Lefteris Kalamaras

Update - January 2017

287 posts in this topic

Hello all,

I wanted to start this post by wishing you all a Happy New Year!

2016 has been a wonderful year for us at Flight Sim Labs as it was the year we finally released the A320-X for FSX. We wish to take a small moment to humbly thank you for the overwhelmingly supportive comments it has received and for the fact it's now a candidate as the Best Aircraft add-on for 2016 (feel free to vote for us here: https://fselite.net/editorials/fselite-2016-user-awards/ ).

So let's talk about what's to come in 2017:

The next update in line for the A320-X for FSX (which should come very soon now) will feature several bug fixes (autoland flare and the MCDU freeze among the more significant pain points with the current release) as well as improvements in handling (the "sticky" comma key for using the tiller and rudder pedals with a single axis). Expect a more complete list with the update itself which is now in beta testing, as Andrew already discussed.

We'll continue issuing more updates down the line, eventually reaching a large "Service Pack" update which will include some generally wanted missing functionality (detailed WINDS, SEC FPLN etc). We're working on that as we speak, but to do that successfully, we've broken the tasks into smaller updates which fix bugs that you guys have identified, as well as improvements that you feel are necessary to enjoy the aircraft more or bring it in-line with customarily accepted "sim-isms" that might part with what happens in real life, but are helpful when the simmer is using the aircraft without all the necessary hardware that a line pilot has in the cockpit.

What about the P3D version?

Simultaneously with the testing of the FSX update, we're also beta testing the A320-X for P3D. The main part of the work is done, there are no 'major bugs' remaining that are stalling the release currently on our end. A few of you have wondered why we have still not released it therefore, even though the FSX version has now been out for a few months. We are also a bit frustrated with this, however the reasons for the delay could be understood if you also visit the LM forums to notice what's been going on with the latest v3.4 hotfix releases and the issues people are having with memory usage and DXGI_DEVICE errors. We feel that there are still some problems with the current version of P3D that is available and that until the good people at LM have had a chance to resolve those, we are hesitant to release a product only to start receiving complaints for situations which are not quite caused by our software. As such, we're working closely with them to do everything in our power to help them identify and correct those bottlenecks. We'll do our best to keep you updated with our progress on it.

What's going on with the "cockpit builder" features?

We had the opportunity to meet with several hardware vendors during our Lelystad visit in November. All of them were very impressed with the quality and depth of the A320-X and were very eager to have our software drive their hardware (or vice versa? :) ). We've had several discussions with the larger vendors and we are going to be providing interfaces to their hardware to allow such usage. Those interfaces will be available once we have the cockpit builder licensing ready and we expect that we can be providing hardware-specific add-on modules to our A320-X in collaboration with those vendors. So - if you are an interested vendor party or you are a customer who loves particular hardware, feel free to tell your vendor to contact us directly so we can discuss options.

We are also looking into interfacing for freeware vendors (such as LINDA) to allow communication with particular hardware supported by those solutions, but we haven't yet decided the exact licensing specifics for this effort, so more to come on this, a bit later on.

"And the forum? I can't easily find what I need there..."

We have already taken steps to improve the forum structure - you may have noticed we cleaned up our main A320-X support forum, moved helpful "readme first" topics into their own sub-forum and are working hard to further improve or even add some new support facilities. We're examining several options to provide a more streamlined knowledge base as well as an open issue tracking system. You all know we're a small team, so this might take a little longer than we'd like, but please be patient with us as we are doing our best to provide the best experience for everyone! The work continues!

Again - thank you all VERY much for your wonderful support in 2016 - we're looking forward to better serving your simulation needs in 2017 and beyond!

48 people like this

Share this post


Link to post

Take your time and keep up the great work!

Looking forward to test the new updates ;)

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post

Did hotfix 2 from LM not fix the bugs? Or are "we" now waiting for another hotfix from LM before we can see the Bus?

Share this post


Link to post

If your A320 has not got a bigger VAS footprint than the PMDG 777 then I don't see why anyone could point a finger at your A320.

Does it?

 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post

Many thanks for the update; for the moment I am very happy with my FSX version of the bus.

Peter

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post

Thanks for the update Lefteris.

Honestly, I'm beginning to give up on P3D version. It's like a never ending issue. Some are reporting VAS issue while others don't. While  DXGI_ERROR_DEVICE_HUNG  is also not clear, again some having this problem and others don't.

Problem is users are using many addons and it's difficult to pin-point what cause the problem. Chaseplane is still an alpha but I can't say if that has contributed to some of the issue. PTA is modifying shadders . 

Perhaps if FSlabs is installed on vanilla P3D and does not give problem, is that enough to say that the software works fine with P3D?

Hendrik

Share this post


Link to post

thx very much! This is favorite aircraft for simulator, very wait for P3D) These months fly only FSL320

Share this post


Link to post
3 minutes ago, Hendrik said:

Perhaps if FSlabs is installed on vanilla P3D and does not give problem, is that enough to say that the software works fine with P3D?

Hendrik,

You've kind of answered your own question - not many (no one I know at least) runs a vanilla P3D install. Therefore we have to look at testing with 3rd party add-ons to minimise as many conflicts that are either caused by our own add-on, or other add-ons that affect that way our A320 interacts with the simulator.

I'd happily say that amongst the test team that we have a good range of 3rd party add-ons that between us represent a very typical P3D set up.

Tim

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post

Take your time guys, its your product and you can release it when you feel its right. Don't let the naysayers get you down, most of them would buy it when you release it despite what they say about any delays now. I am looking forward to the sticky comma key. I have no problem having to engage the nose wheel steering but holding down a button is a bit awkward. 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post

 I really dont see why you should test other addons for VAS problems. The one thing am sure you know is your VAS foot print if this is no bigger than the PMDG 777 i see no reason why you should keep testing VAS problems within P3D. That's LM problem not yours.

Unless you have a larger footprint that is adding to the problem.

If not why keep us waiting.

Share this post


Link to post
20 minutes ago, Tim Mitchell said:

Hendrik,

You've kind of answered your own question - not many (no one I know at least) runs a vanilla P3D install. Therefore we have to look at testing with 3rd party add-ons to minimise as many conflicts that are either caused by our own add-on, or other add-ons that affect that way our A320 interacts with the simulator.

I'd happily say that amongst the test team that we have a good range of 3rd party add-ons that between us represent a very typical P3D set up.

Tim

Hi Tim,

Thanks for the hard work first of all. That is what's confusing, until how far is each developer responsible to the compatibility of their product and if there is a problem between addons and who is then responsible to fix it?  

I am not a software developer so I can't say much however I imagine if a developer is using P3D SDK should not that give some sort of guarantee of their software compatibility? But if a developer is using method that are not inline with SDK then IMO LM is less obliged to find a work around unless there is a underlying problem with P3D itself. 

The question is HOW do we pin point what causes 'a' problem/s with so many addons and WHO is then responsible to fix it? Fortunately I don't have any VAS issue of CTD with my P3D but I also have a reasonable settings, NOT all maxed out and 4K texture. I do wonder how are others having such issues? I know a guy, in the virtual airlines I am a member of, who is having OOM issue with FT EHAM and turns out he is using 4K texture, AI traffic, Orbx vector as well. To me that is looking for OOM but most people would blame it on the software. So again how far does a developer responsible to make 'fix or find a work around' to such 'problem'?

I am waiting patiently and not rushing but I do wonder my mentioned statement above. Also at what point will FSlabs team are pleased with P3D version? coz it will never be a bug/ problem free?

Hendrik

Share this post


Link to post

@Hendrik,

You hit another nail on the head! It is exactly that. Where does one developers responsibility end and anothers start?

This is where cooperation with other developers helps solve these problems quicker - especially when you can find out why a certain problem is occurring. One comes to mind which I think was related to the MilViz DLL's automatically loading even if you didn't load any of their products. Whilst an easy fix is to make any dll's open on demand when required, it shows that some of these issues can be deeply imbedded an difficult to pinpoint exactly.

A lot of problems come through trial and error, disabling one thing or another to see what the effect is. It can be very tedious at times but its satisfying when you find the culprit!

As developers have got bolder with the add-ons they make, the more they need to work around the SDK, tricking certain functions to get the desired output for example which as you can imagine provides its own headaches.

I won't comment why one user may get an OOM and another may not - that's a whole different kettle of fish.

Tim

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post

@Tim Mitchell

Thanks for the comment and your hard work. I do hope that any of the developer @Lefteris Kalamaras or @Andrew Wilson or others would be willing to give a light on this question :  Also at what point will FSlabs team is pleased with P3D version? coz it will never be a bug/ problem free?

Thanks again for the team works

Hendrik

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Nyxx said:

 I really dont see why you should test other addons for VAS problems. The one thing am sure you know is your VAS foot print if this is no bigger than the PMDG 777 i see no reason why you should keep testing VAS problems within P3D. That's LM problem not yours.

Unless you have a larger footprint that is adding to the problem.

If not why keep us waiting.

David,

We're not testing P3D (or other add-ons) for VAS problems. We're not quite happy that, at this stage, it would be a good idea to release on a platform that is causing a number of issues for a number of people which could - as Lefteris stated in the OP - be wrongly interpreted as being our fault.

Your insistent mention of comparisons to the 777 also assume that everyone on the testing team owns the 777 for P3D - what if we don't? I appreciate that a lot of people (yourself included) are anxious to get your hands on the P3D release, however you need to consider the potential ramifications to us if we release and there are memory issues due to an unstable platform. This is on top of the fact that there are a couple of bugs in the latest public release of the FSX version which are show-stoppers (show-stoppers for people who have paid a lot of money for our product), and we need to iron these out before we can switch focus to a P3D release.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
37 minutes ago, Tim Mitchell said:

 Where does one developers responsibility end and anothers start?

As long as your A320 works fine with a vanila P3D without to bigger VAS foot print or very poor fps it ends there. Perhaps compatibility with AS16 ofc aside. 

But people OOMs problems should not be your problem. 

@Karl

You dont need to own the 777 to know it VAS footprint.(its know to be "high") If you have show stopper for FSX then I understand. But unlike the OP your now saying you need to fix FSX version before working on P3D. OK so the wait will not be a sort one. So be it....saddly.

Share this post


Link to post

Sorry to say this, but your explanation that the P3D version is not yet released is just nonsense in my opinion. I have no problem with 3.4 or 3.4h2. So you are saying because some people are having problems with this version, all other with no problem may not enjoy your product?

The only reason to delay it would be if your specific product would increase this problems, but you are saying that this is not the case.

At the end i feel patronized and punished for something that's not my fault.

4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post

I'm so surprised about all problems some users report...


I use the last P3D fix with chaseplane, ActiveSky and a lot of addons you could imagine with 0 faults.

I can understand what Lefteris says about releasing the P3D A320 with those reports, but we some of us have been waiting for months...

Whatever the solution was, i will accept it.

Share this post


Link to post

Very odd decision to hold a release due to issues caused to some people. I deal with tons of friends flying P3D and not a single one has issues of any kind.

Oh well, can't really do anything but to be disappointed and wait.... more.

4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
8 minutes ago, Nyxx said:

@Karl

You dont need to own the 777 to know it VAS footprint.(its know to be "high") If you have show stopper for FSX then I understand. But unlike the OP your now saying you need to fix FSX version before working on P3D. OK so the wait will not be a sort one. So be it....saddly.

No, I'm not saying that. We (testers) have an FSX version in our hands now that should fix the issues. Once we've tested and released, we'll turn immediately to P3D (which incidentally, has also had these same bug fixes as the FSX version).

Share this post


Link to post

Thanks for the update! Can't wait to P3D version...


Enviado desde mi iPhone utilizando Tapatalk Pro

Share this post


Link to post

The range and scope of the replies to this update information(Thanks for the update by the way) is a sad reflection of the world in which we now live.We want it now!

The development team will never satisfy every customer with whatever is said in the update ,if that information does not suit that customer.We simmers range from early teenagers to a lot of the so called senior brigade living in a lot of different continents.We all have a variety of expectations and we all want our particular problem or wish to be at the front of the queue.Real life is just not like that.We all have to learn to have a lot more patience with life in general and with developers in particular.

People who have taken part in beta test teams will be aware that a simple fix often throws up unexpected side effects and it is at this point that a lot of patience is required within a  beta team.We had in the course of 24 hrs three lots of files to swop in order to correct a problem which over three sim platforms means a lot of testing time.No it is not as simple as some simmers seem to think.

We should all take a step back and reflect on what is being said and respect the developers judgement on these matters.They are the ones who have to have an eye on the commercial future of the project. 

 

4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post

Great news..I hope you guys cross more milestones this year!

I realise I'm very quickly becoming that person.. But is performance being given importance in these updates? 

Is it part of the discussions you have internally.. More ways to increase performance.. Or try to bring it to the same level as other complex add-ons by other developers. I understand this add-on is a few Magnitude of orders more resource intensive than other add-ons.. (for good reason)But there have been complaints about certain parts of this add-on causing low performance.(I personally have no proof, nor the means to prove if those things are in fact causing bad performance)

I just hope, trying to optimize performance.. Especially on the non overkill humble setups forms some part of your discussions. 

I wish the entire team the best of luck in both your personal and professional lives and hope this year is peaceful(slim chance... Oh well) 

Warm regards

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, Tim Mitchell said:

Hendrik,

You've kind of answered your own question - not many (no one I know at least) runs a vanilla P3D install. Therefore we have to look at testing with 3rd party add-ons to minimise as many conflicts that are either caused by our own add-on, or other add-ons that affect that way our A320 interacts with the simulator.

I'd happily say that amongst the test team that we have a good range of 3rd party add-ons that between us represent a very typical P3D set up.

Tim

Why not do another early acces for P3D, with that you'll got more P3D user with their config specs and P3D (with all the thirds party addons) 

I'm using the A320 with FSX SE but it's boring to use FSX when you're used to P3D and the addons have a license for both FSX or P3D, so no Active Sky, somes sceneries are missing too, ect 

With an early acces you'll make us happy and find more quickly what is the cause of the problems, like an open beta

 

 

EDIT: When I was reading the thread I was agree with few of guys here, most of peoples having issues and OOM with P3D are sometimes guys who are trying to get more than what their computer can handle, we know that some addons are kind of VAS killers, but few peoples ignore the fact and install tons of addons and after that, they're surprise that they've got an OOM, it's not a P3D or FS Labs problem, it's a problem with the guy behind the screen, because those guys have problems not just with the A320, but with all of their addons. 

We all know that the FSL 320 is heavy and require a good computer, so we have to make right decisions and buy it or not with regard of our specs

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post

Would it not be possible to release with p3d compatibility certification up to p3d V3.3, and exclude 3.4 until such time these issues are fixed on LM's end?

That excludes you from liability of the 3.4 issues, if it is stated as not compatible with this version.

 

P.S - Thanks for the update, although this is my first post I have been following the forums closely, albeit silently, in anticipation for the p3d release.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post

Not sure why we are bringing 777 into mix as "well known" issues and making excuses for something else. We can argue about this till cows go home, but it is very simple, we all have different machines, set-ups, add-ons.... And that's why we all have different experience. I see this blame game often. But everywhere is same, in every industry these days.

My suggestion to Dev Team is to work on SP1 for FSX, not to keep bringing updates every month, because as far as I can see not all of us have issues ( I realized that this bird is so complex, that if you missed something you will get errors and issues not necessarily faulted by FSLAB, I.E. Autopilot, etc). Once all bugs are compiled and all improvements are made than issue SP1. In regards to P3D, can't say much, If you are at test stage I guess you will solve it soon and make it available on that platform. So much hype about P3D "stability"...LOL  

I am happy to say that with tons of add-ons I have no such issue. But if you insist my VAS usage is bigger with A320X than with 777, but still stable. Go figure...

Keep up good work in 2017....Bus is good, need few "touch ups" and all will be good!

 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post

Hi Lefteris, 

Thank you for the update. Though not what we was expecting. 

I would like to point out some of my thoughts about the P3D release as I have already bought the FSX version only to support the team to bring the P3D version out, which I am interested in.

I am running the latest P3D version, and I face VAS issues. Meaning, I cannot complete a flight from A to B in some places having everything turned on. I run quite every add-on that exists on P3D right now except AI traffic and ATC. However, I am aware of the VAS problems and what I normally do is re-launch the flight at least one time before T/D. Sometimes I can do it more than one times. I know its not the most realistic way but with an SSD drive you are up and running again in 2min time. That way I can start approaching a heavy scenery with around 1Gb of VAS which is more than enough. 

I write that to point out, that the sim is no perfect , we know that. If you just postpone the P3D release waiting for perfection this may take months.

I think the team should also think of us  who supported by paying the FSX version waiting for P3D. I know, it was our choice, but in my opinion the VAS issues are not your problem in order to wave for a release. One solution would be to release a P3D alpha version, making an agreement that the user has to sign before installing, stating that there are VAS issues coming from P3D. So you won't have threads here stating that it is unflyable because of VAS. I don't complaing to PMDG for relaunching my sim due to VAS, as I know its LM's fault. 

Everyone would appreciate if you would do that, if you are happy with it as you told us. Knowing about the VAS issue, no-one will complain. For those who want a complete perfect simulation they can just skip buying it and wait for the final version after LM fixes.

I am sure most of the people re-launch their sims when VAS gets low, so its not a big deal.

Please, consider my view.

 

5 people like this

Share this post


Link to post

I thought you would also do a similar release for P3D as you did for FSX with the early adopters. This situation now would be a great chance to use that, because I for example have had so far 0 problems with the newest version of P3D. I run on quite newish hardware with pretty good fps and no problems with VAS, I can fly into Flytampa Amsterdam with Dense autogen settings, no problems whatsoever. 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
53 minutes ago, iTrekx said:


I'm using the A320 with FSX SE but it's boring to use FSX when you're used to P3D and the addons have a license for both FSX or P3D, so no Active Sky, somes sceneries are missing too, ect 

 

May I ask why it is boring to use FSX after P3D. Just put in a single sentence or two. I've done a lot of research about changing over to P3D but I'd really like you to qualify that statement above. Could be the clincher for me.

 

Cheers,

 

Jim

 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
14 minutes ago, J P said:

May I ask why it is boring to use FSX after P3D. Just put in a single sentence or two. I've done a lot of research about changing over to P3D but I'd really like you to qualify that statement above. Could be the clincher for me.

 

Cheers,

 

Jim

 

Sorry if some of my sentences are not realy clear, as you can see english isn't my mother language, I try to do my best, but for me, what I don't like of using again FSX SE is firstly that lot of addons have one license for FSX and another for P3D, I'm a P3D user for a while so lot of my addons are for P3D only and to fly the A320 I had to instal again my FSX, but on it to make FSX nicer to see, I just have Rex 4, an old AS next (now on P3D I'm used to have AS16 + ASCA ... not the same graphism), can't use FSpassenger also, I had to redo my FSuipc config (I hate doing that and few things are wrong), you see, my problem is somethings like that, to reinstall lot of addons just for one plane that we know we will pay for it on P3D, on final, that makes my FSX is kind of ugly and not friendly to use and after that I take another plane, fly on P3D and on it I have something realy awesome to see, to be clear, I'll attach 2 pictures, to let you know why I prefer P3D

The first is the FSL 320 on FSX SE with the best that I can get on FSX to make it nicer to see

1484068266-2017-1-9-14-15-1-343.png

The second one is oon P3D, with AS16 + ASCA, look this picture, then come back on the FSX one and look how the clouds are ugly 

1484068503-2016-12-26-23-47-15-727.png

 

 

 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
4 hours ago, Lefteris Kalamaras said:

What's going on with the "cockpit builder" features?

We had the opportunity to meet with several hardware vendors during our Lelystad visit in November. All of them were very impressed with the quality and depth of the A320-X and were very eager to have our software drive their hardware (or vice versa? :) ). We've had several discussions with the larger vendors and we are going to be providing interfaces to their hardware to allow such usage. Those interfaces will be available once we have the cockpit builder licensing ready and we expect that we can be providing hardware-specific add-on modules to our A320-X in collaboration with those vendors. So - if you are an interested vendor party or you are a customer who loves particular hardware, feel free to tell your vendor to contact us directly so we can discuss options.

We are also looking into interfacing for freeware vendors (such as LINDA) to allow communication with particular hardware supported by those solutions, but we haven't yet decided the exact licensing specifics for this effort, so more to come on this, a bit later on.

 

Great Update wish there are more, what about FlightDecksolution InterfaceIT hardware and modules?

My FDS320 cockpit (currently interfacing the overhead) is waiting FSLABS 320!!! if you need a beta tester let me know...

14585644_10209054808681693_428972671_o.jpg

IMG_1780.JPG

4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
1 minute ago, dcutugno said:

Great Update wish there are more, what about FlightDecksolution InterfaceIT hardware and modules?

My FDS320 cockpit (currently interfacing the overhead) is waiting FSLABS 320!!! if you need a beta tester let me know...

LOVELY setup!

I think Peter Cos contacted us at some point, so we'll try to get back in touch.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post

I have doubts that significant improvements in memory usage can be expected in P3D until a 64-bit version is released, especially taking into account that more content, which increases memory usage is being released.

 

I am flying in Europe and having ORBX Global, Vector, EuropeLC and other European sceneries, Rex 4 TD, Soft Clouds,  Worldwide Airports HD, AS16 and ASCA, PMDG 737 and 777, EZCA v2, UT2 (modified with HD repaints and adding as many of repaints as I was able to find)  I am experiencing OOM at Aerosoft Frankfurt V2 only. However, even this can be solved by reducing LOD from 6.5 to 4.5, disabling AI traffic during approach to EDDF.


As for DXGI_DEVICE errors I was experiencing them also at EDDF only. So this might be just a coincidence that I had both OOM and DXGI_DEVICE errors at EDDF or may be both issues are related.


In addition to that there is quite a number of complaints regarding high VAS usage, OOM issues as well as low performance issues with Aerosoft Frankfurt V2 on Aerosoft forums.


Does it mean that if LM are unable to improve the memory usage issue to resolve the issue with DXGI_DEVICE errors to the necessary state within the 32-bit version of P3D we should not expect FSLABS A320 release for the 32-bit version of P3D?

Share this post


Link to post

I really hope some additional keyboard assignments will make it to release soon.   We currently only have 2 in the FSL menu (accessed from FSX), so could sorely benefit from more - especially for the FCU controls.

 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
6 minutes ago, The_Richtig said:

P3d - worst. News. Ever. 

Agreed. I'm curious, is the FSX better in VAS than P3D 3.4? A comparison could be made easily using the same number of add-ons. One of the reasons I abandoned FSX was OOM. P3D is not in any case worse than FSX in VAS management from my experience. People on FSX & FSX:SE here, could give us an example of a flight that they do and do not get an OOM? I would be interested.

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, iTrekx said:

Sorry if some of my sentences are not realy clear, as you can see english isn't my mother language, I try to do my best, but for me, what I don't like of using again FSX SE is firstly that lot of addons have one license for FSX and another for P3D, I'm a P3D user for a while so lot of my addons are for P3D only and to fly the A320 I had to instal again my FSX, but on it to make FSX nicer to see, I just have Rex 4, an old AS next (now on P3D I'm used to have AS16 + ASCA ... not the same graphism), can't use FSpassenger also, I had to redo my FSuipc config (I hate doing that and few things are wrong), you see, my problem is somethings like that, to reinstall lot of addons just for one plane that we know we will pay for it on P3D, on final, that makes my FSX is kind of ugly and not friendly to use and after that I take another plane, fly on P3D and on it I have something realy awesome to see, to be clear, I'll attach 2 pictures, to let you know why I prefer P3D

The first is the FSL 320 on FSX SE with the best that I can get on FSX to make it nicer to see

1484068266-2017-1-9-14-15-1-343.png

The second one is oon P3D, with AS16 + ASCA, look this picture, then come back on the FSX one and look how the clouds are ugly 

1484068503-2016-12-26-23-47-15-727.png

 

 

 

Thanks for taking the time to respond. I appreciate your predicament.

Share this post


Link to post
13 minutes ago, Ifikratis said:

Agreed. I'm curious, is the FSX better in VAS than P3D 3.4? A comparison could be made easily using the same number of add-ons. One of the reasons I abandoned FSX was OOM. P3D is not in any case worse than FSX in VAS management from my experience. People on FSX & FSX:SE here, could give us an example of a flight that they do and do not get an OOM? I would be interested.

Never have an OOM with the FSL 320

3 minutes ago, J P said:

Thanks for taking the time to respond. I appreciate your predicament.

You're welcome

Share this post


Link to post
8 minutes ago, iTrekx said:

Never have an OOM with the FSL 320

I would need specific add-ons & scenery scenario. Then I can make the same flight in P3D on a heavy payware aircraft to test that :)

Share this post


Link to post
Just now, Ifikratis said:

I would need specific add-ons & scenery scenario. Then I can make the same flight in P3D on a PMDG to test that :)

A320, Rex 4, ASN, ORBX global+ OpenLC + vector, Chase Plane, All the sceneries (previous flight was EHAM (Fly Tampa) to Genoa (Aerosoft) then goes to LSGG (RFS)

But those kind of flight I don't have OOM on P3D too

The only aircraft with which I already have OOM was Concorde (FSL) but long time ago and more recently the TFDI 717 on this first version (the worst) 

On P3D I use the same addons but AS16 + ASCA instead of ASN

Share this post


Link to post

Ok, we are running kind of the same setup then. I also don't have an OOM many times but just to be safe I restart before T/D usually. The worst places for VAS is EGLL and CYUL, on Simwings and FlyTampa sceneries.

Its a pity they don't release the P3D version, while we can just restart the sim at some point in flight and solve any VAS problems. Except its so bad on the FSL in P3D that you get an OOM right on the gate. 

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, ai_ab said:

P3D until a 64-bit version is released

They are not capable making this to work...so we sound like optimists about 64 bit. Not sure how easy that would be (heard that they would have to re-write everything and not worth $$, remember, everything is $$), but would be like Holy Grail of personal Flight Sim. As far as I can see X11 would be future (according to some), but P3D and FSX is what you see.

I wish I am wrong.....  

Share this post


Link to post
26 minutes ago, Ifikratis said:

FlyTampa sceneries

All FT are HEAVY!! I have Boston as well and that one is light and never issues, but it says available only as DX9....

Share this post


Link to post

I use FSuipc so I have an auto save every 30 secs, even if I've an OOM I can reload my aircraft just after it 

 

So yeah, for me, fly it "like that" won't be a problem, because in general I don't have OOMs and even if it happens, I'll be able to report it to help devs and btw continue my flight just after

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now