Lefteris Kalamaras

Update - January 2017

287 posts in this topic

This thread is drifting way off track so let me clarify a couple of things quickly. 

We have every intention to release the A320 for P3D.

We are not going to wait months for LM to produce another hotfix.

We are working around the clock on this - if LM can help, that's great. If not - we'll be taking additional steps with the A320-X to mitigate (as much as we can) the memory problems introduced in P3D v3.4. 

18 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
2 minutes ago, Andrew Wilson said:

This thread is drifting way off track so let me clarify a couple of things quickly. 

We have every intention to release the A320 for P3D.

We are not going to wait months for LM to produce another hotfix.

We are working around the clock on this - if LM can help, that's great. If not - we'll be taking additional steps with the A320-X to mitigate (as much as we can) the memory problems introduced in P3D v3.4. 

Thanks Andrew.

I do appreciate what it must be like for you guys, my first few days back at work this year have been similar...

Wish you guys the best of luck in getting it sorted asap.

Wes

Share this post


Link to post

Ok guys now stop complaining and let the poor guys work ;)

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post

Hi Lefteris -- interfacing with Simulator Solutions Simstacks would be fantastic. 

https://simulatorsolutions.com.au/

Their solution provides compatibility with genuine Airbus hardware, and ARINC429. 

I am sure you have also been in contact with Christoph ( http://www.cockpit-concept.de/catalog/ ) and have looked at his hardware? Again they are designed to drive original hardware. 

Thank you,

Ben

Soarbywire.com

 

Share this post


Link to post

Great news Andy, it must be very frustrating for your team and beta testers. keep her lit! :)

Share this post


Link to post
19 hours ago, Lefteris Kalamaras said:

The main part of the work is done, there are no 'major bugs' remaining that are stalling the release currently on our end.

Then release it.

We understand the FSL is a weighty beast. I've already taken steps to reduce the load my sim places on my machine in anticipation of the release. You won't have to do so much firefighting because we know there aren't as many users of P3D and performance issues in P3D (memory aside) don't have the effect they do in FSX - P3D is much smoother at lower frame rates.

 

Share this post


Link to post
2 minutes ago, Tigh said:

Then release it.

See my avatar.

7 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
14 minutes ago, Tigh said:

Then release it.

 

Give them a break. Andrew just gave us some more comforting news, there's little more they can do and nothing more we can ask.

Share this post


Link to post

I just bought the FSX version because of the promised P3D upgrade option. Hopefully LM works on a stable P3Dv3.5 which has a better VAS recovery as 3.4. I went back to v3.3.5 and VAS problems are solved.

It is dissapointing to read that the P3D bus will not be released in the near future. Hope there will be a refund if there should never be a release of a 32bit P3D airbus version.

 

Share this post


Link to post
1 minute ago, Cargostorm said:

It is dissapointing to read that the P3D bus will not be released in the near future. Hope there will be a refund if there should never be a release of a 32bit P3D airbus version.

If you guys can't read - there is very little point in us posting any updates. 

16 people like this

Share this post


Link to post

But if the problem with P3D is OOM for not everybody, why not do again an early access but this time with P3D, on this way you'll be able to see for which users the problems come from, and not with I don't know how many beta tester you're but let say something like 15, you've not enough different configurations to see for who it's gonna work or not.

I can understand that you don't want to release it because it can be bad for your reputation due to the guys for which it's gonna be terrible with OOMs, but the reputation come from Youtube, Facebook fan groupes, info website like fselite, simmarket news, ... , and forums, but if you open an early access and be sure that the P3D version could be VAS killer and let everybody knows that via the informations sources that I spoke about, everyboy will know that the people paying for this upgrade knew that they paid for a possible buggy aircraft but the aim is to fix all the problems ASAP

 

It's my point of view, be transparant and let people knows that the product will be not perfect at this time, but it will make us happier because I bought the Bus just after the FSX release, at this time we thought that the P3D version will take something like few weeks, maybe 2 months, and we we're lot of people buying it and not flying it just to support you with the purchased, but now I'm disappointed and maybe I regret to bought it few months ago

 

So please, release it and we'll be there to report you the problems, it's gonna help quicker to fixe them and for those (like me, ok) who don't have OOMs issues we'll finaly able to enjoy a real bus

 

 

I'm just now at the end of a flight from Fly Tampa EHAM to Aerosoft Bali with the PMDG 773, P3D V3.4 HF2, started at EHAM with 1,20, now at Bali I've 1,16 GB left ... Come on, OOMs issues are not for every one, but the thing is that we can just read the people for who it's not working because they are crying on forums (and I understand it) but we're less to speak about our good working P3D, because... it's normal, we don't have problem, so nothing to say on forums, but I'm sure that for the great majority of the community, all is working good.

Share this post


Link to post
16 minutes ago, iTrekx said:

But if the problem with P3D is OOM for not everybody, why not do again an early access but this time with P3D, on this way you'll be able to see for which users the problems come from, and not with I don't know how many beta tester you're but let say something like 15, you've not enough different configurations to see for who it's gonna work or not

....

 

This has nothing to do with reputation. It's about their support staff aren't that big, and they can't afford to be flooded with complaints regarding poor performance in Prepar3D. It's the same reason, that they made the FSX version available using the early access method... so that they could control and limit the number of support requests.

Share this post


Link to post
8 minutes ago, AndersFG said:

 

This has nothing to do with reputation. It's about their support staff aren't that big, and they can't afford to be flooded with complaints regarding poor performance in Prepar3D. It's the same reason, that they made the FSX version available using the early access method... so that they could control and limit the number of support requests.

Yes but if we know before buying it, that we gonna have some issues, we won't complain about it and just wait, but we'll have it finaly and try to help 

I'll take the example of X Plane, with the release of XP11, some aircraft was not compatible because they we're made for XP10 and not working on the 11, but thanks to the community, 90,00 % of the addons work now on XP11, without any updates (because the devs are waiting for the final release of XP11 to work on updates, but as LM, it's worth update after update (I speak about the public beta of XP11) 

 

So why not on P3D, he community will help to find solutions, that's how we're working on XP11, it's only us who made that majority of aircraft are now working

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, Andrew Wilson said:

This thread is drifting way off track so let me clarify a couple of things quickly. 

We have every intention to release the A320 for P3D.

We are not going to wait months for LM to produce another hotfix.

We are working around the clock on this - if LM can help, that's great. If not - we'll be taking additional steps with the A320-X to mitigate (as much as we can) the memory problems introduced in P3D v3.4. 

@Andrew Wilson Thank you for taking the time to explain this, it's greatly appreciated & puts my mind at ease! I sincerely apologize what i said in my first forum post, I really was not thinking straight, I have no doubt that you and the team are doing everything possible to resolve this small hiccup:) 

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
5 hours ago, Andrew Wilson said:

This thread is drifting way off track so let me clarify a couple of things quickly. 

We have every intention to release the A320 for P3D.

We are not going to wait months for LM to produce another hotfix.

We are working around the clock on this - if LM can help, that's great. If not - we'll be taking additional steps with the A320-X to mitigate (as much as we can) the memory problems introduced in P3D v3.4. 

thats the attitude a dev must have !

if you guys are confident thats its not your product that messes and reduces VAS , go forth sir ! with all guns blazingg :D and release it !  aaaand until you release it you will never know the sh$t storm of complaints thats gonna hit you :D

AAnd there is no valid data to support that P3D users wont complain if you release it at another hypothetical date when P3D gets stable :/

In short , you guys will have to do support either way (hope it gets easier for you guys ) ! and in our community we will always complain :)

 

Kind regards,

jaffer

 

Share this post


Link to post
35 minutes ago, jafferhussain11 said:

In short , you guys will have to do support either way (hope it gets easier for you guys ) ! and in our community we will always complain :)

 

So true, we aren't the most grateful bunch of people to be honest.

Few years ago we didn't have a terrain radar nor a weather radar(something that was said to be next to impossible to replicate,unless weather was properly displayed)

We didn't have airports that were half as complex as they are now,nor the fidelity,nor the visuals.

We didn't have half the things we have now and were still very happy.

Today we have beautiful add ons like the 777,737 the q400 now an amazing a320,we have ground services, we have airports that are a piece of art, we have a beautiful and accurate weather engine and people also have the means to buy and run these add ons on high end and low end setups.It is ridiculous to see how people get impatient about a release date and try to make it look like the developers owe them a favor.

I dont understand why everything is being taken for granted.Go read something about this universe we live in,get your mind blown by the smaller things in life.

We are insignificant creatures.Don't give yourself more importance than is needed.Spread the love,be patient and remember no body owes you anything.The plane will eventually be released.You will only be paying the mere difference.(I can't even imagine the frustration people might feel if they had to pay for a new license).

You will eventually use the software.The developers aren't running away anywhere and neither are you(hopefully)

Please don't let this post get locked as well.

 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
30 minutes ago, 777cap said:

Few years ago we didn't have a terrain radar nor a weather radar(something that was said to be next to impossible to replicate,unless weather was properly displayed)

We didn't have airports that were half as complex as they are now,nor the fidelity,nor the visuals.

We didn't have half the things we have now and were still very happy.

yes it's been a while since our Cold and Dark by Ctrl E :D 

 

Share this post


Link to post
10 minutes ago, Avantime said:

Hmmm....Sharklets, please?

:lol: and a A350 also .... just kidding, guys take your time to get an A320 for P3D that i am sure will be THE Plane of the decade

Share this post


Link to post
11 minutes ago, Avantime said:

Hmmm....Sharklets, please?

Come on, the P3D isnt even out.

Share this post


Link to post
27 minutes ago, Avantime said:

Hmmm....Sharklets, please?

It's more complex than just sticking some sharklets on the engines you know.

3.4 is no better or worse for VAS than any other version of P3D I've used. If you're expecting LM to wave a magic wand and suddenly see it dumping any more than the 100-200Mb max that it has always done then you might as well just wait for a 64bit version.

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
10 minutes ago, Tigh said:

It's more complex than just sticking some sharklets on the engines you know.

3.4 is no better or worse for VAS than any other version of P3D I've used. If you're expecting LM to wave a magic wand and suddenly see it dumping any more than the 100-200Mb max that it has always done then you might as well just wait for a 64bit version.

That's why I think that it's useless to wait more, it's ,not tomorrow that LM will find the magic thing making P3D free of VAS issues, so let us have fun with the Bus and wait after that if a miracle happens :P 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post

Do you think they will include some optimization of the virtual cockpit, so it gets similar frames compared with the pmdg 737?  Right now this plane is super heavy on frames on FSX. 

Share this post


Link to post
51 minutes ago, 787pilotdabomb said:

Do you think they will include some optimization of the virtual cockpit, so it gets similar frames compared with the pmdg 737?  Right now this plane is super heavy on frames on FSX. 

Don't worry, FSX has less FPS than P3D, for me whatever the aircraft, all runs smoother on P3D, even if on FSX I've less addons

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post

Maybe get rid of the 3D modeled circuit breakers in the virtual cockpit as we won't be able to use them in the entertainment version and a lot of people don't even take one look at them...

They probably take away a good amount of polygons. This could be replaced with a texture. I don't know if the team has tested this, but I think this could improve performance a little bit.

4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
6 hours ago, Tigh said:

3.4 is no better or worse for VAS than any other version of P3D I've used. If you're expecting LM to wave a magic wand and suddenly see it dumping any more than the 100-200Mb max that it has always done then you might as well just wait for a 64bit version.

Basically this.

Share this post


Link to post

The only one addon able to push my I7 at 99% with FSX! Unbelievable! I Hope you will fix it with P3D version.. So take your time to give us your best. But an acceptable time please not like 6 months more.

Personally I bought  the FSX version to anticipate my real goal with this Airbus, use it in P3D... 

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, rhadamantys said:

Personally I bought  the FSX version to anticipate my real goal with this Airbus, use it in P3D... 

Think it in another way: Once P3D version will be ready, you will enjoy more the bus cause you are more prepared due the training made using the FSX version :P

As a developer, I would get really frustrated of reading the same things thousand times a day just because you are impatient. I would suggest, to put in the "bad words" of the board "P3D" and "READY" :D

I'm like you guys waiting the P3D version, but please, give them time to debug and make that working properly. They are even helping LM to find the issue about OOM that this is  not really FSL job.

Share this post


Link to post
9 hours ago, 777cap said:

So true, we aren't the most grateful bunch of people to be honest.

Few years ago we didn't have a terrain radar nor a weather radar(something that was said to be next to impossible to replicate,unless weather was properly displayed)

We didn't have airports that were half as complex as they are now,nor the fidelity,nor the visuals.

We didn't have half the things we have now and were still very happy.

Today we have beautiful add ons like the 777,737 the q400 now an amazing a320,we have ground services, we have airports that are a piece of art, we have a beautiful and accurate weather engine and people also have the means to buy and run these add ons on high end and low end setups.It is ridiculous to see how people get impatient about a release date and try to make it look like the developers owe them a favor.

I dont understand why everything is being taken for granted.Go read something about this universe we live in,get your mind blown by the smaller things in life.

We are insignificant creatures.Don't give yourself more importance than is needed.Spread the love,be patient and remember no body owes you anything.The plane will eventually be released.You will only be paying the mere difference.(I can't even imagine the frustration people might feel if they had to pay for a new license).

You will eventually use the software.The developers aren't running away anywhere and neither are you(hopefully)

Please don't let this post get locked as well.

 

Amen to that, cap777. If you think the complaining here is bad just head on over to Avsim and see the whining, bitching and bashing going on over there. It's pathetic. And people keep quoting PMDG as being the shining example of proper coding etc. Laughable stuff. No-one seems to remember that when currencies were in a severe state of flux PMDG chose to start charging in Euros for their products! They eventually relented and went back to the greenback but that one decision alone soured my taste for the company. Plus folks also "conveniently" forget that they are charging full price for the P3D versions of their products whereas FSL has stated just an update price.

I like PMDG products. In fact until the Aerosft bus made it to market I was using their stuff almost exclusively for my tubeliner needs. But they are not the sacred cow people make them out to be. In any case, this has drifted beyond the OP so I will stop here and just ask that people cut FSL some slack and let them do their thing without all the moaning. I wonder sometimes about the maturity levels in the simming world.

Cheers!

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
10 hours ago, Tigh said:

It's more complex than just sticking some sharklets on the engines you know.

Depends on how complex FSLabs wants to go. There's a small improvement in climb performance and drag but in terms of handling qualities it's very subjective. Some real-world pilots report no discernible difference in handling between the variants, while others do.

Share this post


Link to post
4 hours ago, Avantime said:

Depends on how complex FSLabs wants to go. ...

You're kidding, right? Seeing in what depth and detail they've already modeled the current Airbus for FSX, that question should answer itself.

4 hours ago, Avantime said:

... There's a small improvement in climb performance and drag but in terms of handling qualities it's very subjective. Some real-world pilots report no discernible difference in handling between the variants, while others do.

Doesn't matter what subjective feelings there are with regards to flying it. There's some physical properties and technical data which is present and different from the Airbus without sharkelts. That have to be modeled correctly, and that takes quite a bit of time. 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
12 hours ago, AirbusFlyer said:

Maybe get rid of the 3D modeled circuit breakers in the virtual cockpit as we won't be able to use them in the entertainment version and a lot of people don't even take one look at them...

They probably take away a good amount of polygons. This could be replaced with a texture. I don't know if the team has tested this, but I think this could improve performance a little bit.

Completely agree with this one! :P

Share this post


Link to post

Not a dig or complaint.....just for people who dont read though.

VAS.

Now I've not gone digging thought AVSIM fsx for a post on the amount of VAS the FSL bus users. 

But I did a guild 2 years ago on how to reduce the VAS foot print of the PMDG 777, I wonder if any of this will work on the FSL?

No preload sounds, saved 200 mb

No outside model(yer i know its not for everyone, but if you only stay in the VC it's a huge saving.) saved 250MB

Turned down FO side refresh rates on displays as a minimum makes a big fps gain. I use pop up on another screen so halfed the refresh rates on all VC displays. Big FPS gain within the VC. Is this possible with the FSL A320?

If you use FTX vector only have Highways and primary roads main box ticked, beachers ON, everything else OFF, save 300 MB.

Bunch of other things in P3D to long to list here but not aircraft stuff. 

The VAS footprint then on the 777 was around 700-800mb. The above made a huge difference.

I use the PMDG 777 as an e.g because it was the biggest VAS footprint. It was the first aircraft to have OOM pointed at the plane.

I would like to know the foot print of the FSL A320.

Also like above would happy do without 3D  circuit breakers if they dont work etc, anything to reduce VAS and anything that does not work reduced to help FPS.

I would really like to know what the foot print is so we know what saving we need to make. As long as its no higher than the PMDG 777 I dont see what the fuss is about.

So what is The VAS footprint please?

Is there options to "tune" the displays refresh rates?

Thanks.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Nyxx said:

Is there options to "tune" the displays refresh rates?

Thanks.

Yes.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post

Here is an informative post by Beau Hollis in the LM forum:

Quote

Hello all,

I'd like to thank you all again for your reports. We take our user feedback seriously. We spent a good deal of time looking into VAS usage. Some specific bugs were fixed a as result as Adam mentioned previously: 
- Some 3rd-party gauges leaked memory when the panel window resized. That bug dated all the way back to P3Dv1/FSX. We fixed it thanks to a detailed reproduction sample provided by an add-on developer. 
-Another reported issue related to slewing very fast around world in top down. This bug was introduced back in P3Dv2. 

We don't know of any more specific memory bugs at this time. Our recommendation is that users tune their settings and add-on usage to keep within the current memory limits. 

Any time we update the sim, memory usage patterns may vary, and some re-tuning may be required. New features may require memory to implement. For example, as of 3.4, scenery models can now use visibility scripts to be more dynamic. These scripts shouldn't take up much memory, but we can't be sure how a feature like this might interact with add-on content. If an aircraft model with tons of visibility scripts was placed as a scenery model, it's memory footprint might be higher. We understand that for some use-cases, an older version may work better, so we've posted links to past releases to give users the option to go back.

Finally, I'd like to respond to the feedback about memory usage in general. We understand the frustration with OOMs, which is why we worked hard to provide major memory improvements for v3.0. In the move from v2 to v3, many heavy add-on users saw VAS drop by hundreds of megs or more. Performance and memory optimization will remain a high priority for us as the platform evolves. Big changes are often too risky to attempt for a point release or hot fix, which is why our focus has been on addressing specific reproducible bugs. 

http://www.prepar3d.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=6312&t=120967&start=120#p150649

The statement "We fixed it thanks to a detailed reproduction sample provided by an add-on developer" sounds to me like FS Labs is the add-on developer in question.

Share this post


Link to post

There are rumors circling around that LM has released the P3Dv4 SDK to developers. Can FSL speak to the impact this is having on the P3D release?

 

Also, I'm assuming that the AOC Service "Company Datalink Fault" is among things fixed in the next update for FSX, correct?

 

Steve 

Share this post


Link to post

No - that went into HF2. We're still investigating some different areas. 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
9 hours ago, AndersFG said:

You're kidding, right? Seeing in what depth and detail they've already modeled the current Airbus for FSX, that question should answer itself.

Well PMDG did do a visual-model only 747-8 expansion for the v2, so there is precedent for top-tier addon developers making visual model-only expansions. Anyway the version we have isn't even the most complex, there's still the upcoming pro version.

Quote

Doesn't matter what subjective feelings there are with regards to flying it. There's some physical properties and technical data which is present and different from the Airbus without sharkelts. That have to be modeled correctly, and that takes quite a bit of time. 

The biggest challenge with the sharklets is the re-introduction of the Load Alleviation Function (LAF) for the spoilers and ailerons, however I not sure how this will be implemented given limitations in FSX/P3D with regards to turbulence (Do you know that EZDOK v2 can now create actual turbulence?).

Share this post


Link to post
7 hours ago, Nyxx said:

Not a dig or complaint.....just for people who dont read though.

VAS.

Now I've not gone digging thought AVSIM fsx for a post on the amount of VAS the FSL bus users. 

But I did a guild 2 years ago on how to reduce the VAS foot print of the PMDG 777, I wonder if any of this will work on the FSL?

No preload sounds, saved 200 mb

No outside model(yer i know its not for everyone, but if you only stay in the VC it's a huge saving.) saved 250MB

Turned down FO side refresh rates on displays as a minimum makes a big fps gain. I use pop up on another screen so halfed the refresh rates on all VC displays. Big FPS gain within the VC. Is this possible with the FSL A320?

If you use FTX vector only have Highways and primary roads main box ticked, beachers ON, everything else OFF, save 300 MB.

Bunch of other things in P3D to long to list here but not aircraft stuff. 

The VAS footprint then on the 777 was around 700-800mb. The above made a huge difference.

I use the PMDG 777 as an e.g because it was the biggest VAS footprint. It was the first aircraft to have OOM pointed at the plane.

I would like to know the foot print of the FSL A320.

Also like above would happy do without 3D  circuit breakers if they dont work etc, anything to reduce VAS and anything that does not work reduced to help FPS.

I would really like to know what the foot print is so we know what saving we need to make. As long as its no higher than the PMDG 777 I dont see what the fuss is about.

So what is The VAS footprint please?

Is there options to "tune" the displays refresh rates?

Thanks.

 

 

 

 

NVM just found out, thanks!

Share this post


Link to post

@Andrew Wilson so if i am reading this correctly, Lockheed have stated there's no more fixes they can think of that will reduce VAS other than turn your settings down? So are we still waiting for a fix from Lockheed or is that not the case now? I'm a little confused to be honest. Also i would like to add yesterday i did the return flight from Flytampa St.Maarten to FlyTampa Amsterdam in the PMDG 777 with Orbx global and open LC and had no OOMS at all. Perhaps my tweaks are actually working. 

Edited by WayneG
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
3 minutes ago, WayneG said:

@Andrew Wilson so if i am reading this correctly, Lockheed have stated there's no more fixes they can think of that will reduce VAS other than turn your settings down? So are we still waiting for a fix from Lockheed or is that not the case now? I'm a little confused to be honest.

 

I think Andy's post is fairly clear (bold by me):

On 1/11/2017 at 6:55 AM, Andrew Wilson said:

This thread is drifting way off track so let me clarify a couple of things quickly. 

We have every intention to release the A320 for P3D.

We are not going to wait months for LM to produce another hotfix.

We are working around the clock on this - if LM can help, that's great. If not - we'll be taking additional steps with the A320-X to mitigate (as much as we can) the memory problems introduced in P3D v3.4. 

 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
9 hours ago, Nyxx said:

No preload sounds, saved 200 mb

No outside model(yer i know its not for everyone, but if you only stay in the VC it's a huge saving.) saved 250MB

Turned down FO side refresh rates on displays as a minimum makes a big fps gain. I use pop up on another screen so halfed the refresh rates on all VC displays. Big FPS gain within the VC. Is this possible with the FSL A320?

If you use FTX vector only have Highways and primary roads main box ticked, beachers ON, everything else OFF, save 300 MB.

Bunch of other things in P3D to long to list here but not aircraft stuff. 

The VAS footprint then on the 777 was around 700-800mb. The above made a huge difference.

He...that sounds like you are OK with stock airplane....LOL..... 777 is absolutely perfect.....no issues whatsoever. This A320 is good, yes, a bit "heavier"  on VAS but manageable.

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, Avantime said:

Well PMDG did do a visual-model only 747-8 expansion for the v2, so there is precedent for top-tier addon developers making visual model-only expansions. Anyway the version we have isn't even the most complex, there's still the upcoming pro version.

The biggest challenge with the sharklets is the re-introduction of the Load Alleviation Function (LAF) for the spoilers and ailerons, however I not sure how this will be implemented given limitations in FSX/P3D with regards to turbulence (Do you know that EZDOK v2 can now create actual turbulence?).

Uh...you don't want to create that turbulence..... I found it not that great....

Share this post


Link to post