glider1

Members
  • Content count

    290
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

11 Neutral

About glider1

  • Rank
    Member

Flight Sim Profile

  • Commercial Member
    No
  • Online Flight Organization Membership
    none
  • Virtual Airlines
    No

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

488 profile views
  1. I wish Dan well as a small developer. I hope he charges an upgrade fee for v4 of Flyinside at the very least. Without Dan we would still be sitting in front of a monitor watching a 30-frames-a-second-picture of a simulator.
  2. Hi Alex - thanks for the link! I tried it in the same scenario as 1.4.3 and now it works perfectly. Thanks for the effort and really sorry for the slow reply I forgot to follow this topic. Cheers, Harry
  3. Thanks for your help Oliver. I didn't think of putting an invisible motor into my gliders so that they would fly an AITrackerX flightplan. I did it today and it works. Here is what I did in case in the future anyone is interested: Downloaded any freeware glider out there Replaced the aircraft.cfg with the Aircreation582SL trike that shipped with FSX Reverted the title in aircraft.cfg back to the original glider Replaced the [contact_points] section in aircraft.cfg with the original glider section made sure that the texture section in aircraft.cfg was the same as the original glider Added the Aircreation_582SL.air file to the glider folder Changed the folder name to indicate that the glider is converted to an AI traffic glider The AI trike now looks like a glider and averages 50kts around the task which works well for pacing. What I like about this system is that you don't have to create waypoints just dispatch a flightplan to the AI as you intend to fly it yourself. Now... if only you would teach the AI's to find thermals and then resume the flightplan I would be incredibly appreciative. Cheers
  4. Hi Lorby Yeah the gliders are already motorized with a fold away engine. While the models were sitting at the parking bay not being able to be pushed back, I tried to change their parameters with AITrackerX to "start their engines" and "set their throttle to full" but that didn't work either. I tried converting a flightplan to a waypoint list, but I couldn't get it to work properly. The gliders would hover above the airport and do all sorts of weird things. When I get desperate, I'll try your idea of changing them to have a motor as the trike has. I guess the trike can be pushed back and fly a flightplan? Ok, thanks for the suggestion. EDIT: another issue is that planes parked in WAMA cause AITrackerX flightplan planes to disappear if they think they are going to hit the WAMA planes.
  5. Hi Oliver Was really looking forward to flying a task with AI gliders that follow a flightplan so that I could use them to pace myself round the course. Then to my horror I saw that when AITrackerX dispatches the gliders, they can't push back and so just sit in the parking bay! Is there anything that can be done? My first thought was to dispatch GA aircraft and switch the model once the aircraft have taxied onto the runway. But I can't do that for two reasons. Firstly in VR the playback dialog hides behind the main app window making it unuseable in VR. Secondly, in the playback dialog there is an option to switch model, but it doesn't work for AI's dispatched as a flightplan The waypoint system might be the solution but it is more manual labour and not as convenient as setting up a flightplan. Thanks for any help. Cheers, Harry
  6. Hi Alex! The app is AITrackerX and Oliver the developer (who has a forum hear on Avsim) said this was happening when I loaded a LittleNavMap flightplan: "It is not AITrackerX that crashes, but the .Net XML parser" Cheers, Harry
  7. Thanks Alex for this great navigation tool you are so generous of your talents. It was pointed out to me that there might be an omission in the flightplan specification for this app at version 1.4.3 regarding the encoding that causes some apps that read littlenavmap flightplans to crash depending on what framework they are using. I'm not a developer, I'm only passing this on to you. Here is the problem: "the XML text declaration is incorrect and causes the .Net XML parser to crash This "<?xml version="1.0" ?> is not according to the W3C XML specification "<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>" would be correct" Source: http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-xml/#sec-TextDecl Chapter 4.3.1 Thanks again
  8. Spot on. I actually think they got the resolution of Rift CV1 perfect from a design point of view. The resolution is low enough so that low end graphics cards can play VR designed games (but not flight sim), and the flightsimmers like us just need to supersample. If they would have made the CV1 any higher res, it would have been uneconomic AND still too low res for the flight sim crowd used to 4K monitors. So they picked the resolution for CV1 perfectly. Plus one to the designers. I would say CV1 Rift is near perfect design concept. Only problem for me is that the goggle fog up and it takes a few minutes to clear! I hear the Pimax 4K has little grooves in the lens to minimize fog. EDIT: The P3Dv4 VR implementation problem is that Lockheed haven't provided a supersampling option in the graphics menus for VR!
  9. You're right WebMaximus. I fly the Phenom 100 in VR which has a lot of tiny details on the glass cockpit and when I think about it, the resolution hasn't been a problem at all and the experience of flying in a full size cockpit is a game changer. Instead of being on VATSIM, I've been using PF3+MCE which is ideal because of the voice commands you can give to your crew, ATC and for controlling the sim.
  10. The key setting is supersampling. You need to super sample the rift resolution otherwise....yes....it is too blurry. A 1080 card can supersample to an equivalent of 4K resolution which helps quite a bit. A 980Ti is probably best on a supersample of 2K resolution, which is what Webmaximus above has it set to. VR works great for all types of flying but IFR in a big tubeliner is probably the weakest experience.
  11. There is no such thing as something for nothing. Networking apps is only going to benefit FPS if you can't use an affinity mask and you have a slow CPU. All apps you add to the sim use the same amount of resources on the sim no matter where they are located. Networked apps still burden down the sim just as much as if they were on the same machine since they hit simconnect or equivalent which need CPU resources on the sim machine. So if you use an affinity mask, you don't need apps to be networked since they run on cores that the sim is not using. If you have a powerful CPU running at 4.5GHz or higher, there is almost no benefit to networking apps even without an affinity mask because the operating system will tend to put the app onto cores that the sim isn't using. A few years ago, it did benefit have apps networked because the operating systems didn't allocate CPU resources properly and running apps on the same machine caused stutters. If I am wrong, please correct me.
  12. I'm not on that chipset but am on the i7700k. Just in case it is any benefit to you, I had a performance drop a few months ago that nearly tore my hair out it was a real challenge to solve. By accident I stumbled across a guy on the Flyinside forums with the same hardware by Gigabyte having a similar drop in performance. There was nothing visible in any of the traces of CPU usage we could find. He discovered that the trick was to delete all of Gigabyte's bloatware software especially "Easytune" and do all the overclocking from bios only. I had already made sure that none of their software was running, but there was still some Gigabyte services running in the background I didn't remove. I uninstalled all of it and performance recovered. In the end we concluded it must have been some bug with their software control of speedstep or turboboost technology. Gigabyte are are an exceptionally good hardware engineering company but their software is the weakness (only my opinion).
  13. Rob that old trick has been around for ages (at least a year) going back all the way to v3 and it happens on a four core always has. Kicking the threads like that only works temporarily. Not sure about HT. There would be at least three people I know of on Avsim that have noticed this over a long time.
  14. Thank you!
  15. Thank you for trying Lorby! Even proof of concept takes time. I guess it would have had limited application anyway even if it did work. The situation is that the gliding community especially UKVGA gliding club is slowly but surely getting stuck in no-man's land. Our beloved CumulusX is no longer supported and the towplane feature is broken. That means we are loosing options to tow gliders into the air. We are going backward not forward with 64bit. CumulusX was able to control the towplane in FSX SP1. I have no idea how it did it. The feature was called "smart tow". You could select via a menu whether the tug take a left pattern, right pattern or fly straight out. The tug was aware of thermals and after leaving the pattern would tow the glider toward a thermal location. After release the tug would fly back to the field. It sounds great but in practice the tug would often not be able to make it back to the airport and then fly off into the distance polluting the multiplayer servers with AI traffic. It didn't matter too much and in single player it didn't matter. No worries, thought I would ask. There is a space for a new GliderX app that I can say. The way to go with it would be not to write thermal code, but to make AI gliders and the towplane aware of whatever thermals are injected into the simulator via other apps like CumulusX or AS16 etc. Otherwise do the lot including the thermals! You could then make it so that glider pilots could compete with AI gliders or just have AI gliders follow the same glider task. Cheers