mikelockwood

I bought MSFS 2024 this week. (Wish I hadn’t) I’ve spent hours setting up a C172 just to get the feel of the sim before moving onto airliners. Oh btw none of the cockpits light, pathetically basic in my opinion. Anyway, I tested out my flight over New York and landed at La Guardia. Yep, there were no buildings only jetways. I’m going back to MSFS 2020. It’s a disgrace how Microsoft can even release this, even 6 months in and it’s half baked. Regards, Mike

Thank you all for your replies, Luis70 I will do as you suggested with the Navigraph files. Regards

Thank all for your feedback. It’s interesting to see that two of you had problems after the Windows 11 update. I’d completely forgotten that I’d downloaded that update myself. I’d like to ask the members who are having smooth experiences whether they have or have not downloaded that update as well. It might be significant. Many thanks

Hi All, I'm hoping for some enlightenment. About 2 weeks ago I started experiencing very laggy graphics and sound stuttering. Also, loading times of the simulator became horrendously long just getting to the main menu and then just as long launching after hitting “Fly”. My Fenix aircraft wouldn’t automatically sign in resulting in a dead aircraft at the gate. I tried to think back over any recent updates that I had carried out. I had updated Fenix so after checking on the Fenix site I found an article recommending a complete re-install. This I did. The Fenix is ok now. I also remember updating my Nvidia graphics driver, so I rolled back to a safe November driver that I’d used without any problems. I do have a lot of addon airports installed. I use the addon linker program, so I tried disabling 95% of them in case this was causing the problem, that made no difference. To be honest, having many installed airports has never given me any problems in the past. My system is not exactly cutting edge, I have a I7 9700K processor, 2080ti graphics card and 32gig of RAM. My broadband speed is 40-50mbs at the PC. I haven’t touched my graphics settings, in fact everything is as it’s always been. This set up has always given me a smooth experience. My gut feeling is that this a Microsoft server issue. I’m sure that most of you are aware of the recent publicised articles regarding long loading times for MS2020. Then of course there has been the disappointing launch of MS2024 which has it’s own streaming issues. My belief is that Microsoft are not pumping out a solid reliable data stream since MS2024. They need to upgrade their servers. I used task manager to check my broadband speed being received by the simulator and the graph goes up and down like a yo yo. I do not get erratic speeds with other applications. I’d welcome any views/opinions or ideas as at the moment my simulator is not worth playing in this state. One of the reasons that I’ve stayed with MS2020 is because of its stability. This recent experience has made me less likely to change to MS2024 if poor streaming is the culprit. Regards, Mike.

Hi all, just stumbled across this post. I’ve today bought the Fenix A319/A321 pack, checked that the official Fenix liveries are up to date and fired up MSFS. Thought I’d try the A321 first but when I started at the gate it’s invisible, went back to main menu and checked hangar, it’s also invisible there too. Changed to A319 in hangar that’s visible but has no landing gear. Original A320 still ok. In all instances I’ve used the default Fenix house livery. As this relates to the original post I wondered if anyone can add to this. Regards Mike

This is what concerns me. Rex started off behind but they do seem to be keeping on top of updates. I’m also drawn to the weekly season changes in REX rather than every 45 days. Thank all of you for your opinions. Think I might give Accuseason a try. regards Mike

Hi All, I know that this subject has been covered before, but I can't find any recent comparisons between Bijan Seasons 7.2 and the latest Rex Accuseason. Most comparisons are 10 months old now and from what I can gather Rex has grown up a bit since then. I already have the Bijan product but I haven't seen much in the way of updates for a few months. Anyone got any thoughts/suggestions on this? Regards, Mike

It will be worth the wait. I have a corner of Heathrow waiting for the arrival. First I'll add a livery, probably British Airways ( hope PMDG have a few ready to go) then set up Ezdok and explore that wonderful cockpit from every angle. A quick run through of the basics (yes I will read the manual later) and then I'll be firing up those 4 engines and rolling out. Maybe a quick flight down to Paris playing with the controls and panning around the outside watching 4 contrails snake out behind, then .................... Etc. Etc........ Mike

Hi Naïf, I still can't understand why there's no traffic whatsoever, surely I should still see some small GA traffic using VOX ATC. I rechecked my emails that I have received from Steve who designed the airport and this what he wrote:- "My Southend version has: Gate Parking (Commercial airliners) 10x Gate Small 18m (same size as standard, fits up to A321, my AI easy jet's park here) 3x Gate Medium 23m (none in standard, fits up to B757) Ramp Parking 4x GA 16m 3x GA Large 14m 3x GA Medium 10m 4x GA Small 6m" So although I understand what you are saying about the differences in interpretation between VOX and FSX atc surely I should see something using VOX??? Keep the suggestions coming though, I love this airport and am determined to get to the bottom of this. Many thanks

Hi Naïf, thanks for the reply. I have checked with the airport developer regarding the parking sizes and they take at least A320's. EGMC usually has Easyjet A319's landing there plus some GA so I don't think that size is the problem. I welcome any further suggestions though Many thanks

Hi all, I using Steve Colley's excellent Addon freeware airport for Southend. Unfortunately, when I use VOX ATC I have no AI traffic present. I use WOAI and this works fine when using FSX ATC. I've written to Steve and Tegwyn at VOX but no one appears to have a solution. I'm just wondering if anyone else has come across this problem at this airport or had a similar experience with an Addon airport that may help me resolve this. Many thanks,

Thank you Matthias and Steve. I guess I'll just have to experiment some more until I can save up for a faster computer!! Thanks Steve for all your advice particularly as it wasn't really an issue with your fixer after all. I guess that's the whole idea of these forums really. What's been discussed here may help others with similar issues. Merry Xmas to you all!!

Hi Steve, I've set "light effects only" in the "light effects" section and I'm back up in the low 20's now which is much better than about 8 fps! Ok, now I'm a little confused. Do I leave "Convert effects" ticked or not? Also, what am I seeing now? are the contrails and wing tip vortices FSX or Precipitfx? I've been doing some research over in the Avsim Precipitfx forum and never realised what an issue fps is using Precipitfx in DX10 as it didn't seem to affect DX9. I've also re-read the Precipitfx manual and I found the following "DirectX10 is fully compatible when used with the SteveFX Scenery Fixer. DX10 enhances the look of many effects and gives a softer look to volumetric lighting. We highly suggest it!" I've checked my Preciptfx installation and the box is ticked for DX10 compatibility. I hope that you can clarify these points for me. Many thanks once again.

Hi Steve, In Light/Effects I have "All Effects" enabled, the "Convert Effects" box is ticked and and the two "Exclude" boxes are unticked. Regarding PrecipFx, I have it optimised for DX10, but I guess I'd better try taking that out of the equation and report back. The saga continues..........

Hi Steve. I'll come back to you tomorrow regarding the effects/lights. I'm using my iPad right now so not on the PC. Tom, I'm not using UK2000 Gatwick, just a freeware add on from the Avsim library. Other than bringing the airport up to date, it's pretty much just an FSX airport. I take your point about contrails, but DX9 coped ok. In fact I'm quite pleased in general with all my add ons. I expected higher frame rates leaving out REX etc but with everything running the results are not that much lower than above, except when I hit higher altitudes in DX10 (which never happened in DX9) Thanks again for your input, Regards Mike

Hi Steve, I've tried some tests today. I reinstalled the libraries and unticked the 5 shader boxes. I carried out 6 tests in all, all shaders unticked and then adding a shader each time. I've tried to add some consistency but cutting back on add ons. The test criteria that I have used are, EGKK Gatwick, runway 08R, FSX weather set to fair, time 12 noon. Climbing out to FL300 straight course off runway of 79 degrees. I've used no REX live weather, no ATC (I use VOX normally) no Track IR (to keep cockpit static without head movement). My FSX loads with UTX and GEX and I use EZCA which also loads. I used my PMDG 737-800 NGX as I wanted to see how the cockpit performed. By the way, I keep the textures down to 1024 in the cockpit so as not to overtax things too much. Test 1 - No Shaders On runway cockpit view 20 fps av External view (behind, looking forward 38 fps av At FL100 " 20 fps av " " 40 fps av At FL 200 " 23 fps av " " 50 fps av At FL 300 " 27 fps av " " 18 fps av Test 2 - Rain Shader added On runway " 19 fps av " " 35 fps av At FL 100 " 19 fps av " " 35 fps av At FL 200 " 23 fps av " " 40 fps av At FL 300 " 25 fps av " " 18 fps av Test 3 - Rain/Cloud Shaders added On runway " 21 fps av " " 33 fps av At FL 100 " 18 fps av " " 35 fps av At FL 200 " 25 fps av " " 45 fps av At FL 300 " 23 fps av " " 17 fps av Test 4 - Rain/Cloud/Water shaders added On runway " 21 fps av " " 35 fps av At FL 100 " 20 fps av " " 38 fps av At FL 200 " 25 fps av " " 45 fps av At FL 300 " 26 fps av " " 17 fps av Test 5 - Rain/Cloud/Water/General shaders added On runway " 20 fps av " " 32 fps av At FL100 " 18 fps av " " 35 fps av At FL 200 " 25 fps av " " 45 fps av At FL 300 " 26 fps av " " 15 fps av Test 6 - Rain/Cloud/Water/General/Legacy shaders added On runway " 19 fps av " " 32 fps av At FL100 " 21 fps av " " 35 fps av At FL 200 " 24 fps av " " 39 fps av At FL 300 " 23 fps av " " 15 fps av In my opinion the shaders are working fine. It's hard to get perfect results with FSX. Perhaps the only thing to note is only 15 fps at FL 300 when adding General and Legacy shaders. I'm wondering also if the fps falls away slightly at higher altitudes when the contrails kick in (I also use Precipitfx). My own conclusion is that I've screwed around with my fsx.cfg and NVidia settings so many times that I've tweaked myself into oblivion!!! I await your opinion Steve and anyone else that has any I ideas. I really don't want to give up on DX10!! I'm happy to post my fsx.cfg here if anyone is interested. Many thanks, Mike

Thanks Steve for your prompt reply and also to Tom as well. I will run some test flights and carry out your instructions. I'll report back in due course. Many thanks Mike

Thanks Tom for your comments. I am running Windows 7 64 bit with an I7 3.4 ghz processor so I don't know if you have more processing power than me. I shall try your settings to see if that helps and wait for Steve to reply with any suggestions. I am reluctant to go back to dx9 for the same reason as you, the cockpit shadows really are awesome. I am a realist and don't expect miracles from Steve's fixer, just comparable performance to dx9 Many thanks for your help, Best wishes, Mike

Thank you for your reply Steve. I haven't replied for a while as I thought that I'd go away and experiment so more. I've tried all sorts of sssgaa combinations but still have the low frame rates at high altitudes. In dx9 I had never tried Nvidia inspector at all prior to using dx10, I just had the graphics card set to application controlled, so wanted to familiarise myself with the different settings in Nvida inspector case it was something that I had done wrong. My graphics card is only a Geo Force GTX 560 ti so it's not exactly high end by today's standards, but with careful tuning I've always had a workable FSX considering all my add ons. By the way, I've been careful with textures. I keep my clouds on DXT5 and wave animations on DXT1. Cloud resolution is at 512. Sooooo today I decided to check out your suggestion, I uninstalled the libraries and took off in heavy cloud and rain, set the altimeter for 32,000 feet. Externally my fps improved even though there was plenty of heavy cloud around. Once I reach crusiing level and the weather was clear in the distance, external fps was back to the 40fps region. Even my cockpit very was back in the mid 20's which I'm happy enough with considering that I fly PMDG aircraft all of the time. I did notice now though that the cockpit shadows were more blocky and jagged as a result of this. So where do I go from here? I assume from your suggestion that you suspected that the libraries might make a difference. Do I give up on dx10? or perhaps now you can advise me what to do with the library situation. I notice that there's a Debug section, perhaps there's areas there that you could advise me to experiment with. Many thanks MIke

I'm also getting low fps. I have read and appreciate the comments above, but using DX10 only gives me 6 to 8 fps at cruising altitude (high cruise fl250 and above) I'm using addons such as PMDG, REX, VOTATC6 so I appreciate that I will get a frame hit. At busy airports I get around 20fps which I'm happy with as performance is smooth. I thought that the airport activity would be more punishing than flying high with just terrain and sky. In DX9 l would normally expect around 40 fps at high altitude. I suspect that this is to do with LOD settings/terrain settings and would appreciate any help. As you have said, your fix is mostly neutral so I'd expect at least the performance as what I had before. I've read your manual and also the How to guide. Regards Mike

Hi Keven, been trying out version 1.3. This is much improved with clearer and longer contrails and better wing tip vortices. If anyone reading this has any doubts about buying this software, I would recommend it on the strength of the new version. Regards Mike

Hi Keven, Sorry for the delay in replying due to real world issues. I'd be happy to post some screenshots. Can't see an upload button anywhere, maybe someone could tell me what I'm missing here?? :blink: Mike

Hi, I only purchased PrecipitFX last week, so I'm still experimenting with different conditions, but one thing that is abundantly clear to me, is that the contrails are too weak. I have my FSX to the optimum settings as well. Having said that, the effects are much more realistic than the stock FSX ones so I'm pleased to read that you are working on improving this. I like to be able to see my AI aircraft filling the skies as well, so denser contrails adds more of an element of realism in my opinion. Anyway, it's good to see a refreshingly new product, so keep up the good work and listen to our feedback so that you can carry on improving it for us. Regards Mike

Hi Wizzardos, I was very pleased to receive your reply. I don't for one minute think that it was your intention to mess with my files, I'm only glad that this has been brought to light so that it may help others and also that you are rectifying it. I think your liveries are excellent and recommend them to anyone reading this. Regards, Mike

Does anyone know if it interferes with REX 4 textures?