Star1

Good to see it reported in this discussion that ChasePlane works with Prepar3D V4.4 I was just wondering if OldProp’s “A320 Family Immersion” (designed for Aerosoft’s Airbus A320 Professional bundle) plays well with P3Dv4.4, or if issues? Admittedly, it does say on OldProp’s product webpage that compatibility is for Prepar3D v2.5 to v3.4 as well as mentioning elsewhere that it’s for Aerosoft Airbus A320 Family (2014 edition).

Ok thanks, much appreciated. Will try the latter two solutions which sound much better than hard links and registry edits which I wasn't too keen on. I have some newly purchased add-ons such as PFPX, TOMCAT, SIMstarter NG, plus others to name but a few that I'm holding back on installing until I upgrade my PC in order to minimize any registering, de-registering and then re-registering complications. As well as some add-ons I've already installed in FSX SE (FS Global Ultimate, REX Texture HD 4 + Soft Clouds, plus others). If I don't upgrade computer soon then will reset PC and start clean using combination of dual installs and the Migration Tool which sounds very handy. The SIMstarter NG I recently purchased (not yet installed) from reviews appears to be a very useful tool for choosing automated start up options for aircraft, scenery, weather, place, scenario, graphic settings, etc.; maybe a future incarnation and enhancements for this handy utility could also include choosing which SIM to fire-up along with some kind of automated merging/trunking of add-ons to run for chosen flight sim executed if dual install or Migration Tool has not worked or been used... just an idea. Thanks again.

Much info on the web often mentions how to migrate one's mass of FSX / FSX SE add-ons accumulated over time over to Prepar3D using methods such as registry editing or dedicated migration tools such as the apparently appraised 'FSX to P3D Migration Tool' by FlightSim Estonia. However my desire (if conceivably possible) is not so much to migrate add-ons by abandoning FSX SE altogether and moving to Prepar3D, but more so to have 'both' FSX SE and P3D exist/installed on the same computer and have all or most necessary add-ons that developers list as being compatible with both FSX & P3D, to be installed and run on P3D as well as still being installed on FSX SE. Is there a method either by sharing add-on installs or some form of separate dual installation procedures? Naturally I fully understand that some add-ons are not listed as being both FSX & P3D compatible and therefore goes without saying that their different versions have to be purchased separately, i.e. PMDG 737 NGX Base in which I own the FSX SE version and shall be purchasing the P3D version very soon. I would prefer to have both FSX SE & P3D v3 installed on my main C: drive (which are 2x SSD in RAID striped) and sharing compatible add-ons. However if somehow sharing compatible add-ons is a real problem, then another option is for me to split my two SSD's in RAID into two separate single drives and have FSX SE with Windows on one and P3D v3 with Windows on the other. The latter method may be more expensive requiring an additional copy of Windows if Windows ignores the fact it's on the same computer by being dependent on the drive's hardware ID, as well as the more tiresome feature of having to reboot when switching from FSX SE to P3D v3 (being on separate drives). Is there any real solutions with regard to sharing and not migrating add-ons?

Strange.. Installing FTXGB appears to have cured it in the area I'm flying.

Many pages on the internet pointed out the issue with further away textures being bluring but not immediately below the aircraft, although admittedly I didn't research this deep enough. So maybe it could be fair to assume there are two types or versions of this problem? i.e. 1. the version with the greater radius texture issue where the user at least still enjoys textures within the 'inner radius' of the texture engine that thankfully does follow the aircraft for constant good detail below and close to the aircraft... and then 2. the more drastic version of this problem where any kind of texture within the whole (LOD_RADIUS) radius does not follow the aricraft at all on its travelling direction and therefore very soon becomes blurry even immediately below the aircraft. I see... yet I don't understand how flying in a direction to soon reveal the bluury texture immediately below and then using an F-35B Lightening II to 'hover' directly above the ground for a few minutes (even several minutes) shows that the render engine doesn't even attempt to try to catch-up over a considereble time. This gives rise to the thought that the texture render engine appears to stop completely and gives up, as if a bug in the processing routine. Surely the travelling and therefore changing coordinates of the moving aircraft in FSX being fedback to the texture rendering engine would enable the engine to buffer, catch up and empty previous old/past area catch for new area to fill? Interesting! That is worrying to know, although there does appear to be many example and YouTube video's where the texture rendering radius distance is impressive to say the least. No doub't probably using overclocked Intel Extreme CPU's in 6 or 8 core configurations (being that FSX is more CPU intensive than GPU), or maybe not and it's some other workaround. I tried setting frame rate limit within FSX setting pane, however it seems to perform better when Unlimited is selected and that confused me further because normally if I set some games I own to a limited frame rate that mathes the display, the games then perform better than they do with unlinited selected - this is the exact oppisit to what I'm experiencing with FSX frame rate adjustment. Your probably right though and some system performace hog needs to be tweaked in order to improve the situation. But I can't help feel and think that hovering an f-35B Lightening II above some terrain for several test minutes would've given the texture rendering engine ample time to catchup, even on a slow low spec PC - would this not be reminicant of a potential bug issue in the render process? Possibly the texture render engine needs the raw overclocked power of very high end CPU's to maintain a live render output without the slightest dip in CPU performance that could break the apparent brittle/fragile render stream continuity from slightly lower spec'd CPU power from which the texture render engine could be unable to recover from and never will from lack of further development and thus developer updated coding. Mmmm....

Hi to all AVSIM members. I'm still relatively new to flight-sim software and despite having dabbled in the differing versions of FSX over the years, I'm still very much a novice. Therefore please bare with me when trying to obtain guidance and advice. Now that I have a computer with slightly better specs than my previous PC's, I feel a bit more inspired to get into FSX and although my current computer is by no means anywhere near what would be required to run FSX properly, it does appear to run FSX much better than past rigs I've owned to a level I can enjoy except for an unusual issue. My Issue:- I've noticed there's much mention in numerous forums and websites regarding performance tweaks in relation to the unwanted blurry textures problem. However my current experience with this issue unless mistaken, has a slight alternate spin on it. Whereas the main and most common problem some users experience is blurry textures in the distant or onward areas past a certain radius point threshold around the aircraft, my issue is proving slightly more problematic and strange in that my starting point is always good and all looks very acceptable even impressive. But then when flying off in any direction, the texture and Scenery appear to remain impressive from the starting point area but soon after a short distance the rendering engine does not appear to want to follow the aircraft's scenery rendering radius - in other words the scenery starts looking dreadful immediately around and right below the aircraft itself. I tested this further by switching aircraft to another like the F-35B Lightening II for VTOL to enable a 'hover' directly above the ground, this was done for purpose of giving time to see if the scenery & textures catch-up from the render engine by hovering above the terrain, however surprisingly the scenery texture detail still does not catch-up regardless of how much time is given. The only thing that immediately produces amazingly detailed textures once more, is forcing a Scenery redraw/refresh by means of a Scenery reload within the menu (just clicking OK in Scenery Library without making any changes does a refresh & reload), or loading a flight, changing plane/location/time of day which trigger a reload etc. As mentioned, my computer system does not have the best specs, but it's quad core i7, dual GTX 970 in SLI and dual mSATA SSD's configured in RAID stripped which shouldn't be that bad in contributing towards semi-decent loading/rendering of Scenery - the frame rates certainly appear acceptable to good with most settings on high even Ultra, albeit with the usual fps killers set to off such as light bloom, ground shadows, etc and traffic not to high on medium. I am at a loss. When I do get good textures from when the flight first starts, or doing a Scenery redraw, the system doesn't appear to struggle whatsoever as the scenery and textures are well detailed within the LOD Radius (which is at 4.5000 and unedited). The 'Empty scenery cache on exit' option is selected/ticked, however I have tried it unticked as well to no effect or change with the issue at hand.