Rogen

Have installed the latest update for the FMC, much appreciated for the release. One thing I have noticed is the main panel's flood lighting is inconsistant between the GPS equiped vs. the FMC equiped versions. Looks to be related to the ~\FLYSIM Learjet 35A\panel.FMS\FLYSIMWARE_DIMMER\PANEL_1_FLOOD.xml and it's use of PANEL_FMS_NIGHT.bmp Any chance of a resolution ? Kind of spoils the asthetics of the VC the way the FMC main panel is flood lit. Cheers This is what the GPS equiped panel looks like, where the PANEL_1_FLOOD.xml is using PANEL_1_NIGHT.bmp And this the FMC equiped panel where PANEL_1_FLOOD.xml is using PANEL_FMS_NIGHT.bmp

That it certainly does, but really the ESP engine is probably about as far as they can take it imho. That said if/when LM introduce their new UReal based sim to the public, there is the blackshark maxar satellite plugin available, plus a ton of other types of plugins for some pretty amazing things. https://blackshark.ai/blackshark-ai-launches-globe-plugin-for-unreal-engine-making-the-whole-world-available-in-3d-to-anyone/ Good choice with UReal, there are a lot of dev resources and expansion options available.

Flying around the south of England in the Beech Duke 60, a very nice high quality RealAir aircraft, complemented by the Orbx TrueEarth Southern GB package. This link is actually a short vid clip where I'm using Radar Contact for ATC, makes the whole flight quite immersive. Cheers

Hey great to hear, cannot wait 🙂 Cheers Still totally enjoying this aircraft.

Yeah, you'll need to confirm the power supply will suit whatever GPU decided upon, else a new power supply is not all that expensive. I run a 3080Ti with P3D v4.5HF3 where I have quite the amount of GPU power sucking customisations applied. And while the 3080Ti is great, I still find I can max out the GPU both in it's ram and GPU usage, maybe a 4090Ti would take it to the next level where I can max out everything, or await the 5000 series ? ;-) But still it's pretty great, I can enabled almost everything to the max except for the casting of vegetation shadows (sometimes) and autogen distance where depending on the area, medium/high are about the max unless you're flying in a place like Africa or South America or any other place where there would not be a lot of autogen to display. Check out my vid links where the latest vids are running the 3080Ti, earlier ones are runnng a 1070Ti. And here is a pic of Orbx True Earth GB South @ 4k with a 30Hz vsync on the 3080Ti providing for a very smooth 30 fps. Cheers

And deservedly so, Radar Contact is a pretty reasonable program. Here's a short vid (4:30) showing a section of flight from Welshpool EGCW to Shoreham EGKA with Radar contact in use. Cheers 🙂

Well... there you go, the gauge obviously does more than just populate the fuel and payload. Looks like it's going to be deadend getting the dll resolved, back to manual loadouts and manual data entry I'm afraid. Now that I've got the plane installed and have added the RXP GTN 750, I might also add an FMS given that MilViz removed what they had originally. This looks like many x86 to x64 movements I've seen, where some are great with no issues and others are at best a half baked effort and left to langish. Maybe the original FMS was a contract job, maybe the license was limited, or maybe the person who developed it has moved on and there is no-one left who has the knowledge to continue with it. Cheers

Actually the AP does work within the limits of what it is, as too do the Flight Director handlebars. Bit of a trick to getting the FD running. Flip the in cockpit AP enable levers up. Then use the Keyboard Z key to disable. At that point the AP warning light will light and warning sound will play. Click the warning button to off and the the FD bars should rise. You can also flip the two AP switches up to re-engage the AP controlling surfaces. Cheers PS. A pic to show it all happening, and yep the GPS is the GTN 750, just through it in quickly and needs to be suitably resized.

Hi @StephaneS, Ok I installed this plane and took a look. And yes I can see not all the P3D "Fuel and Payload" stations are reflecting the values entered into the MVAMS. From what I can see the MVAMS updates the ini values in \MVAMS\Configurations\B732\ successfully. And it seems the values are then read by the MV_732_ACM.dll, where I assume they are intended to be injected into the Aircraft.cfg or are used in some other way, I didn't find any clarity on how it is intended to function, but going by the fact that some of the values are injected into the aircraft.cfg I assume the rest should be too. And a review of the Milviz forum shows gpxe never raised the issue, so it was never investigated / resolved or even commented further on. As a workaround what can be done is disable the MV_732_ACM gauge in the panel configs, e.g. comment out the gauge. //gauge03=MV_732_ACM!ACM_Control, 0,0,1,1,0 With the gauge commented out the "Fuel and Payload" stations will reflect the values in the aircraft.cfg's [WEIGHT_AND_BALANCE] section. The stations can then be all populated with default max values (or some other defaults) and as part of the startup checklist manually adjust the values within P3D's "Fuel and Payload" config window. Or you can set up a collection of aircraft.cfg and swap in/out or rename as needed, or add / comment the station values in the aircraft.cfg. Personally I'd go for just maxing out the values in the aircraft.cfg and make adjusting the values in the "Fuel and Payload" window part of my checklist. Would be nice if Blackbird would fix this as it's a bit af a real problem and not solvable outside of having the source code and the enviroment to build the dll. But if they could provide an accurate understanding of how it is intended to actually function a member of the community could probably write something to replace it. Thinking about it there would be a need to identify the aircraft being flown, set the pathing, read the correct ini, inject the values and do it all while the aircraft is being loaded. Cheers

Yeah, it is a great aircraft for very little price, the PBR model is available from https://www.liveries.nz/pbr-mods There are a few other PBR models offered from this site, although be aware not all are free of issues. For example the PC-12 PBR model has it's problems, but if you happen to have a PC-12 (by Carenado) the community improvements pack includes fixes for the model. https://www.avsim.com/forums/topic/621885-pc12-fully-loaded/ Cheers

Hey thanks for that tip re: the 4k VC textures, I've had the plane for some time without knowing about them. I like that you can download and install cabin safety demos and there is also a PBR model to round it out as well.

The title of the thread should provide the answer... "End of product support for Prepar3D" But there is always user to user support options were fans help out each other. What's the prob that you need support for ? Cheers

Nar... what's the point of doing that ? There will always be conjecture and speculation given LM being a mostly defence orientiated company who keep their mouth shut. And it's interesting to read what people come up with, even those MSFS zealots do on occasion manage to hit a point. But whoever that fellow was, saying that bugs were not fixed as compared to FSX is pretty wrong, you've only got to take a fly in FSX vs. P3D to see, and on occasion I do do just that to remind myself of the problems of FSX given there is a tendancy to take for granted what there currently is in P3D. I mean there are massive differences between FSX and P3D coding wise. Unfortuantely the one difference that's in your face is the default scenery, which I'm sad to say hasn't improved to any meaningful extent since FSX (and in some instances has even gone backwards - e.g. parking allowances at default airports in the current 5 release and various other shortcomings). Software does always become stale and I've seen many enterprise software products fall by the wayside, typically where they've been resold, the original developers are gone and the new company is unable to bring the software up to date, at which point a new upstart will arrive and start taking the business of the incumbernt. LM at least did it right from the very beginning with the ESP code base, i.e. they had some of the original developers on board, they spent a lot of initial time in code review and recoding (I believe some of the hardest was the removel of pieces of assembler code), while still keeping an extremely high level of backwards compatibility, which is no feat to be dismissed. Personally I'm hoping for a "fixed 5.3" that resolves the current outstanding and introduced issues of 5.3, along with a redeveloped set of dev tools (because once you've done some dev work with P3D you realise how dreadfully primitive they are) and an improved dev pipeline (so you don't have to constantly exit and restart just to see a single change). And I'd welcome an intelligent scenery alignment method that aligns the textures of landclass to roads instead of just overlaying streets on top of textures. Or perhaps LM could use their vast resources to create ortho like that of @MatthiasKNU as a download option, even as a subscription base would be good. https://www.avsim.com/forums/topic/633675-photosceneries-and-autogen-for-the-p3d-world/ And of course there is the complete new sim option based on the UnReal engine v5. Such a change would suit LMs new customers given the sim would be commercially built for a specific purpose and probably with a budget in the 10s of millions of $$. All speculation of course :-) Cheers

Hi, Rogen, I would like to ask - when I add this line to the file you specified I just lose all my ground without the autogen on it. Can you give me a repair? I really want to use my Tomato Shade, I am used to it, but I can no longer use HF2 and this is a little twist for me. Hi @PavlinS, My response was to the post above from yourself. Essentially you don't add the line if it doesn't exist, as the line is a variable created by TomatoShade depending on the choice of TS options. As to the vertical waves, they are not anything to do with shaders, the thread link below covers what needs to be performed to resolve the issue of vertical waves. https://forum.orbxdirect.com/topic/178208-vertical-waves/ And yes, I too use some of those "Flight Sim Jewels" texures and they are nice. Cheers

Hi @PavlinS, The only part of that line I've added is the bold abs wrapper abs(). If you don't have the line, don't add the line statement, as the statement's existance is a variable based on settings chosen in the TS UI. I added just the abs wrapper to ensure the value wasn't doing to exceed parameters as the line was generating warnings in the p3d logging e.g. "GPUTerrain.fx warning X3571: pow(f, e) will not work for negative f", where the abs() wrapper ensures an absolute value would be returned thus killing the warning, this makes the code read as pow(abs(f), e). As to the issue with your night improvements. The config is just an ini file, if you load it into Notepad++ along with the RDPresets ini, you can use the Notepad++ compare function to review the lines and differences in graphical way to quickly identify points of difference. Then apply a process of elimination to track down the setting that might be resulting in your invisibility prob. I'd start with the sky related settings and work though via top to bottom. Hey if you do, find the diff and resolve the invisibility prob let me know. Cheers