Jump to content

roesti

Members
  • Content Count

    57
  • Donations

    $0.00 
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

37 Neutral

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Flight Sim Profile

  • Commercial Member
    No
  • Online Flight Organization Membership
    I belong to both VATSIM & IVAO
  • Virtual Airlines
    No

Recent Profile Visitors

585 profile views
  1. Hello, just something I noticed while looking at the screenshot (most likely not the origin of the problem here). Your CPU seems to run at 4.5 GHz, in your signature you're saying that it's "overclocked" to 4.6 GHz. May I ask what settings you're using here and why? I'm confused because the default boost frequency of the i7-8086k is already 5.0 GHz (it's just a better binned 8600k with 5.0GHz all-core clock). So without touching any manual overclocking, your CPU should run way better. Maybe you have a reason why you stick with 4.6 GHz, but I've never heard the term "overclocking" when running a CPU below it's default levels, so I'm just curious 🙂 Anyway.. GPU usage seems very low, that's strange. When you say it gets better after turning AS off.. does GPU usage actually go up or will it stay at 5-6%? There must be some hiccup, because usually one of each other should max out (GPU or CPU). As mentioned by yurei, I'm also interested in your cloud texture settings, like resolution etc.
  2. Yes. AFAIK Prepar3D automatically lowers the settings if you use the "Try Again" button, like disabling Enhanced Athmospherics (if u were using it). Some of them like "COCKPIT_HIGH_LOD" (gauges look very blurry if set to 0, which usually happens after this dialog) can only be reverted back directly in the Prepar3D.cfg and not via the settings interface in P3D. So if you don't have any backup of your Prepar3D.cfg and don't like to fiddle around in it, you should consider to delete it and let P3D create a fresh one after starting again. Be aware that you have to adjust your graphics settings again, but at least you get the default settings back.
  3. Yeah, there are always ways to make concerns of others sound ridicilous 🙂 I can understand that some things may sound far-fetched, but maybe sometimes it's not wrong to take a look outside of our "western world bubble". There even exist countries (not that far away that you might think from a European point of view) that are known to imprison not only their own people, but even foreigners who just wanted to make a vacation at a certain place, after the government found stuff that those people posted somewhere publically on some social media platform - stuff people like us living in western societies would laugh about or not really pay attention to and the people who posted it didn't thought it would lead to such dramatic consqeuences (for example, just disagreements about decisions of this certain government or support of the opposition party). Sure, I doubt there was any relation to flight simulation, but this planet as a whole isn't as free as the United States or the European Union. If you never encountered any disadvantages due to things you posted online, I'm really happy for you and hope you'll never do (if you live in San Francisco like your profile suggests, you probably won't). I'm serious here. But privacy is a topic that is important as long as we don't live in a perfect world where people act like we expect 🙂 It's just my opinion and from time to time, it doesn't hurt to make people without those problems aware, I think 🙂
  4. Maybe he is a member of your mentioned groups? We don't know, so we don't should make assumptions 😉 Other than that, there are enough valid reasons why somebody doesn't want his name show up on a public forum. And everything on these forums is still viewable (probably indexed by search engines), even if you're not logged in. I doubt that a name with "dashes" in it is good enough to hide. Believe it or not, there are people out there whose intentions are not the best. There may even exist employers who like to "stalk" their employees and ask why person X was able to post something at 3:00 a.m. on a specific forums while he should be asleep. I know this may sound paranoid for some folks but stuff like this really exists (yes, I know.. one could argue "if this is true, this person should change the job!" or whatever, but this discussion would never end and go in circles forever - it's just an example). Maybe he just don't want to be connected to a certain community. You could still argue "what's bad about being recognized as a member of the flight simulation community", but: In my opinion people should be free to choose what they want to share online and what they don't want to share. Everybody may have his personal reasons to make this decision on his own. Yes, of course there are enough other companies that don't care and collect your data anyway, but this can't be an excuse. I'm aware that total privacy is an illusion, I can agree with that. But at least you should always have the option, that's the correct way. And even if companies like Microsoft have my data, this doesn't mean they can freely share it with other companies, which they don't (then FSLabs or others wouldn't need to ask at first :D) This isn't directly dedicated to the FSLabs forums (as said, you can still make your choice and stay "hidden" from the public), just some general thoughts.
  5. Believe me, I'm as puzzled as you about this.. When I should make a guess, I'd say they maybe want to reduce the chances of piracy. Like I mentioned, the "real name" rule wasn't there at first, but you still had to register to download stuff. As their database is really big and I doubt you'll find a complete snapshot of it somewhere, as somebody who uses a pirated copy of the plane, you have to find other ways to get this stuff and this might be not so easy. The "real name" rule for the forums came wayyyyy later and I guess it's just "bad coincidence" that it now also applies to users who just want to download stuff. Maybe they haven't really thought about this part and the main purpose was like you said, to get "constructive communications" on their forums. But this is just a personal guess of mine and if you really want an answer, I guess the best way is to write a personal message to Lefteris. Chances are not low that he will answer you, from my experience, he usually does when he finds time. But this answer probably won't be satisfactory for you 😄 ------------------ PS I guess the general decision to use the forums for downloading stuff at first (even before the name rule) is just pure convenience for them and others. Because as a forums user, you are free to create your own livery / mod / cabin pack / whatever and just upload it to the forums - it's a feature of the forums software, it just works.. so they maybe thought it's the best idea to just go this way. So for FSLabs it wasn't necessary to code some "own application" for distributing liveries amongst the community.
  6. @killthespam Like I said multiple times now, I'm with you like I'm with the OP - I don't like their decision. I just wanted to point out that at least you are able to download the stuff without sharing your real name publically, as long as you don't post. Still far away from "perfect" and for me, it also doesn't make much sense to give them my data "twice", but it's still the same person / company, that already knows my data. My argument about "it's their rules" was, you are not forced to use the forums. You can still download the liveries without posting. And even if you decide not to register (which I can fully understand), you can still use the product (okay, you're limited to the default livery..). Product support is handled completely outside the forums as well via ticket system, so I guess there isn't a real possibility to go against these rules (in legal terms) other than avoiding the product completely, like you already said. I also don't like PMDGs forums rules or attitude. But there isn't anything we can do against it (except not buying / using their stuff).
  7. Yeah, that's the setting I was talking about that you should turn off 🙂 But: Have you tried the following? Click on the link named "Show online users". At least I get an error message here, that I'm not allowed to do that. And I'm sure this is valid for every "normal customer", so even with this setting enabled, nobody will be able to find you. I guess only FSLabs staff can use this feature. I totally agree with your concerns, as already said. I really don't like their decision, I'm totally with you. But still, as mentioned in my last post, I bet the chances are low that something "bad" happens. A shop database "hack" would be far worse I guess and I think it's as possible as a forums hack. But you already had to enter your name when ordering the plane, so.. yeah. It's still an "incovencience" and I really wish (like yourself) they had not gone this way regarding the forum names.
  8. I'm an European citizen and I share the same concerns 😄 Especially in Europe these rules are highly debatable (privacy laws are very strict here) and most people I know would agree, I think. But I guess it's perfectly legal, because it's their forums and they can make the rules. But still.. the problem only exists if you want to engage in discussions on these forums, and yes, it's too bad that you can't. And I'm serious here, sometimes it might be nice to post something. But at least you have the choice. So if downloading is all you want, everything is fine, you don't need to expose anything to anybody if that is all you want. . Okay, you could still be concerned the forums could get "hacked" and somebody will be able to get "all the names", but.. a) These would just be the names with no addresses b) Then you also should be concered if somebody "hacks" the customer data of their shop (and this is the full data including addresses). But if one is really concerned about this possibility, then this person shouldn't even buy the plane at first. So maybe there's some point I haven't thought about, but they already made the forums they way that you can't browse users or other stuff like this.
  9. While I agree with you that their decision about this is questionable, I actually don't see any problem. If you don't like to post stuff on their forums (as you mentioned), your privacy is not in danger. There is no public member list that can be seen by others (even registered users). There is also an option to turn off your "online status", so if you really don't make ANY post on the forums, nobody will ever be able to "find" you / read your name. Only FSLabs knows and like you said as well.. they already know. Basically if downloading stuff is all you want, this should be perfectly possible without fearing to give away data to others that violates your privacy. --------------------------- That being said, I get your point. The "real name as username" stuff was not always like this. Years ago you were perfectly allowed to use any username you liked - and this is still true for people like me, because I still have my old username. I never used my account to post anything over there, so I'm still "fine" - but if I decide to do, then the "friendly reminder" will come for sure. This won't help in your position because I guess there's no way for new users to "bypass" the requirement for using your real name - and yeah, old users don't have any real benefit here, because well.. they have to change the name as soon as they start posting. 😉 But I still had prefered they stayed with their old rules, agreed.. Anyway.. That's difficult. The files shouldn't be "personalized", but there is no legal mirror to them. Even if you find something somewhere, chances are low that you will find complete or updated stuff. Be aware that liveries are updated all the time / new stuff is added, etc. - One could ask a friend who also owns the plane, but I guess this is against their terms of service / not allowed.. and I doubt the mods over here will tolerate any further discussion about it. But yeah, it's really not necessary. You shouldn't encounter any privacy related problems if you don't post, set up your privacy settings and just download stuff. So I really recommend to just do that 😉
  10. While every discussion about topics like these is just pure speculation (including my own opinion), it's still very unlikely. AMD won't catch up that fast, especially when it comes to Raytracing Performance and things like DLSS, the main focus nowadays when it comes to gaming performance. NVIDIA doesn't "make" ANY GPUs. They're fabless - they create chip designs (and of course the designs for RTX 4000 Series and even the next successor most likely already exist), which are more like "blueprints". These chips are manufactured by other companies, like TSMC or Samsung (current 3000 Series). AIB partners then put these chips on actual graphics cards. Maybe you meant the "Founders Edition", sold and marketed by NVIDIA directly - but even those are NOT built by NVIDIA, they're made by Foxconn or AIB partners like PNY, too - and those current Founders Editions are still being built. Like I already said, there are still GPUs in the 3000 series line-up not even released - on the lower end of the line-up like the 3060, but also unannounced cards like the 20GB 3080 series card which is still not off the table for a later release this year. What NVIDIA will most likely do.. releasing refreshes like the "Super" series in the past, if they think it's neccessary. One should not forget, NVIDIA is nowhere "under pressure" by AMD or what the average customers thinks. Their market share is still above 75% - and this won't magically change, even if AMD steps up and releases some flagship card that's maybe roughly better in raw / "paper" performance than NVIDIAs best model. There are real shortages due to COVID and other factors. So even if NVIDIA wanted, there's no way they can "build up stock" that fast for a NEW generation of gaming GPUs when at the same time they're not really able to match the demand of the current generation. On the other hand, why should they bring something new, given the fact that due to the current situation, everybody including board partners, retail vendors, etc. earn way more money, because people buy those cards happily still priced over MSRP. That doesn't make any sense from an economical point of view. They will milk the hell out of this situation, that's how this business works. It's not like that people aren't buying their stuff. Anyway.. what I wanted to say is: Rumors about NVIDIA releases were almost always wrong in the past, that's because NVIDIA is really good in keeping their stuff secret with almost no real leaks. So chances are high this story repeats here again. Those "leaks" you find on some tech news sites are just guesses by so-called "business insiders" who don't have any real insights. And even if somebody should leak some real stuff, you can bet their "partnership" with NVIDIA will end really quickly. 😉 They're really not amused by this kind of click-bait stuff and they took action in the past.
  11. It's very unlikely that it will be released this year, because NVIDIA used a 2+ year release cycle for their most "recent" generations. Not even all Ampere Cards are released by now and I'm not speaking about general availability or supply shortage. Maxwell = early 2014 Pascal = early 2016 Turing = end of 2018 Ampere = end of 2020 Lovelace = one can only guess, but you know what I'm trying to say Additionally, there is a high chance of wrong predictions about NVIDIA architecture releases, meaning that nobody knows which platform is for consumer or professional use only. Remember when Pascal was current? Rumor was "Volta" will be the successor (it wasn't, although there's a Volta Titan), then "Ampere" (it wasn't - okay, now it is, but with one generation inbetween), then Turing got released.. so chances are high these rumors are wrong again or maybe Lovelace is not targeted for the gamer market at all.
  12. It's already updated for 5.1, be sure to enable "Release Candidate versions" in general settings (first option). Current version is v1.2.48.
  13. Okay, the amount of fuel for this route makes much more sense now, good! 🙂 Now you rotated a little bit late, just begin slowly rotating when you reach Vr on your speed tape. Yeah, then the stick shaker came in again.. The reason is your "confusing" flap retraction schedule. Aside from this "extreme" turn right after-take off you're trying to do, you instantly retract all of your flaps. You're in VNAV SPD, which commands 169 kts (below acceleration height). You simply cannot retract all of your flaps with this low airspeed (look up the flap maneuvering speeds of the 747-400), thats why you're almost stalling again. Watch your speed tape (left on your PFD). You see this green little numbers. At first, there's a little green 10. This is your flaps 10 maneuvering speed, so when your airspeed goes above this speed, you can retract your flaps to 10. You will then see a litte green 5 afterwards. If your airspeed goes above this little green five, you retract the flaps to 5, I think you get the idea ("1" and "UP" are the remaining indications following after 5).. I won't go further into detail here, because there are so many tutorials out there (including a written one coming right with this plane), explaining the procedures and the reasons behind all of this. In my opinion, this is even basic flying stuff as it doesn't matter if you ride on a 747 or a Cessna 172, you should know such numbers on every plane you're flying. So I hope you will read a little bit more about it - believe me, it will make your life easier 🙂 - Just watch this video - this should answer all questions (they're flying flaps 20 until reaching acceleration height (it's called out in the video, timestamp 2:55 after reaching 3000ft+), then you see how VNAV command 230kts and they start with the retraction schedule)
  14. Watched the video. You're very heavy, trying to take off from an airfield that is at 6000ft above sea level. You loaded 173.6 tons of fuel (= 382722 lbs), that is a lot. Please give more details about the route you want to fly. If you wanted to fly from OAKB to OPIS like the video description suggets, 20 tons of fuel should be totally fine, so I don't know why you loaded as much fuel as possible. Anyway, I tried calculating some take-off performance date using TOPCAT (RWY 29 at OAKB), but even if I go as "light" as possible in regards to weights, take-off isn't authorized in a 747-400 from RWY 29 due to obstacle limits.. I guess you should use Runway 11 instead. Okay, even if we ignore all of this (exceeding MTOW, etc.), there are several "oddities" that happen after take-off. Running almost out of runway, you raise the gear before you get even an indication of positive rate (even rotating before reaching Vr), way too early (imagine your plane is still on the ground, you just lifted your nose, main gear is still on the runway..). Then, you pitch up to 20(!) degrees nose up and while your speed is dropping and dropping (why? Speed is now in the yellow speed band and way below manouvering speed - if you see the speed dropping, you should lower the nose (push), don't pull or even bank), you even raise the flaps from 20 to 10 (why? You don't want to retract the flaps until reaching maneuvering speed for your desired setting, indicated on the speed tape of your PFD), stick shaker goes off and you bank into the turn (why? Banking increases your AoA / Angle of Attack even more))? Uhm. I hope you don't get this wrong, no offense - but I can only recommend that you read the tutorial that comes with this plane and try to recreate the tutorial flight. Because.. yeah, somebody could start explaining what went wrong and why, but for me it looks like there are still some issues with basic concepts of flying such aircraft type. Like I said, even if this take-off would not be "allowed" IRL, you still could have made it without stalling. Edit: I made a screenshot, video stopped at the moment you raise the flaps from 20 to 10. Your speed is 160kts (dropping, indicated with this little green arrow, called speed trend vector), while the flaps 10 maneuvering speed is about 195kts, as far as I can see it on your video. Maybe it's easier for you to see what I try to tell you if you can see it on a picture.
  15. Maddog seems to be finally compatible (5.1+) now, they released a new open beta incremental installer on their support forums.
×
×
  • Create New...