KBUR

...there lies wisdom in your words . Cheers.

Sorry; I don't have Flight1's GTN series; but what I can tell you for shure is, that I got serious performance issues with all the latest MilViz publications, the... DHC 3 Otter Turbo Otter Milviz 310 R Redux (not the old one; the predecessor runs pretty well on my rig. Here the same with the old/just updated MilViz Baron 55: this one runs very well on my P3D computer system). and the worst of all (I know, someone may not believe it, but for me it ist a matter of fact) - Milviz's Twin Comanche - their last publishing: this pretty simple plane costs me even 5 up to 7 FPS on countryside FTX sceneries; the result are microstutters and a spoiled flying experience. I can reproduce this MilViz performance issue phenomena whenever I whant. By selecting another comparable plane - like the new A2A Bonanza - everything goes normal (of course: it is always depending on scenery too - but I do all my testing-routines very carefully). What I can recommend desperately: Do your testings regarding GTN performance in a non MilViz plane (or in an old one), and see what happens. Months ago I've researched about Flight1 navigation tools and their performance in different flightsim forums too. What I can remember is, that the vast majority of its owners reported it as "very good", because the GTN's use an external engine and don't touch sim resources.

...o man, long awaited and almost abandoned. YOU MADE MY DAY Sir 🕺🕺; thank you so much for this - hopefully - no fake news 😀. My absolute favorite bird of the whole A2A fleet !!!

Thank you a lot for pounting out this very useful explanation in a nutshell 😀. Now I can understand the purpose of the FTXTreesHD Folder in ORBX/Scripts; very enlightening.

This is absolutely confusing 😕 ! When you look inside the sim folder and looking for dependencies considering both Tree Addons, and which one recalls which BGL File, then it is absolutely clear and no room for doubts: TreesHD rewrites and replaces the default >vegetation.bgl< (in Scenery/Global/scenery). Default P3D vegetation.bgl is 3.758 KB --> TreesHD replaces this file and after rewriting it, the "new default" vegetation.bgl counts 3.127 KB (in this case made by ORBX's trees). TerraFlora just puts a complete new vegetation_TF.bgl in the same folder (scenery/global/scenery) with the value of 2.682 KB. Its vegetaion blg even has a new name --> so there can't be any conflict with the ORBX trees: Whether with "FTX_Vegetation_FULL. BGL", nor with "ORBX_EU_AGN_TREES.BGL" , nor with the rewritten "vegetation.BGL". ....and TerraFlora tree textures in scenery/global/texture even have a new name with the suffix >..._TF.dds< ----completely contrary to FTX TreesHD which actually replaces P3D's default trees. So, someone can imagine that all this new vegetation files can bring up bunch of strain to the system. ---> converse to developers advertisements. It can lead to microstutters and a lot more CPU activity than necessary in the background without noticing it instantly (based on my own observations). Corresponding to my own experiences: yes, that is true....but only regarding its depiction in the sim ! ---> because TF Trees look more fluffy, even its everage tree texture size is extremely higher than TreesHD: most TF texture files count 5.462 KB --> for 32bit Simulators like FSX not really VAS friendly !!! contrary to 683 KB in TreesHD I for my own recognized that both textures - side by side - can look pretty funny in sim. That's why I've made a "Frankenstein Trees Addon", passing both: TreesHD & TerraFlor...with the best of both worlds and a good compromise regarding performance and display. ---> 'm very happy with the results 👍 All the best.

Sorry, but this is incorrect: TerraFlora Trees doesn't replace anything, it just adds its own tree texture files to the main sim folder: it contains only one bgl-File in "scenery/global/scenery" which is called vegetation_TF.BGL, which determines its trees to be placed worldwide. the corresponding texture files to this .BGL are put in "scenery/global/texture (53 tree textures in total) - with the ending "name of the tree_TF.dds" - TF stands for Terra Flora most likely. So, its up to your convience: you are able to install it just for enhancing your default textures or you can operate it with FTX Trees HD together seamlessly, as you like. I prefer both, because in some areas - most notably while different seasons - TF does a better job, and in others FTX Trees HD. E.g TF's winter textures are pretty overdosed, whereas ORBX is doing the "winter-job" quite a lot better. Apart from that TF offers two special trees for fall in its default texture set: veg_Broadleaf_ChestnutMaple_FA_TF_B.dds and veg_Broadleaf_CottonwoodElm_FA_TF_B.dds ...which make autumn shine in its red colours more accuratly (Indian Summer) - something really special which FTX doesn't bring on. All the best.

LOL, yea it's fall already. But it also could be fall 2019 😅.... Honestly spoken: I don't care about this helicopter anymore, even it is for free !!!! Fine with me if IPACS would bring it on fall 2030. Currently I'm discovering more and more the possibilities of my other two main simsulators and the beauty of their living worlds.....and IPACS/Aerofly FS 2 is lightyears away from this. But I'll inform you if I read corresponding news, and when this hell of a Robinson heli will be rising on the horizon Here is something to quicken your appetite 😉 : All the best.

Hi mate: I'm using DDU for a couple of years now, and NEVER EVER had anything like uninstall-issues or somethin like that (playing P3D on a gaming laptop too). Based on my own experience it's easy peasy to use; even it's developer is constantly updating this amazing freeware-tool. But I ALWAYS obey some rules when operating DDU as adviced by its creator: Firts create a restore point manually. Second: uninstall graphic drivers in SAVE MOD ever. Ah, forgot something essential I've done for more than one year or so: After getting sick off of all this Windows 10 annoyances I threw this OP System to the junk and remedied many of its issues (like unwilling updates etc...) by installing Windows 7 Pro 64-bit. Looking back I think this was one of the best "tweaks" I could have done. Best regards.

😉 different people, different needs. I LOVE to fly WITHOUT AP and military/GA is the only I'm doing in P3D v4; for me it's almost a must not to fly with AP. I'll give the new Milviz Twin-Comanche a try. Hey folks, dear fellow simmers: " Be more adventurous and less lazy couch - potatos 😄 " Thank you MILVIZ for your courage.

Yes, critics on IPACS is absolutely legitimate !!!! And there is a lotta to complain under my point of view. On 23th February 2018 "drhotwing1" - a member from IPACS staff - made this official statement on steam: I'm sure many others, like me, bought Aerofly FS 2 because they trusted in the announcements of IPACS/drhotwing1, that they will improve this still bare-bones sim. For me, as a non VR user, their progress of developement in relation to their promisses is not acceptable ! (--> the above you can read/ I've quoted, is not the only advertisement they've done in such a manner.) I mean, the status quo is pretty clear: A monster of GB on my hard drive; to much dead data storage for just casual simming! On the other hand still no dynamic weather themes, only one season (since the beginning of aerofly FS in 2012). no AI Traffic at all. still a non living world and antiseptical environment. no real improvement in their flying school/mission section of the sim since their first release in 2012. still this ugly water mask (but with slightly better colours comparing to version 01/2012 at least ---> Bush flying in PNW, when ORBX will have pushed TrueEarth Pacific Northwest to the market, without dynamic water and without waterplanes 😡 ????!!!! ) many of this development delays/denails still exist since Aerofly FS v.1 (published in 2012) still no heli aboard (even the brand new VR Simulator on market - FlyInside - delivers three of them in its basic configuration). For me, as an owner of 3 Aerofly versions and a non VR-user, a very unrewarding situation. PS: Anyway, thank you Jerome for opening this thread/survey. Very good idea indeed !

Ahhh, now it comes to fruition 😃 ! Whenever I read something about curves, stick pressure/movement etc... in various sim-forums, it sound like a book of seven seals to me. Often thought: " Am I doing something wrong or are all of those guys stick- hypochondriacs ???. What the hell are they taking about ? " Because I never ever had an issue with stick/yoke responsivenessf (maybe just in my beginnings) ; I never set up a curve profile or anything like that at anytime in all of these years of flight-simming (using many different flight sims; mainly P3Dv4 and DCS). Even when I change my stick gear during flight (mostley depending on aircraft), sometimes flying left- or righthanded (depending on my daily mood - serious), changing between Props, Heli or Fighterjet, it makes no difference to me at all. After a couple of moments/maybe one minute I get adapted and fly the craft or heli in conjunction with the stick and my motor nerve system and enjoy the ride. Never ever had and issue flying around in the A2A C172 or Skylane or the other beautiful birds of A2A. Even converse: I'm finding that the Cessnas are flying tooo stable. But that's not because A2A has done something wrong, it's just because of the aircraft itself and how it's supposed to fly like its real counterpart. In this particular case it just reflects my personal preference, because I more like the unstable and nimble ones, like a fighter jet, heli or warbird (particular tail dragger). And especially the A2A-Texan which always gives me a good sensation of gliding through the air like an air-surfer 😄 . Thank you Scott; thank you for your committed and persistent hard work, and thank you for your enlightening explanation above !

" It's just a snapshot of mine taken in the distant future on that day, when the Aerofly R22 Helicopter will be released: " Sorry guys, don't feel offfended, it's all about humor 😉.

Don't understand me wrong guys, cause I support AeroflyFS/IPACS since their first release "aerofly FS" in 2012 (even bought its downgraded Version "aerofly Flug Simulator 2013" from publisher Ikarus), and now its current version AFS 2), BUT : ==> I can understand you sooo well, because the same happens to me with Aerofly FS repetitively since its first release in 2012 !!!! In the following I will quote some advertisements DRHOTWING1 hase done during the last couple of months on steam after crucial AFS 2 updates: In my own experience - since its beginnings - Aerofly seems to be the eternally auspicious Flight Sim out there: In many aspects brilliant without doubts, in many ways just a half done beginner !!!! Just a few basic examples: For me TrackIR becomes even worser in AFS 2 compared to its predecessor AFS. For some reasons TrackIR is always linked to the aircrafts airbrakes and I couldn't get rid of this bug since I bought this sim on Steam more than one year ago. Even TrackIR doesn't work anymore in the outer views - only in virtual cockpit (exeption is one outer view of the Corsair). VERY ANNOYING, problems I never had in aerofly FS Version 1 (2012). For some reasons the developer decided that the user can't have direct access to Aerofly Missions/flyiing lessons directly, without doing the lesson before successfully. And they have removed (who knows why) all the funny inflight achievements you could achieve during flying around like in Aerofly FS Version 1 ---> Flying School, Missions - , even no Mission Editor in the new AF Version --- IPACS has completely muddled this very important aspect in their current Version AFS 2. Thereby interesting missions - or at least a mission builder - are so important for the end users not to get bored of the game/sim. A circumstance which concerns a lot of dissatisfied simmers (including myself) if you read diverse forums attentively. Why the heck are they not developing a simple drop down menu for straight forward Aiport Selection like in other sims ? (i.e P3D, X-Plane) I mean it's common sense: the whole scenery becomes bigger and bigger and someone must always do this silly scrolling around on the world-map if you want to find your preferred airport. I've revealed this few points not only because I'm annoyed of these as a customer, but also to show that there are some points they could solve whithout having big budget money or a big developer team behind them likewise. As another user on AVSIM Aerofly Forum stated (analogous) : " The developers (Ipacs) have lost their connection to the community/end-user. " Referring to my own experience with this sim: absolutely, he said the truth! But I would go even further: To REALITY too !!!! Because if you read the quotes from drhotwing1 (member of the IPACS Team) above, someone can reflect with common sense that there lies is a big misconception - a big big gap - in what the developer wish for to be and what reality showes up. They are really far far away from beeing the "....the best simulator on the market " (drhotwing1, aka Jeff) out there. Best regards to all of you, dear simming fellows. Konrad. PS: English is NOT my mother tongue.

For me it became a MUST TO HAVE TOOL; using it for almost 2 years (P3Dv3 and now P3D v4). You can also map FS Tramp map via shortcut over keyboard or joystick for quickview - it offers a lot of important options for individual customization. I can validate the positive statements of the Thread-Creator. And, FS Tramp is definitely very performance friendly (if any impact 🤒 - I don't know). Have a quick look here: http://www.fstramp.com/ PS: For FSTramp there is no need to be online for working properly ! ....and a few screenshots for your convenience:

Hi folks, I can tell you: this Data-Compression thing is not useless ! I'm operating P3D v4 on a Crucial 500GB SSD (see here , if interested). Before compression I had 227 GB of disk space occupied. After compression there was 163 GB of disk space assigned. ....which means a reduction of 64 GB and a gain of 64 GB more storage on my SSD (which is really notable). Till now I haven't recognized any gain or loss of performance during flight sim operations, but at least write amplification should be reduced which can increase the endurance of a SSD significant (not to mention about free disk space - SSD are expensive and P3D inkl. all its addons needs a lot of memory location). Resume: Nothing speaks against data compression; positve aspects prevail. Guys, what are your own experiences? Best regards to all of you, Konrad