Rogen

Does this post help ? https://www.avsim.com/forums/topic/545338-unable-to-import-crj-flight-plans-flp Plus you could always search for the file extension, I find Agent Ransack is quite a useful search tool supporting many search options including seach for text in files and regex based searches. Cheers

I think that's more a symptom of "low hanging fruit", where trolls and the moderators are more willing to jump on a thread because there is higher visibility, i.e. it's easier to jump onto and you just know the mods are more than willing to hide, delete and lock a thread if it even looks just a little independent. Cheers

Yeah, a good point of entry for those who want to fly but are not computer-literate confident enough to do things themselves.

My understanding is the workflow for scenery creation is much more streamlined, as well the tool sets available are also improved. And where the tools are better and the workflow allows easier and faster production, you'll have more releases. Cheers

Yeah loads of I.T. is offline and crashing. AVSIM still up though... 🤐

I found out the main thread reaching 100% is the intended operation when Active Waiting is enabled i.e. when "Enable passive waiting" is not checked. The purpose being to artifically drive the main thread to 100% so it's always running flat out to prevent down throttling to lower clock rates and then having to ramp up again like in a roller coaster effect. All in the aid for smoother framerate pacing it seems, could be the reason for some people seeing smoother operations when the frame rate limiter is set to front edge sync. For myself it has no effect other than to drive the CPU to 100% as my machine is base overclocked and includes a bitsum highest power plan and always stays at the highest clock speed anyway. Also when NVIDIA reflex is enabled RTSS is no longer using its internal timer mechanisims and thus those wait settings don't apply. Cheers

Yes, I did trial front-edge sync, however noticed nothing of note, in anycase after reviewing the documentation its usage senario doesn't really apply when using Frame Generation. When reading the RTSS docs, "NVIDIA Reflex" is intended for the use of FG and also has some very specific management options. but hey... I suppose it depends on what GFX card is in use, and all in all... whatever works best for your system 🙂 I find as long as the PC can maintain the framerate I've set the sim to run at, frame generation will bring the display up to the vsync level and the sim will be very smooth. The moment the sim is overloaded and its framerate drops, so too does the vsync drop out, meaning vsync smoothness is lost, so it's important to keep the frame rate to practical levels that can be maintained. For myself I find 30 fps (for x2 to a 60 Hz vsync) and 20 fps (for a x3 to a 60 Hz vsync), covers all use senarios so far, from normal to heavy hitting. Cheers PS. Further trialing of front-edge sync is showing a significant increase in main thread use (p3d v5.3HF2), to the point of driving the main thread to 100%, looks like about ~10% extra, swapping to NVIDIA Reflex removes this overhead.

A fellow enthusiast has wrtitten back and advised he is using an additional gauge to use the buttons on the F1 GTN 750 bezel when running the RXP GTN 750 in the VC, which does work quite well although a double click of the button is needed. Well, I've looked into it further and have managed to work out what is needed for a single button click operation on all the VC F1 bezels for the RXP GTN 750, the GTN 750 + 650 and the 2 x GTN 650.. So I'm at present running through the required work for all the VC GTN bezel options of the Beaver for single bezel button click operations. But wait... there's more. A nice new and fully integrated GTNs means the Auto Pilot deserves some work, given I've found the original barely functions and actually needs a pilot to reset the heading bug at every turn, plus there are many times it just gibbed out and failed to catch and follow the GPS line and just generally misbehaved overall. I get it, if that's what the real one was actually like then so be it (in the interest of authenticity), however I prefer an autopilot that is reliable enough to get on with the job itself and I've gone through the code and reworked so it will function much more reliably which is in testing atm. All going well with the testing, the intent is to implement as an additional gauge that can be commented out in the panel configs should the original autopilot be desired. Of course this lot of changes will be targeted to those who have the RXP series of GTNs. Cheers

Been having a further play around and found the following. I was able to use "RivaTuner Statistics Server (RTSS) version 7.3.6 from Guru3D.com to successful control the sim frame rate outside of the sim itself (on the fly so to speak). Means i can set the Nvida control panel (NCP) frame rate limiter to off and just use RTSS, where I can easily set 30 or 20 fps for 2X or 3X Lossless Scaling frame generation (FG) operation while live in the sim, (instead of needing to change the frame rate in the NCP and restart the sim). For myself, I found the trick is to use the RTSS frame rate limiter option of "NVIDIA Reflex", being the NVIDA's rate limiter and is actually intended to be used with frame generation.. Also if your sim can mange 30 fps (without FG), the 2 x with Vsync on a 60 Hz screen mode does greatly cut down on frame generation artefacts while providing a very smooth flying expierience. Cheers

GFX card drivers perhaps ? What's the specs ? I note you'd raised the same issue in October last year where you updated the GFX drivers and reported back all good. What's changed since then ? Cheers

Yeah I see the same/similar with Orbx after adding airports etc. Everything is all nicely configured, (including the Orbx insertion points) and the layers are looking good, I add an Orbx airport and the layering is messed, although all the Orbx stuff is in the right locations. I then use the Lorby tool to correct the layers and do a save of the configs via Lorby's backup mechanism. The Orbx log files are quite verbose, they might provide a hint as to what is going on, I suppose it's a bit like the layering in Besthesda games like Skyrim, where I have well over 100 mods and use a tool named LOOT to re-layer the mods. I also recommend to raise such types of issues with Orbx, along with info on how to reproduce the issue, I noticed an Orbx product had changed it's layer position after I reported an install issue I was having, so it does appear they do use feedback. Plus they resolved an issue of missing tree textures in TeraFlora v2 when I raised it with them. https://forum.orbxdirect.com/topic/211734-terra-flora-v2-package-issues/ Cheers

Software is different. In my experience of software development and support... Less purchases typically also equates to less support requirements (unless it's as buggy as hell, but then again you'd think in a mature product there should be very few (if any) issues). It's not as though it is taking more dev resources being a (hopefully) mature product and given they've frozen the code. And it's still going to take internal storage space since they've already sold x number of instances to people over a long period of time. The Ops managment tool would still be in use based on pre-existing sales meaning they'd be obligated to maintain that part anyway. Yeah, it's their software and their right to do what they want, but it's a bad attitude to just dump on people without notice, such actions upset customers and a word not allowed off customer tells more people of their poor customer service experience than those who are happy, especially in this age of Information. In the companies I've worked for we typcially gave 6 months public notice of obsolescence. Of course the obsolete component was no longer included as part of the current releases, but was still available for those who really wanted or needed it on the basis of no dev work would be performed. Plus they could always introduce a "maintenance" fee but that's up to them. Cheers

Hey thanks for the info. Cheers

Hey Folks, Been a few comments re: the following items. No RPM change when manipulating the propeller pitch lever in the VC. MVAMS not changing from cargo to passenger. I'm not experiencing those issues in P3D v5.3 HF2 (5.3.17), below is some info. If you are running P3D v5.4 be aware LM broke code that affects XML tools usage, it's a big part of why I'm running 5.3 atm as the problem would affect many of my installed aircraft. The same issue was introduced in P3D v6, however LM did fix the issue in v6 patch #4. The MVAMS version I'm running is v1.0.1.0 and I make changes in MVAMS with the sim not running and have not had issues. Cheers

Are not we getting a little off topic and risking the wrath of the over enthusiastic ??? 🤔 But carrying on regardless...Yes the Nvidia filters would tend to effect all colours, pretty much similar as the Reshade ones, although the reshade shaders do provide a huge number of options on LUT management, as well as items like ambient occlusion, you could even apply TAA anti-aliasing if you'd like. Unfortunately LM... for whatever reason wrote their shaders with such build in problems like too dark cockpits, and way overdid the blue haze, it's almost like they'd not been up in a plane before... That said I've seen many other developers build such wierd things obvious to everyone else but themselves (dev crew tend to have a different breed of somewhat blinkered logic). Anyway I've been playing with the shaders a bit myself because v5 made it so hard to consider due to such obvious issues and one by one I've been culling items out of my list, not all done yet but getting there. The funny thing is, in the various shader files there are many ortho options which completely change the look of the sim, I assume those sort of options are in there for the LM/mil developers to create their own look over whatever custom scenery they are using. Would you like to try out what I've configured so far ? It's basically 3 shader files and provide for the look of below (clouds excepted).