Activity Stream - SOH Forum

Activity Stream

Sort By Time Show
Recent Recent Popular Popular Anytime Anytime Last 24 Hours Last 24 Hours Last 7 Days Last 7 Days Last 30 Days Last 30 Days All All Photos Photos Forum Forums Articles Articles Blog Blogs
  • Naruto-kun's Avatar
    Today, 04:31
    Just to give a programmer's perspective (and one from Milviz at that), my dll gauges are getting kinda big. Takes a while to compile. Now if I have to do that 6 times for each installer (eval, commercial, entertainment for x86 and x64), it can get painful, especially when I am trying to manage at least 4 different projects and do R&D to keep up. Secondly, P3D v4 makes it super easy to do what I always dreamed of, namely genuine IR FLIR/LANTIRN, A-G radar patchmaps, and a TFR E-scope with genuine raw video. Third, LM opened the interface to DX11 render to texture functions, and while I could do something similar in FSX (We caused a stir with our DX11 cockpit lighting in FSX back in the day), it was painful and hard to do. Now it is much easier to do it without hurting framerates. ...
    22 replies | 743 view(s)
  • BendyFlyer's Avatar
    Today, 04:21
    I can also understand why anybody in this business commercially would shift to say P3D and 64 bit development, if your in the computer game you simply have no other choice. Legacy software work is a very narrow niche indeed. I can also understand a lot of peoples view about the cost of a new rig or alternatively upgrading current sim models etc for P3D. I guess you would have to say if your going to make that change a developer are you moving into a diminishing market, after all FSX has been declining steadily in terms of users which is why MS booted it off shore to LM in the first place. I fall into the camp of having spent years working on FSX and a myriad of supporting programming and other development tools I now have so customised my FSX that I have neither the energy or the...
    22 replies | 743 view(s)
  • Mixxer's Avatar
    Today, 03:40
    Nice. Major using that AI Gigapixel to update to the 2048 textures do you take much of a frame rate hit? Im only running cfs3 from a 5-6 year old ASUS ROG G75VW laptop which has a GTX670 graphics card so Ive so far resisted the temptation to run textures through that program in case I get a big hit on the frames. For example I can pack the sky with planes (30+) and my frames drop to around 40 - 50fps with everything set to max for visuals typically with only the one plane it sits around 90-110fps depending on the aircraft both without stutter.
    1964 replies | 421598 view(s)
  • stansdds's Avatar
    Today, 02:50
    MicroSoft used to have a contract with Jeppesen to use their weather servers for real world weather. That contract expired years ago and was not renewed. If you truly want real world weather and have it reliably accessible, you will need a third party program. I still run the boxed version of FSX and use Active Sky 2012 for weather.
    1 replies | 29 view(s)
  • stansdds's Avatar
    Today, 02:48
    stansdds replied to a thread Nascar 2019... in Racer's Paddock
    I gotta agree!
    17 replies | 970 view(s)
  • stansdds's Avatar
    Today, 02:46
    stansdds replied to a thread fan coumcil email in Racer's Paddock
    Daytona, Talladega, and Pocono are, in my opinion, the worst tracks. Yes, they can go 200+mph, but there is little passing and, except for Pocono, you are just waiting for a big wreck. I like short track racing and I think 1.5 miles is more than big enough for a NASCAR race.
    1 replies | 45 view(s)
  • shotgunshack's Avatar
    Today, 02:25
    Out of the last 18 years of simming the last two have been my happiest with a new Coffee Lake PC and associated ancilliaries running FSX:SE beautifully. Also as FSX and flight simming in general appears to be losing its appeal ebay has been an absolute paradise for cheap boxed scenery and planes. It seems a shame that so many people struggled for years to make FSX perfect and gave up just as the home computer and Steam came to fruition.
    22 replies | 743 view(s)
  • expat's Avatar
    Today, 02:23
    P3D 64 bit is the quantum leap. I believe some on this thread explaining why they are sticking to FSX may be short changing themselves and perhaps are being - unnecessarily - defeatist, due to a misapprehension of P3D v 4+. I built my rig seven years ago strictly to run FSX. I haven't changed a thing since jumping to P3D when they went to 64 bit. People here may correct me - I have not researched the specs in a while - but my understanding has been the whole rationale of 64 bit was to if anything reduce the demand on available cpu/gpu and memory so that - in my case at least - my FPS actually doubled going from FSX to P3D with the same hardware. As gman5250 says, a lot of hardware upgrades can be done today on a tight budget (though Fx cards at least a year ago were very pricey due...
    22 replies | 743 view(s)
  • Mike71's Avatar
    Today, 02:14
    LEX was "run hard and put away wet" in her later years as the dedicated TRACOM CVT/AVT. She was stripped of any combat capability so as not count in the Navy carrier force structure. Berthed in Pensacola she worked the Gulf of Mexico coastline to host the day CQ requirements of basic and advanced flight students. Qualification required satisfactory completion of (at least during my career up into the 90's): All TRACOM qualifications were DAY ONLY - 2 touch and goes - 6 traps - The T-28s / TS-2s got 6 deck launches - T-2/F-9/TA-4 students got 6 cat shots. Depending on the weather and other operational scheduling, LEX would transit westward towards Corpus Christi and operate near the coastline to service monthly qual periods for the advanced jet squadrons at NAS Beevilee and...
    36 replies | 3699 view(s)
  • pomme homme's Avatar
    Today, 01:55
    Is the novel feature that the designer believed that any fool could fly it?
    18716 replies | 2718416 view(s)
  • Catboat's Avatar
    Today, 00:49
    Thanks Heywooood, Gman5250, and all. Though I think it is inevitable that eventually I may have to upgrade, I started off with FS9 and then on to FSX with which I am totally happy. My main concern is like Heywooood states, all the earlier models that I have would be extremely expensive to replace. Most developers now offer a choice, e.g. Carenado with its tick the box: FSX, FSX Steam, P3D etc. I have opened accounts with most of the payware developers I use, so I believe that hopefully, should I go to P3D in the future, that those models I have already purchased, could be re-downloaded through "My Account" to P3D. It would still mean a lot of work, but at least the money has already been spent. Milviz products have always been excellent, at last count I have 8, and I would hate to...
    22 replies | 743 view(s)
  • giruXX's Avatar
    Today, 00:33
    got it: Norris Foolproof Aeroplane 1930
    18716 replies | 2718416 view(s)
  • Frosty's Avatar
    Yesterday, 23:50
    Can you give an example? It could be that it is either too small or too big. Too small means that it's so far away you can barely see it (like the bucket I did) and if it is too big, you're inside the model. Try zooming in or out and maybe rotate your view to see if something changes. BTW, if you're looking for dimensions, I have a list of most models I made.
    1 replies | 47 view(s)
  • Portia911's Avatar
    Yesterday, 23:02
    Portia911 replied to a thread Some things I've noticed in X-Plane
    er . . . yeah, or - you could take Mike's word for it (!) :dizzy:
    4 replies | 123 view(s)
  • MaskRider's Avatar
    Yesterday, 22:57
    tres mas...
    44 replies | 1217 view(s)
  • MaskRider's Avatar
    Yesterday, 22:52
    One last quick trip featuring Peperez's Sikorsky JRS-1 flying from Nonouti Atoll to Tabiteuea Atoll
    44 replies | 1217 view(s)
  • heywooood's Avatar
    Yesterday, 20:09
    Yes well to be clear - I have no problem upgrading my hardware and laying out some dollars to do so. That is all money well spent. I think your assertion that developing for so many various flight sims is expensive is unassailable. And that building virtual models for the 64bit sims is exceedingly difficult making developers even more vulnerable to market ‘failure’ when a product release falls far short of sales expectations. This to my mind makes ongoing FSX development a bit MORE attractive to indivdual and small house developers who want to make money without the overhead. Again - I dont mind buying new hardware when there is a quantum leap in CPU / GPU technology - thats money well spent. What I refuse to do at this point is buy things like libraries of scenery and aircraft I...
    22 replies | 743 view(s)
  • Mark's Avatar
    Yesterday, 19:50
    There was a thread at Flightsim not long ago where the user couldn’t get REX weather to work. Maybe they pulled the plug on internet weather updates.
    2 replies | 122 view(s)
  • gman5250's Avatar
    Yesterday, 19:44
    From my chair: All of the above comments are valid and indicative of a common dilemma. Technology and markets are always moving forward. If I may, I'd like to add one or two additional observations. I find myself in a situation where I am more or less forced to build a completely new system, with very limited resources. I am, of course, in need of a system that is capable of not only running a 64bit simulation platform, but also effectively managing resource intensive art, video & 3D modeling software. After some concentrated research I find that I will be able to pull off my rebuild for less than I had originally forecast, and move up to a Generation 9 system. Am I making sacrifices to make it happen? Sure. For those who are comfortable in FSX 32bit that's a great thing....
    22 replies | 743 view(s)
More Activity