[jhb_airlines] Re: FSX SP2

  • From: "Paul Reynolds" <paul@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: <jhb_airlines@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2007 22:53:05 -0000

Both THTG and Goflight are beyond my megre means but I know thaat Matrox
have dealt with the THTG issue.  There's a patch on their site.


-----Original Message-----
From: jhb_airlines-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:jhb_airlines-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Gerry Winskill
Sent: 18 December 2007 23:23
To: jhb_airlines@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [jhb_airlines] Re: FSX SP2

I'm still feeling guilty about not installing SP2 but caution seems to
be indicated by forum postings.
On UK2000 GS is having problems getting his own scenery to appear. There are
reports of THTG units requiring a workaround The Goflight forum reports GF
users having Databridge errors during flights!

I'm beginning to suspect Aces have a day job, involved with the
commisioning of National Health IT systems!

Gerry Winskill

Gerry Winskill wrote:

> Hi Paul,
> Very interesting!
> I had intended installing SP2 today but am holding off, after a
> Horizon Forum report of one chap's system suffering a severe setback
> and another being screwed because his FSX Registry entries were wonky.
> Accepting that my own are 100% is a bit of a leap of faith!
> I suppose my first problem is trying to decide "What's in it for me?".
> At present I fly with fps at the locked target level of 25fps,
> wherever not in close proximity to airports. On the ground, taking off
> and landing can see this figure drop through a range that bottoms at
> about 10fps. In FSX I find performance still acceptable at this level.
> The closer I fly to the England Scotland border and the higher my
> framerates and smoother performance. I don't get blurries and can live
> with texture load times that don't exceed three minutes. I have a
> selection of scenery, Freeware and Payware, that may be adversely
> affected. Ditto for a reasonably effective AI setup.
> My settings differ from yours in relatively few areas, as follows: FPS
> locked at 25 Lens Flare  off
> AA On, via FSX
> Aircraft Global Settings at Custom
> 3D Cockpit  off
> Aircraft Shadows on Self  off
> Scenery Complexity  Extremely Dense
> Autogen  Normal
> Special Effects Details   High
> Airline Traffic  80%
> GA Traffic   80%
> Airport Vehicles  low
> Road Traffic  31%
> Ships and Ferries  74%
> Leisure Craft   73 %
> Via nVidia Control Panel I have Anisotropic at  x4.
> So, overall, my sliders are probably a bit higher than your own with
> framerates that sound as though they might be comparable. I guess that
> puts me in a position where the only incentive to instal SP2, apart
> from an emotional pull in that direction, is if it offers the prospect
> of higher framerates and / or significantly improved appearance. What
> I've read so far suggests it's unrealistic to expect it to do either
> of these things, so I may well instal and take half a step forward and
> a couple back; by way of problems with existing scenery  and aircraft.
> It even seems reasonable to assume that SP2 is in part designed to
> minimise the effect of what are, for FSX, underspecified systems. I'm
> all in favour of that but it would have been nice if Aces could have
> been a bit more specific on their targets. That isn't a moan, just an
> attempt to clarify the circumstances, for myself.
> Until today's report(s) of OS damage etc, I'd intended to try it since
> I understand that SP2 (not the Acceleration Pack version) can be
> removed via the Control Panel. The reported problems of a few make me
> much more undecided.
> Beyond SP2 and DX9, I don't see myself taking the next step, to DX X.
> That involves switching to Vista. Since the DX X related promised step
> change in visual quality has now been withdrawn, I don't see the point
> of replacing my expensive 8800GTX with an even more expensive one and
> changing to a new OS.
> I can see the logic of drawing a line after FSX and saying FSXI will
> have no backward compatibillity. I'm not sure what they can offer that
> would make it attractive to ditch most existing scenery and aircraft;
> perhaps that's down to a lack of vision on my part. So it looks as
> though I'll pull up the drawbridge and stop at FSX.
> Gerry Winskill
> Paul Reynolds wrote:
>> I've been running the Acceleration pack for a few weeks and generally
>> I'm
>> impressed.  I'm getting stable frame rates in the mid 20's.  I have
>> to say
>> that I think we're in that phase where the real benefits are yet to be
>> realised.  OK so there are backward compatability issues but, I'm led to
>> believe, these are where designers have deviated from the FSX SDK
>> standard.
>> OK so this is really irritating if, like Gerry, you have designed
>> scenery
>> which is running OK but then throws a wobbler when the software is
>> patched.
>> I can understand how frustrating that is but I think these are teething
>> troubles that as SP2 settles down we'll leave behind us. Gerry's
>> issues of
>> incompatability with SP2 are because of elements being combined using
>> drag
>> and drop software for placement.  As he has only have partial control
>> over
>> the initial design elements, any problems with those not specifically
>> designed by him can cascade down causing problems with the finished
>> product.
>> Where he is controlling the design, he can update to account for
>> changing
>> standards.
>> Actually I find it interesting that as Aces design FS11 they've
>> already indicated they do not intend to support backward
>> compatability. So any hopes of designing work to carry over is dead
>> before it's started!  Or is it? If
>> any design you do moving forward is done on a modular (object
>> orientated)
>> basis it should be relatively easy to update to reflect changing
>> standards.
>> For those who wonder how I'm getting the stable mid 20's frame rates,
>> here's
>> how my set up using the 8800GTS:
>> Within FSX:
>> Graphics:
>> Frame Rate : Unlimited
>> Global Texture : V. High
>> Lens Flare : On
>> Light Bloom : Off
>> Avanced Animation : On
>> Info Text : Continuous
>> Filtering Annisotropic (see Graphics Card settings below)
>> Anti-Aliasing : Off (see Graphics Card settings below)
>> Aircraft:
>> Set Ultra-High
>> 3-D Virtual Cockpit : On
>> Aircraft Casts Shadows on ground : On
>> Aircraft casts shadows on self : On
>> Aircraft landing lights illuminate ground : On
>> Scenery:
>> Level of detail Radius: large
>> Mesh Complexity: 100
>> Mseh Resolution : 1m
>> Texture Resolution: 7cm
>> Water effects: Max. 2X
>> Land Textures : On
>> Scenery Complexity: Sparse
>> Autogen density: Sparse
>> Ground Scenery Shadows : Off
>> Special Efects Details : Medium
>> Weather:
>> Cloud Draw distance : 60mi/96km
>> Thermal visulaization: Off
>> Detailed Clouds : Maximum
>> Traffic:
>> Airline Traffic: 7%
>> General Aviation: 7%
>> Airport vehicle density: minimum
>> Road vehicles: 0%
>> Ships & Ferries : 15%
>> Leisure Boats 15%
>> Other graphics settings (set outside FSX):
>> Anti-Aliasing : On, Supersampling 4xS with Gamma Correction
>> Anisotropic Filtering : On, 8x Texture Quality : Quality
>> Trilinear Optimization : On
>> Negative LOD BIAS : Clamp
>> Paul
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: jhb_airlines-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> [mailto:jhb_airlines-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of franklyn
>> fisher
>> Sent: 18 December 2007 13:43
>> To: jhb_airlines@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> Subject: [jhb_airlines] Re: FSX SP2
>> Somehow I do not think that SP2 is the culprit.
>> It has to be something else on his sytem triggered by it.
>> I have been running SP2 for 3 days now, with narry a problem.
>> FF

Other related posts: