Chris Bell

i understand Steve, i was curious to pick your brain in case i was missing something ❤️

the OS itself,

the point im tying to make is if you utilize 4.5GB on your page as is, you could have placed it in your ram and speed up your system by virtue of ram vs even ssd speeds, unless you are low on ram; which is not the case with most sim platforms; why slow it down with paging? even if its not the data flow to gpu; why slow your system down for no reason? you have ram, its always idle, use it!

@SteveW its not goofed here since its always been disabled from my memory if not mistaken your page file could grow up to half of your installed ram; that's what auto manage page file does by default, i could be off on this but that to the best of my recollection is the math behind it, disabling page file is to this day one of the first steps i do on any new system, i've done this all the way back to XP days, not a single issue ever! you have RAM you paid for it, use it! is my motto

not only SSD, systems speeds and the low RAM cost now days makes this old logic irrelevant, paging was used in the very old days when systems had 16/32MB yes MB RAM! paging was efficient and cheap way back than to free up RAM usage to speed system performance, back than the cost of upgrading ram even by 16mb was ridicules so offloading to a temp file located on system drive was a smart way of handling this limitation; 30 or so years ago in the very early windows days! not so much today,

why would you advise dedicating 16GB on SSD for paging? or paging to begin with; with 32GB fast system ram, and additional 16GB on board GPU's?

@GSalden you can disable AI in sim settings until a fix is out for this issue,

@GSalden if you apply these settings what happens during same flight?

i believe you can run it through exe.xml to run a check; if not mistaken its compared against SDK autogen.xml version, not new entries unless the SDK version manually updated as well to reflect new entries, @Rob Ainscough i think you may be confusing the M in ACM? it stands for Merger,

@Rob Ainscough once entry is injected and .agn updated respectively all will remain in place unless removed, it doesn't need to run more than once, pondering the same :)

you know very well why as explained here

indeed Rob the tool will help you examine existing data or test new data, developers may use the tool as part of their installation but by all means it has no relation to Arno's work, its the data added by each respective developer that matters, @GSalden i know first hand you know better than this! quit it

indeed BM now BMNG changed since its inception, but not in the way we compile our vector data! we always have been and will be native sim format! our data is constructed the same exact format sim native data is, as explained two posts back sim native data will never break there or have issue; BMNG is no different as it is the same exact format, you can go ahead and put it to the test and see for yourself that our data behave properly when crossing meridian just as clean sim does on its own,

@GSalden its not about if Sim can perform better!!! i added information in my last post; please reread it

@GSalden Gerard you are missing the whole point of what Rob did, anything on your list beyond P3D is not LM's responsibility, with... X with... Y with... Z your list is not a plain Sim comparison! you are adding variables to the mix that are not in LM hands to change, the idea here is to see if this is caused by P3D which LM team can address, or a third party addon being used requiring a different course of action to resolve, as i mentioned on this thread earlier there is an issue around Meridian when compiling data, if not done correctly (i'm not saying it is done incorrectly!) you can be sure you will encounter anomalies there, logically P3D native data cannot fail to properly render on meridian as it is properly segmented in advance, developers do not always segment their data and will use a single overlapping polygon to render their data in that area!

in that area i believe its a FlyTampa autogen data which you should also be able to turn on or off from their CPanel, see this article for assistance https://www.fsdeveloper.com/forum/threads/using-merger-tool-to-manage-3rd-party-autogen-as-user.438793/

i think what Chris is hinting... you wasted two whole hours and still no new video!?

i think the shift in regions folder on top could be encouraging this in that particular spot, it seems that sim doesn't consider beyond meridian 0 line as the next tile unless you cross over, as i mentioned on LM forums regarding this issue; we encountered this when rendering NE UK, we had to cut our textures on meridian line and render the complete area backward so it stitched back correctly! in other words you cannot create a regular polygon that starts on one side and circles through that area as drawn above freehand, you would technically have to go around the other side of the globe if that makes any sense, this has noting to do with blurries though,

@Rob Ainscough note you are crossing LC region right at that spot from 0601 to 0501! blue is your flight path

@GSalden are you monitoring your temps at the same time?

@Marina Kosherova when in flight; how long before these blurries appear for you? which aircraft are you using; what is your alt and cruise speed?

@Adamski_NZ i have no idea who you are! no one here needs nor looking for your approval! beside your derail attempts what have you contributed? good thing you two are the only uneducated minority in this discussion , You know who focus on the carrot? How’s that for grammar!

Some of you are aware I am not a regular end user; what I am about to share is not my personal opinion it’s a fact! the majority here will not have access to such information as it is not published anywhere, This is not a promotional for our work as it doesn’t need any on its own merits, not a single one of our customers has posted here; nor experiencing the likes of these ghost issues, don’t get me wrong... they know where to come and we have dealt with many issues since 4.3 release! we had our share of customers hitting our support with some issues out of this planet; we dealt with and resolved every single one of them! From everything we dealt with so far; not a single issue required reporting a bug back to LM with regards to 4.3 release, Not to say there are no bugs to report; we just haven’t found one yet and we dealt with some extreme messes, Everyone were in this mishmash of a mess ourselves included; what we learned… not one of the major dev’s work was the culprit, It always was some small tool being migrated from fsx or some off the shelve addons they used; or simply just an old fsx habit they deployed incorrectly in their cfg's that messed everything up, With that said I challenge anyone here with a valid issue related to 4.3 release; to come forward with a viable issue we can reproduce and investigate, For the record if you can reproduce you should simply demonstrate the issue on LM forums, it’s that simple!

im sorry to inform many here; its not LM who's pushing your individual environments! LM out of the box doesn't have any issues; its only when you guys start mixing things around is when things start to happen; its ok if you try to manipulate your environment to get more out of your gear, its not OK to try and blame someone else when its not exactly working for you the way you like it too, it is still not LM's fault some third party addon is not up to date or the developer behind it is not keeping up with architectural changes, a personal rant to you all!!! many of you here jump into conclusion with regards to LM policy and many other aspects, please understand LM does hear your voices; be it through ambassadors or designated professionals! many of us are here atm because many of you having so many issues! yet not one of you this entire thread presented a single case we can properly investigate we spend months working on each platform release, to hear you guys tossing fault over our professional work! yes we are professionals at what we do; the complaining side is not! (no offense) its as if the finger is pointed at us as signed off dev's well; as we each have personal time and sweat invested with each release, you're essentially not just saying LM didn't do their work, but each dev signed off on the release also didn't do their work as well! instead of asking or point out a possible fault; zero accountability or responsibility is taken! the entire attention is conveniently diverted to the one place it shouldn't be, LM and P3D! what most of you dont account for is LM is responsible approach to all your existing addons! they could have just as easily wiped out the old code and rebuild a new one from scratch; all of you would have no leg to stand on nor old addons still working for you, even though its not really their concern to make sure older dev's can still earn their living; they should be concerned about developing simulation platform for managing military and large fleets, that include war game simulation, underwater and space exploration, you cannot even mention P3D nor the efforts behind it in the same sentence with... XP or FSW these are gaming platforms designed to be low cost Steam shop gaming applications mimicking flight simulation! P3D is the real deal simulation platform! the people behind it are not kids nor will hang up their lab coats anytime soon, do some research who LM is and how long they have been around to better understand their stance in this arena, there isn't a government on this planet that is not controlled by LM tentacles in one way or the other,

its also important to note that this manipulation is "suggested only" when locking frames externally! as long as frame are not restricted externally there is no need to compensate or interfere as sim can calculate these cycles most efficiently on its own,