Jump to content

MehdiAli

Frozen-Inactivity
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content Count

    80

  • Donations

    $0.00 

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by MehdiAli

  1. Posted

    Could someone help me out here? No traffic, new install of UT2 and AI_liveries.txt configured for it. 

      

    Fri Aug 25 20:36:20 2017 (utc)
version 6.13
PSXseeconTraffic (64 bit), for any user aircraft in Prepar3D v4
You are using the latest version
There are 4206 airports in the internal database

*** Livery summary ***
1365 liveries read from file AI_liveries.txt
0 Registration codes for a livery
no generic Boeing liveries
no generic Airbus liveries
no generic Embraer liveries
no generic Bombardier liveries
no generic ATR liveries
no generic Private liveries
291 unique airlines
63 unique aircraft types
Default livery set for aircraft category Heavy, type A306, num liveries: 17
Default livery set for aircraft category Middle, type A318, num liveries: 16
Default livery set for aircraft category Light, type STAR, num liveries: 11
No default livery found for aircraft category Helicopter
****************************************

Initializing a (TCP/IP) PSX server at port 10747
20:36:20 Waiting for FlightSimulator to connect ...
20:36:20 Waiting for RealTraffic to connect ...
20:36:20 Lockheed Martin® Prepar3D® v4 connected
20:36:21 RealTraffic connected
User aircraft: F-22 Raptor - 525th Fighter Squadron, model: F22,  category: M
User aircraft position: latitude,longitude  25.257047,55.371512
20:36:22 49 nearby airports from lat/lon 25.257047,55.371512 with range of 540 Nm
20:36:22 at lat/lon 25.257047,55.371512 close to airport OMDB at 0 Nm, next is OMSJ and than OMRK
20:36:25 OMDB 252000Z 01005KT 310V090 CAVOK 34/26 Q1000 NOSIG
20:36:28 Connecting to RealTraffic ForeFlight stream at (UDP) port 49003 ...
20:36:28 RealTraffic ForeFlight stream connected
AIC968  A321 M VT-PPB  SHJ->TRV =x=   random airline BEZ for type, F1UT2_321.IT.IT
AXB116  B738 M VT-AXQ  AUH->DEL =x=   random airline JAL for type, F1UT2_73H.JL.JL
AIR18   GRND L         DXB->    =d=   F1UT2_S20.DC.DC.SE-LTV
AIR19   GRND L  =d=   F1UT2_S20.DC.DC.SE-LTV
OPS1    GRND L OPS1       ->    =d=   F1UT2_S20.T3.T3.White
KAC301  B77W H 9K-AOL  KWI->BOM =s=   similar type B772, F1UT2_772.KU.KU
CCA942  A333 H B-5956  DXB->PEK =s=   similar type A332, F1UT2_332.CA.CA
MEA430  A320 M T7-MRF  BEY->DXB =s=   similar type A321, F1UT2_321.ME.ME
UAE355  A388 H A6-EDG  SIN->DXB F1UT2_380.EK.EK could not be created!
FDB29   B738 M A6-FDY  DXB->BAH F1UT2_73H.UX.UX could not be created!
UAE74   A388 H A6-EDR  CDG->DXB F1UT2_380.EK.EK could not be created!
A6EDX   A388 H A6-EDX  DXB->    F1UT2_380.EK.EK could not be created!
AFL524  B738 M VP-BCG  SVO->DXB F1UT2_73H.FR.FR.EI-DHD could not be created!
UAE734  B77W H A6-EPO  KRT->DXB F1UT2_773.EK.EK could not be created!
UAE192  B77W H A6-ECF  LIS->DXB F1UT2_772.EK.EK could not be created!
A6EDQ   A388 H A6-EDQ  DXB->    F1UT2_380.SQ.SQ could not be created!
A6EOP   A388 H A6-EOP  DXB->DWC F1UT2_380.QF.QF could not be created!
A6EER   A388 H A6-EER  DXB->    F1UT2_380.SQ.SQ could not be created!
UAE815  B77W H A6-ENY  DXB->RUH F1UT2_773.EK.EK could not be created!
ABY483  A320 M A6-AOT  SHJ->AMD F1UT2_320.BD.BD could not be created!
AIC968  A321 M VT-PPB  SHJ->TRV F1UT2_321.IT.IT could not be created!
AXB116  B738 M VT-AXQ  AUH->DEL F1UT2_73H.JL.JL could not be created!
AIR18   STAR L         DXB->    F1UT2_S20.DC.DC.SE-LTV could not be created!
AIR19   STAR L  F1UT2_S20.DC.DC.SE-LTV could not be created!
OPS1    STAR L OPS1       ->    F1UT2_S20.T3.T3.White could not be created!
KAC301  B77W H 9K-AOL  KWI->BOM F1UT2_772.KU.KU could not be created!
CCA942  A333 H B-5956  DXB->PEK F1UT2_332.CA.CA could not be created!
MEA430  A320 M T7-MRF  BEY->DXB F1UT2_321.ME.ME could not be created!
UAE9754 B77L H A6-EFD  CDG->DWC F1UT2_773.EK.EK could not be created!
UAE655  B77W H A6-ENH  CMB->DXB F1UT2_772.EK.EK could not be created!
SAI221  A320 M AP-BLI  ISB->DXB F1UT2_320.JM.JM.Air Jamaica could not be created!
RJA612  A320 M JY-AYS  AMM->DXB F1UT2_320.W6.W6.Ukraine could not be created!
RBA97   A306 H V8-DLA  BWN->DXB F1UT2_AB6.AA.AA could not be created!
AIC996  A306 H VT-ANO  DXB->DEL F1UT2_AB6.TU.TU could not be created!
UAE702  A388 H A6-EOW  MRU->DXB F1UT2_380.EK.EK could not be created!
UAE110  B77W H A6-ENQ  LCA->DXB F1UT2_773.EK.EK could not be created!
UAE954  B77W H A6-EBG  BEY->DXB F1UT2_773.EK.EK could not be created!
AIC952  A321 M VT-PPW  DXB->HYD =x=   random airline AUA for type, F1UT2_321.OS.OS
UAE122  B77W H A6-EBX  IST->DXB =s=   similar type B773, F1UT2_773.EK.EK
SWR243  A333 H HB-JHK  MCT->DXB F1UT2_333.OZ.OZ could not be created!
GIA089  B77W H PK-GIG  AMS->CGK F1UT2_772.MH.MH could not be created!
AIC952  A321 M VT-PPW  DXB->HYD F1UT2_321.OS.OS could not be created!
UAE122  B77W H A6-EBX  IST->DXB F1UT2_773.EK.EK could not be created!
UAE834  B77W H A6-ECP  BAH->DXB =s=   similar type B773, F1UT2_773.EK.EK
UAE834  B77W H A6-ECP  BAH->DXB F1UT2_773.EK.EK could not be created!

    Thanks :)

  5. Posted

    3 minutes ago, niyoko said:

    From my base  settings, I saw a significant increase in GPU usage when I went from 2xSSAA to 8xSSAA. I also have played around with Dynamic Reflections increased my memory usage, but it's not factored into the charts that I posted. Both settings also had impacts on Framerate.

    With 8xSSAA I saw a noticeable difference in the night time lighting. I didn't notice much of a difference during the day. At night, the street lights were clearer and more like pin-points of light. Their was also less shimmering in the night lighting.

    How was the FPS when using 8XSSAA ?

  6. Posted

    56 minutes ago, niyoko said:

    @eXpress48
    OK. I sat down and did some testing. I ran a test at night with the GTX 970 and 1080 since most have been saying that the dynamic lighting is an impact on their FPS. I also included a day/night test with 4xSSAA and 8xSSAA on the 1080.

    Mods
    PMDG 777-200 Base, FsDreamteam KCLT, FlightBeam KSFO-HD, ORBX Global, ORBX Northern California, ORBX Trees.

    (All runs used Prepar3D's Fair Weather preset.)

    Rh74vWE.png

    Averages (2xSSAA)

    GPU Usage: 64.47
    Framerate: 29.46

    pOmXgec.png

    Averages (2xSSAA)

    GPU Usage: 39.79
    Framerate: 30.43

    GNxG5Xd.png

    Averages (2xSSAA)

    GPU Usage: 39.75
    Framerate: 31.38

    Would there be a way to increase GPU usage on the 1080? there isnt much point as its only using about 40% of its capability. 

  10. Posted

    Hifi just updated their Facebook- should be out next week 

     

    The beta is going well, however we do have some relatively serious issues to resolve that have come up, so we are working on that and continuing to test. We'll evaluate our status early next week, make some decisions and post some updates. Thanks again for your patience all!

    • Upvote 2

  11. Posted

    1 hour ago, 0Artur0 said:

    I suspect that X-plane devs are paying all those people making P3D v4 Youtube videos. I haven't seen that low FPS and such stutterfests since the launch of FSX back in the day. :) I'm yet to see a Youtube video of v4 depicting a smooth and visually pleasing experience.

    Yeah i know ;-; not exactly fantastic and beatuiful flowingly fps lol idk what adjectives to use xD but in the following months i should be getting a MUCHHHHHHHHHH better GPU and then them oooohhhhh fps willl be flowing in xD however as i said in the video, the fps is different to when im not recording, it went up to 25 once i stopped. Sorry about that but should get better in the next month or so. ps: i dont realy like x-plane :p

  12. Posted

    5 hours ago, EGLD said:

    indeed, and the videos being posted of v4 so far are appallingly made

    terrible video captures that seem to show the sim running at 10FPS, default scenery and planes, wild panning from side to side, visible neon pink start menu (dude seriously! :biggrin: )

    the base platform is an incremental step up from P3D v3, and that's all that was needed. the big change was the architecture going from x86 to x64

    does anyone look at fully modded v3 and say it looks terrible? does anyone look at the default v3 and say it looks amazing?

    v4 can only be judged once all the big addons are ready

    Not everybody can be as lucky as you, its the best i could do. .. All im trying to do is make a video with a bit of humour, regarding the release of V4. Im sorry if you felt that way.

    • Upvote 1

  13. Posted

    6 hours ago, swiesma said:

    Well.... LM delievers what people demanded for years. And yet I see whining in almost every thread "how bad v4 is".

     

    LMAO

    Yep thats what i said, its what the community has been wanting for such a long time! Yes we dont see all that other stuff but the first thing i heard that the community wanted as 64bit.. 

  14. Posted

    36 minutes ago, himmelhorse said:

    MehdiAli,

    Just a couple of comments.  

    I would like to point out that when FSW was asking the community what they wanted in the be all next Generation flight simulator platform, most of the community registered the comment that they wanted a 64bit platform. I believe that most thought that once they had that, the addon developers (3PD) would add some incredibly good finishing touches.  We actually got something with a lot of potential but something far from the majority wants. An early access programme which was, in many respects a retrograde step. Again, early access but with potential.

    Lockheed Martin, in total contrast, consulted with nobody other than 3PD, obviously listened to the general comments and supplied exactly what people were asking for with FSW. It is undeniably 64bit FSX with some improvements. Most of the addon developers are now feverishy working on updates and if LM leave this platform in its existing state, I will eat the crotch out of anybodies nightie LOL. I believe that this is a far cry from what LM  will  be offering in 12 months time or even sooner.

    Your oft repeated comments regarding the negligible difference from FSX  are quite right but I feel it MAY be a little unfair in some ways.

    I will probably buy both in the long term but I have to admit that P3D is, even right now, a MUST HAVE whilst FSW is not on the radar until it is a complete platform with many many more addon developers on board.

    The fact remains that at the moment we are in flight sim heaven and I am, for one, loving it.

     

    Regards to all

    Tony Chilcott

    I have no wish to reignite the FSW/P3D war of words and simply, in my own inept way, 

    Yep completely agree with you on that. However In a way LM must have spoken to the general audience, if you think about it, 3PD must have spoken to the audience to find out what current needs are etc. And therefore the information was transferred to LM.

     

    Regarding FSW I feel that it has a bit of potential, most simmers use LM since they are able to deliver and do what the simmers have been asking. From what I have heard ( I have only bought FSX:SE from dovetails) it isn't as good as thought when released (regarding Flight school) and since FSW is in early access I can't really say much at the moment. Thanks Mehdi :)

     

  15. Posted

    So i created a video, and i hope you decide on weather you are going to buy it or not. personally i feel it isnt worth about $60 but around 45, there isnt much improvement otehr than 64bit- i understand that this is what we wanted as a FS community for such a long time but i guess its just my opinion. Enjoy :D And if you have any Constructive critisism (i know i spelt that wrong) then feel freee to drop it down below or in the video's comment section. Thanks Mehdi

  18. Posted

    2 hours ago, Avidean said:

    FSW has been released today! I do think that Something official regarding V4 will happen today. I do think that we hobbyist are significant enough to P3D that they wouldn't want to loose us to FSW due to an information vacuum. Might not be released but expect an announcement or the lifting of the NDA today. That's my opinion.

    Yep V4 ANOUNCED!!

  23. Posted

    On 3/14/2017 at 9:00 PM, RALF9636 said:

    Even after installing the summer/fall 2016 update the "Error setting up flight operations. Failed to compare two elements in array" remains when opening the control panel. And the control panel still sometimes crashes when selecting specific databases (the UT2weekly_official.db works fine now).

     

    I gave up finding a cure for that. But anyway it seems to do no harm to the UT2 function in the sim. I see a lot of new liveries, B787s and A380s. 

     

    Thanks a lot for your contribution, Pete!

     

    @Erik: As far as I understand it, the summer/fall 2016 update only gives you new schedules but no new liveries and no new aircraft like the B787 and A380.

    Did you find a way to fix that error? Thanks

  24. Posted

    7 hours ago, tooting said:

    Ive just PM'd you.  thanks.  Its bizzare it just these 2 airports.

    Have you got any idea to what is wrong? none of what i know are corrupted. Sorry i know your busy, just wanted to get it fixed. If you could tell me what the smallest database file you have and which one it is, would be much appreciated. Again sorry for bugging you. 

     

    Mehdi

  25. Posted

    On 05/05/2017 at 5:56 AM, tooting said:

    Look at the size is any of them 0 kb?? 

    In the database folder.  

    Nope all of them have a file size. teh smallest one is 176kb UT2Weekly_aig_dhldeguatemala_wi14-15.db

×
×
  • Create New...