someone will always try. The reason I asked about manual vs. offset mode is the problem sounds like a power/speed management issue. I previously used offset because it would downclock the chip, idling as low as 1.6Ghz at .92 v-core, which was very nice for long term operation. The problem is that it wasn't consistent with the voltage it was supplying at sustained loads (like FSX) and I would catch the clock speeds dropping from my OC of 4.4, with v-core drops down to 1.25 (with my standard OC voltage being closer to 1.31). Since you are already on manual mode, I would check out Windows options related to power management. I don't believe the problem is within FSX since CPU power regulation is not its responsibility. AF mask can control which cores to use, but not how they operate. The Nick N guide is a very good place to start since he is educated about Windows and how to optimize it. Going through that guide will help to make sure the operating system is set up ideally for FSX. It may also be a good idea to check your CPU speed and temperature over time via a logging file. I believe CoreTemp is able to do so for both clock speed and temperature, per core. Analyzing this kind of data would tell you exactly the speeds the chip is hitting in FSX over the length of a flight, and how the speeds and temps may be interacting.

Jim, I think he's just looking to add turbulence avoidance as a challenging aspect of the simulator, not control it himself. To that end, the PMDG weather radar on the 777 (and supposedly coming to the NGX soon) are the only FSX avionics I know of that are capable of designating turbulence on radar returns using it's WX+T mode. And personally I've never noticed it indicate any turbulence that wasn't already defined by a storm cell, so even that will be of limited use. As previously noted, sigmets and airmets are your best bet to finding turbulence. There are also user-generated pireps in ASN if you are in live mode. Looking at live weather radar, a winds chart like the one linked above by Bjratchf, or atleast examining the winds map on X-Gauge will also give some clues. You will find a higher degree of turbulence in temperature gradients, areas with fluctuating temp conditions where high and low pressure zones may be colliding. Same for winds aloft, you can probably expect some turbulence when crossing into/out of a jetstream or air mass that has a different speed or direction relative to the air mass around it - which the X Gauge or a flight planning utility like PFPX (sourcing it's weather data from ASN) will display quite nicely. And you can expect turbulence when climbing over high terrain, which ASN also mimics quite nicely. I always seem to get turbulence climbing over the Alaskan Range when departing Anchorage in the NGX. My climb rate also tends to shoot up due to updrafts. Just keep in mind that predicting turbulence is still very difficult even for professional meteorologists or flight planners/dispatchers. Even if we can scope out the data ASN is feeding the sim, we have no way of doing that in nature. Some data, like exactly predicted turbulence locations, is just not realistic for us to have.

Are you using manual or offset mode for v-core?

Awesome, glad you got it working!

Jeroen, I do the same exact thing, except use an Android tablet. Having the flight briefing on a tablet is very helpful, plus it saves a whole lot of paper! When you copy to a text file are you using the "save" option under the "Flight Plan (OFP)" tab in the toolbar? As a second option, perhaps worth mentioning, you can also use Foxit PDF reader to 'print' any document to a PDF file instead of a TXT. In this case you would 'print' the flight plan, but select "Foxit Reader PDF Printer" under the printer options, and then select the location where you'd like the file saved.

Is there any chance you are engaging APR mode before getting the GS indicators on the HSI? Or not in ALT hold mode before capture?

Well, based on the fact that the GS diamond shows up and you could hypothetically fly the slope manually, this seems to be an aircraft autopilot issue, not an ILS signal issue.

My apologies for such a delayed response. I am not using P3D, however.

Microsoft has a fix posted on their support site. Deleting the reg keys as advised seems to help a lot of people with this issue. http://support.microsoft.com/kb/968365

And a really nice slideout table in the Duke that all of my passengers (ok, it's really just me back there) use on every flight! Until landing that is, then I make the announcement (to myself of course) to "put tray tables in upright and locked positions". As long as you don't go too far, and performance is good, which is always the case with your RealAir products, little details like this are welcome in moderation. On a side note, I used to work along side a 3d modelling team and they would always tell me stories of 3d modellers who kind of "went mad" on certain projects. One guy for instance was supposed build a warehouse, and despite the fact that the render camera would only be at eye level, and the lighting kept very dark, he ended up modeling the rafters, the plumbing through the rafters, electrical wiring, wiring supports, air vents, etc... all details that nobody would ever see. He was lagging behind deadlines as well, so eventually got fired. There definitely seems to be an obsession aspect with certain modelers, which is fully understandable considering that they are doing something they really love to do and often times can't stop themselves from doing it.