barrel_owl

I managed to place the Rex/Milviz WX Advantage Radar in lieu of the GTN Unit 1, however problems seem to be greater than benefits at the moment. First, obviously the gauge is only visible in 3D, all actions need to be taken in 2D, which is expected (only Carenado can edit the 3D model in order to fit the Rex/Milviz gauge). The size of the GTN Unit 1 bezel is far from fitting that of the weather gauge. A tried several adjustments, but I am afraid there is no manual tweaking that will ever fit a rectangular gauge into a square bezel. What you see is the less worse solution I found. Based on my experience, the dual GTN configuration is a frame killer on this plane (not the GTN itself, whose footprint on VAS is negligible in other aircraft). As I explained in another thread, the performance is far worse than with the default one with GNS430 and MFD640. Things do not seem to improve much replacing the GTN Unit 1 with the weather radar. I am still working on it. I can share this mod eventually, if anyone really wants it, however as it is I do not recommend it.

I have two good news for you. The first one is that there is a solution to this problem. Someone created a sound pack for Dornier Do228 one year ago based on real samples. The second one is that it is completely free. http://library.avsim.net/esearch.php?DLID=189075&CatID=fsxsnds

I made a test and, for what is worth, I came to a conclusive evidence: the performance drop is definitely due to the double GTN unit configuration. At least here, there is absolutely no doubt. I made exactly the same flight in the same exact situation (same departure position, same flight plan, for the records LOWI-LOWS, same addons, same weather scenario with AS16, same graphic resolution and same traffic setting). Only the livery was different (I have both the default VC with with GNS430 and MFD640 and the GTN mod in place, both model/panel combinations are mapped to different textures in the aircraft.cfg). While I had continuous and abnormal FPS drops with the double GTN configuration (such as from about 30 FPS to 5-8 FPS and then back), resulting in heavy microstutters, I never experimented the same with the default configuration. FPS remained constantly in a range between 25 to 40-50 depending on the view and the situation, but with overall smoothness and no microstutters. I will make another test with only one GTN unit active later, as suggested above. However, it is clear to me that something is definitely wrong with the VC model with a dual GTN unit provided by Carenado. I am unable to determine what exactly is causing the frame drop, anyway it makes very little sense to keep both GTN units as long as Flight1 will not provide any crossfill. With that said, this might be a further step into the direction of purchasing the new Flight1 GNS530. I am very tempted to buy it and install it in lieu of the default GNS530 to see what happens.

If you want to remove GTN unit 2 (the one lower at pedestal level), add [//] in front of the appropriate line in the section [Vcockpit06] of your panel.cfg file: [Vcockpit06] .... //gauge00=F1GTN!GTN750VC, 0,0,667,794,UNIT2 .... If you want to remove GTN unit 1 (the upper one), do the same, but in the section [Vcockpit01] of your panel.cfg file: [Vcockpit01] .... //gauge00=F1GTN!GTN750VC, 0,0,667,794,UNIT1 In addition. In this case, remember that the 2D window is associated by default to GTN Unit 1 (Shift+7 here). So, if you want to disable GTN Unit 1 and leave GTN unit 2 active, you also have to change the appropriate line in the declaration at the top of the file: from: Window06=Flight1 Garmin GTN750 U1 - DO NOT MODIFY to Window06=Flight1 Garmin GTN750 U2 - DO NOT MODIFY That's all.

Are you using the double GTN panel or the default panel with GNS430 and MFD640? With the latter, performance is OK. With the double GTN configuration, instead, I have a significant FPS drop. I tried to deactivate either GTN unit 1 or 2 and it seems to get better, but I need more testing. After all, it makes no sense to have two GTN units as long as we have no crossfill.

You may want to take a look here: http://www.simforums.com/forums/answered-gns-430-530-bundle_topic56565.html

In this case, your installation is OK. Just enjoy your sim. Now, one tip. Many addon installers are not built correctly. When you're prompted to choose between FSX and FSX-SE by an installer, I suggest you to choose "FSX". As long as you only have one FSX version installed and the appropriate entry in your registry points to "C:\Program Files (x86)\Steam\steamapps\common\FSX", by choosing FSX you will be redirected to your FSX Steam installation. Choosing "FSX Steam" may sometimes be tricky, based on my experience, as some installers wrongly assume you have both versions installed, which is not. While they will be redirected to your only main folder under "C:\Program Files (x86)\Steam\steamapps\common\FSX", they might create external folders named "FSX-SE". This is why I strongly suggest anyone to choose FSX.

Thank you for sharing this information. Have you tried to ask this question in the Flight1 forum? Whether it is possible or not to integrate the GNS 530/430 in the VC even in aircraft that do not come with an RXP option? Some people here already answered to me that it is possibile with manual adjustment, yet it is still unclear whether 3D knobs will work or not. I read that Flight1 is already working to an update, but maybe Bert may have one of his brilliant ideas here...

Very nice job!

Simply 100% my thought. I saw and see serious and respectable software houses being bashed at here every day for minor issues and minor complaints. To be welcomed into the community after you have literally abondoned your paying customers for years without any notice is a privilege that not everyone gets to partake in this world. Good for them.

I don't use such hardware. Therefore, from my view this detail is completely irrelevant. On the other side, customer support makes all the difference to me. As said, I am not the kind of guy who likes bashing at others' products. I would have bought myself RXP gauges long ago, if only they did bother to make them compatible with FSX Steam or, at least, to announce they were working on it. I am not questioning their quality. I just do not consider serious someone who vanishes without notice for years and then magically reappears only days after a competitor has announced an identical product. Maybe they have their good reasons. I am always open to change my mind, but honestly they need much stronger arguments than fanfare and a vague announcement to convince me of the contrary.

I could not agree more. They literally abandoned their products, and above all, their customers for years. They did not even bother to reply to emails. Not one single information about the reason, not one single warning on their site about the fact their products were not compatible with FSX Steam. As a mere coincidence, only days after Flight1 announced their 430/530 suite, they show up again with this announcement. Coming soon? When exactly? I do not want to disqualify RXP in any way. However, since differences between both products are in fact expected to be minimal and the price is the same, there is absolutely no reason at the moment why I should not opt for Flight1. At least, they do care about their customers.

So, are they alive and kicking? And yet no support for FSX Steam and Prepar3D for the legacy GNS 430/530?

Freshly uploaded on the tube. Very detailed and infomative.

Agreed in full. But the reason why many of us forced an "unreal" GTN750 into the cockpit of a C182 or a Baron 55/58, often requiring an extra work by Bert, is that the Flight1 GTN 650/750 was the only serious alternative to the default Garmin 430/530. Unless you were running FSX classic, RXP gauges were not an option. Now, there is no reason anymore to do that. Flight1 products are always very expensive, but they are worth the money charged. I have both gauges on my to-buy list with highest priority.

Thanks a lot, Rimshot. And, of course, no crossfill yet, so no reason to keep two units there.

Does the installer automatically replace the default GNS system? For example, the GNS 430 in the Carenado Baron B58? Or is a manual installation required?

Same here. A total waste of money.

Agreed, it should not be for "the masses". I recommend DTG to call it "EliteSim" or maybe "AristoSim: only for the best".

I heard a rumour that they will reveal more infomation, as soon as they will be comfortable doing so. Sorry, can't say more at the moment :-)

World cameras do work. In case they don't, all you have to do is following the procedure described in this video. I concede, however, that Ezdok is not very friendly and straightforward and this may be scaring for some users. Chaseplane appears to have a nice and simple UI and this appears to me at the moment as the only real step forward. Again, I am open to change my mind as soon as they will prove me wrong.

You can do this with FSX/P3D default settings. I have F11 associated to the 360° pan view and yes, it can coexist with Ezdok views.

Nothing I have read in their announcement page or seen in both videos convinced me so far that this is real step forward from Ezdok. Except, maybe, for the friendlier control panel. Cloud support? I have all my Ezdok sets on cloud and I don't need to be logged to their account. Of course, I am open to change my mind as they will release more information, but so far I am kinda disappointed.

Agreed in full. In terms of features? Obviously yes. In terms of realism and adherence to the real counterpart? I strongly doubt so.

Right. Seems they do operate three 200 at the moment. Here is one: https://youtu.be/2gfTwg_9B3g?t=20