Kermit_70

Hi all, this is a very specific question about the use of multiple monitors in FSX. It is not about how to set them up, but about two alternative ways to use them in a cockpit configuration. When you have multiple monitors (three for me) and an Nvidia graphic card (GTX 650 for me), my understanding is that you can configure one of the following: FSX run "windowed" (=not in full view), and each monitor will display a different "viewpoint" of the virtual cockpit. You can fine tune the viewpoints and their relative position on each monitor to simulate a surrounding effect of the virtual cockpit. Use Nvidia surround mode to link the three monitors into a single screen; run FSX as full view on this single long screen so that a single virtual cockpit fills all three monitors. No individual viewpoints are necessary in this case. I would like to know: a) Is there a major difference in performance between (1) and (2)? b) can I use TrackIR in both configs? c) can I see the instrument panel of the virtual cockpit in both configs? d) If I had a fourth monitor, could I put on it a 2D panel for instruments and use (1) or (2) only for the outside scenery? Please answer what you know or have experienced, but also give me your opinion on all this. Is there a config that is obviously much better than the rest? Am I making it too complicated? For reference, I am running Windows 10 and I have a bunch of physical controls (yoke, pedals, TPM, trim wheel, radio stack, autopilot, light switches, etc), but not single instrument panels (altimeter, VOR, etc) so it is a bit of a hybrid. I am not sure if giving up the virtual cockpit completely and switching to a 2D instrument panel to complement my hardware. This is related to the topic, because it depends how well (1) or (2) perform and give me extra "juice" to run a 4th monitor. Thank you for your time!

OK, solved. I figured it out that the second audio signal I was hearing was coming from DME. Once I switch that off in the audio panel (and also the Nav1, of course) everything was quite again, even if VOR1 was correctly connected to station (falf was off and needle moved). I didn't know that the DME had its own audio channel. As a side note (but probably not belonging to this Forum), I noticed that on the audio panel (top position) in my A2A C172 the DME switch does not light up when on (althought it works fine, as described). Regarding GNS V2: I thought this was only for P3D, but maybe I was wrong. Does it run on FSX as well? Is there a discount to upgrade from Legacy to v2 in FSX?

I am using GNS430 v1 (legacy for FSX) in A2A C172, and I am trying to turn down/off the ident morse signal that comes up when Nav1 (vor1) is tuned in. I have two sources of the same signal: one coming from the sound panel (controlling com1, com2, nav1, nav2, etc) and one from the GNS430 alone (since it is setup to work as Nav1). now, I can turn off the one from radios by clicking on Nav1 on stack, but cannot turn off the one coming from GNS. in the manual of the real Garmin GNS430 it says that this can be done using the small knob on the left, right under the one used to power it on. But in the RealityXP model for some reason this little knob is used to control dim of the screen. Is there a way to return this knob to its original settings and control the ident volume? is there another way to do that? many thanks

Hello, I would like to know if there is a general agreement on this or not: Given: FSX three-monitors (Nvidia surround) EzDok TrackIr5 no proper home-built cockpit, just few Saitek panels requirement to fly different GA models (so cannot be hyper-tuned on one model only) Which setup would you adopt and why? VC extending on the three monitors (surround with bazels) + EzDok for positions in cockpit + TrackIr to move eye direction VC extending on the three monitors (surround with bazels) + EzDok for positions in cockpit, but no TrackIR so that views on each monitor stays the same (i.e. central monitor always showing front view, right monitor always show right view, etc) VC on central monitor only + EzDok for positions in cockpit, but no TrackIR, + right fixed view on right monitor and left view on left monitor no VC at all. Fixed front view on central monitor, fixed left on left, fixed right on right. I know that #4 is very old-school, and that #1 is the most popular, but I would like to know if anybody prefers #2 or #3 and why. I fly exclusively GA (no airliners), bot VFR and IFR, but I don't think that matters to the main question. Cheers

Thank you all, I figured it out. Just to be clear, on the “Reality XP 430XP/530XP WAAS” (legacy for FSX) there are no details about this. Maybe you are referring to a different (newer) version. Anyway, thank you for the hints, which helped me figuring it out. Cheers!

And how do you do that? Also, by doing this, are you giving up any "special" feature of the Reality XP GNS model?

Thank you Bert, The "GNS WAAS 430/530 XP" guide only briefly mentions the RXPGNS.INI Is that what you meant? Do you know how I should edit it to add keyboard shortcuts to - on/off- CDI- Enter Also, how do I modify RXPGNS.INI to use the Saitek physical knobs to navigate the menu in the GNS? You know, when you go through NAV, WPT, AUX, NRST pages... Sorry, I feel a bit lost here...

Hello, I have an FSX configuration with Saitek radios programmed with SPAD & FSUIPC and the Reality XP GNS430 mounted on the A2A C172 panel. I would like to use some of the knobs/buttons on the Saitek radio to control the knobs (when navigating it, not just to change frequencies) and buttons of the GPS: - on/off - CDI - enter is it possible? cheers

Yes, sorry. I am still stuck in the past with FSX. My hardware is unable to support MSFS20 so I am squeezing the most out of FSX. Pretty happy, I have to say. But I don’t think the questions changes. Basically, I think it is about VC vs 2D panels. I am still unsure what is better. I am now exploring the idea of VC with reduced zoom to fit central view on central screen in a natural way... Any insight?

Hi all, I hope this is the right forum (if not, please advice). I would like to know your opinions about these possible configurations for 3 monitors on FSX (I flight GA, but I dont think that matters here): (1) single view from FSX stretched across the 3 monitors (using NVidia surround mode) AND using TrackIR to pan around (2) single view from FSX stretched across the 3 monitors (using NVidia surround mode) BUT without TrackIR (3) one separate view from FSX (front, right side and left side) on each monitor, and no TrackIR The goal is to achieve maximum realism (as if I am actually siting in the plane cockpit) and not necessarily to optimize visual field. I have used TrackIR a lot when I had single monitor and I loved it, but I feel that now with three monitors it might be more realistic to keep the view fixed? Afer all, real big simulators don't have TrackIR or similar, right? Another concern is about computational strain and FPS during flight: which of the three is more inetnse on CPU/GPU? I have Intel Core i7-4790 3.6Ghz (with 16GB RAM) and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 650 handling the three monitors at once. Looking forward to hear your opinions, the most knowledgable crowd on flightsimming! Cheers

Hello, I hope this is the right forum... Question regarding control of Saitek radio panel via SPAD (old version) and FSUIPC (latest, paid version): Can the sensitivity of the knobs be fine tuned? When I rotate them sometimes they skip one or two numbers, as if they are too sensitive. I know that SPAD has an "acceleration" option, but my understanding is that it does the opposite (makes going through the numbers even faster, not slower). Nothing else appears on SPAD for this. So I am hoping that maybe FSUIPC can do that? I would be grateful if you could answer to this specific scenario, 'cause its never helpful when somebdy replies "SPAD is terrible, just switch to SPAD.NEXT", or "have you tried programming with LINDA"? I don't want to redo all my installations just because of this, so it would be great if this could be done simply through FSUIPC. Cheers!

Many thanks!

What are the minimum and suggested hardware specs? I am sure they are published somewhere, and some of you will be so kind to pint me to it... Cheers!

oh I see... I didn't realise they were under NDA. So I guess the images we see in the official updates are picked by Microsoft and redistributed? So maybe we can ask the alpha-tester to send images of that region to Microsoft, hoping that they will chose them as "appropriate". It was just for fun, anyway. Out of curiosity, really. Cheers!

Hello to all lucky Alpha-testers! Can I ask you to visit and post shots of the Italian Alps around Mont Blanc? I am particularly interested in the new rendering of the area around the ski resort Courmayeur. Take it as a challenge, and a way to test the new sim! Cheers!

How to compete and stay alive on the market against MSFS2020? Price, obviously. Do you have any idea how much is this MSFS2020 going to cost? Did you hear about "free life-time upgrades"? Well, it ain't going to be free... I imagine the market will be divided in "hard core ready to spend lots of money on this" and the rest. Like everything else. I can still buy a good Toyota in a world where fantastic but expensive BMW are available. And this, IMHO, is a good thing, because different people wants (and can afford) different things.

anybody knows about Persistent aircraft status (like in A2A accusim)?

I think most of us use FSX with third-party scenery (ORBX, etc), so it would be fair to see a comparison between 2020 promo and FSX with ORBX, for example. Same goes for weather, enhanced by third-party REX . I doubt the difference would be that striking. I think the real advantage of the new sim would be obvious if the default package will already start from the same level of FSX+ORBX+REX+A2A+etc, at a fraction of the cost and a fraction of the headache ...! But I am not that optimistic.

Are we still listing desired features, or the discussion has drifted off tangent again...? My list: - best possible physics and flight model (e.g. buffering before stall, correct spin recovery, etc) - live, realistic weather (shadows, rain, etc) - ATC with voice recognition; both IFR and VFR (flight following?) - Native integration with VATSIM? - Track-IR and VR compatible - AI traffic, with GA as well (especially for small GA airports) - customisable cameras - in-game pull-out of real approach charts (IFR) and sectional charts (VFR), where available - Compatibility with existing add-ons: A2A, ORBX, REX, etc. to give user options (default vs add-on) - Compatibility with existing hardware (Saitek, etc)

Here we go again... I have FSX with tons of add-ons (A2A, ORBX, Aerosoft, REX, UT2, etc) and Saitek hardware. I like my super-realistic GA aircrafts, my live weather and traffic. I don't do airliners. I am looking to use PilotEdge or Vatsim, but have not done it yet. It's all good, but I feel I am spending too much time tweaking and making sure all is up-to-date and still working... Since I only flight short, very realistic GA flights, I usually don't have OOM problems. I am still stuck in DX9, so no shadows, etc. And of course it is 32bits. Question: should I switch to P3D v4? Is it worth it? a) can I transfer most of my add-ons to P3D without purchasing them again? b) is P3D simpler to customise and use (for example, do I still need all the FSUIPC / SPAD mambo-jambo to fine tune Saitek hardware?) Cheers

That would be great. The segment of simmers specifically dedicated to GA is very strong... Are you familiar with Chris Palmer at Angle of Attack ? http://www.flyaoamedia.com I am not sure he is still interested, but he would certainly have the expertise to collaborate with you in this kind of project. Just tell him I put you in touch with him! Cheers

Hi There, I was wondering if the devs here were even considering producing a tutorial for GA single engine prop aircrafts. Obviously using study-level models such as those by A2A. Any insight?

Sounds good, many thanks! We will wait somehow patiently.... Excellent work so far, BTW. Cheers

Yes, let's make it a petition! I really think that ChasePlane would work ver well together with TrackIR, but without it is unusable. I don't really want to pause trackIR every time I want to look at the airplane from outside. For example, when I take off I like to look at the runway from behind the plane (currently with EzDok) but then quickly switch back to inside the cockpit with TrackIR, or when I am landing I like to have a quick view with a camera looking at the landing gears, but then gain I need to switch back quickly (one button) to cockpit with TrackIR. I cannot even imagine how the Dev could think of using ChasePlane without TrackIR installed... Anyway, vote, vote, vote!

Hello all, thank you for your reply and interest in the topic I started. It is about using TrackIR with ChasePlane. Could you please use this thread ONLY if you address its topic? If not (like "I just purchased it but it doesn't work"), please open a new thread in this forum. I am subscribed to this thread and I would like to receive only notifications about TrackIr in ChasePlane. many thanks to all!