Alan_A

member
  • Content count

    98
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Alan_A

  1. Thankfully I don't have much by way of tweaks in the cfg - not any, that I'm aware of - but at minimum, on the upgrade to 4.3, I'll rebuild the cfg as required and then maybe leave it close to default settings for a while and see what happened. Hoping to find that in the matter of performance adjustments, less is more.
  2. I did some forum searches and couldn't come up with a clear answer to this (apologies in advance if I missed something obvious)... am wondering if there's consensus on this forum on whether or not to turn hyperthreading on for P3D v4. Very interested in your opinions since I've come to regard the Aerosoft forums as an oasis of sanity in a sea of tweaking madness. I know there are strong advocates for hyperthreading at Avsim and elsewhere. I've tried it - and at times I've felt that I've gained smoothness. At other times I've felt like that's a placebo effect. Whatever gains I've had, have been pretty subtle. True, small gains might be worthwhile. But on the other hand, use of hyperthreading also requires turning down the CPU clock, and working with batch files for other add-ons in order to keep Core 0 clear for P3D. In other words, there's a lot of futzing (technical term) involved. And I'm at a point in life where I'd like to avoid futzing to the extent possible. One more observation - my system has seemed marginally less stable with hyperthreading on - not fatally so, but I've had a greater number of crashes and balked starts. Haven't had enough trouble to make it a clear dealbreaker - this is just an additional piece of evidence. Relevant specs: I'm using a homebuilt system with an i7 7700k from Silcon Lottery, rated at 5.1GHz. I typically run it at 5.0 without hyperthreading, or lower the clock to 4.8 with hyperthreading on (maybe I ought to think about going lower). Thanks in advance for weighing in.
  3. See, that's where I'm coming out. I've been at this for more than 30 years, and in the context of this discussion, I've gotten pretty adept at writing batch files, but I don't want to be writing batch files - as the bumper sticker might say, I'd rather be flying. I'm thinking seriously that when P3D 4.3 comes out, I'll do a clean install and try to strip the sim down as much as possible - maybe some (low-ish resolution) textures, ORBX Global and landclass (but maybe not Vector), a few add-on aircraft and airports. And that might be it. A small part of me wants to get hyperthreading right, but the bigger part wants to stop thinking about it at all. So... simplify, simplify, as the man once said...
  4. Thanks for the responses, guys... figured it might be a system-specific thing, but thought it was worth asking. I'll keep experimenting. I understand the value when you're running multiple add-ons... but that's something I'm trying to cut back on a bit. Would like to simplify things to the extent possible. I'll see if hyperthreading helps with that. So far, differences have been subtle. With hyperthreading off, the only add-on that's sometimes a challenge is the A2A Constellation - which I think might be related to the amount of sound processing involved. At some point I'll try a third-party sound card as another variable. Will post here again if I turn up anything worth reporting. Thanks again!
  5. Weather is the one area where I'm still reliant on add-ons - but that might be because I'm sort of a weather junkie. I keep track of my local weather and like flying in it - to the point where I mostly fly locally and not in more interesting locations. So, a matter of personal preference. Active Sky works pretty seamlessly for me. But I suppose I could get used to native themes and customize them. ORBX global is a nice enhancement without much performance impact, so yes, that'd be a nice part of the package. It would be nice to have AI with real-world airlines but none of the current solutions are all that satisfying (am hopeful for JustFlight's Global Traffic). Or... maybe just some good static aircraft on the ground so the airports aren't deserted. Would happily do without all the rest - especially third-party ATC. For me, native ATC is really the least bad of the not-great options. Sorry for the off-topic, but you're onto a good and important idea - would be happy to continue the conversation elsewhere if it would be helpful.
  6. I'd think seriously about that. I've been simming for more than 30 years and over that time I've probably used every add-on in creation, but my time is limited and so is my appetite for rigamarole. A lot of my flying is repetitive between just a couple of city pairs, so a stripped-down install covering that and nothing more seems very attractive. Granted, it's dangerous to listen to a one-person focus group, but take it for whatever it's worth.
  7. And a very attractive feature, too - not only for economic value, but also for ease of use. I've reached a point where I don't want to deal with a half-dozen add-ons competing for system resources and tripping over each other. I'd much rather keep things simple and straightforward. So thanks for that.
  8. It doesn't sound like anything to them...
  9. Be careful - don't drink and weld!
  10. Alan_A

    engines not starting

    That's interesting - if I recall correctly, FSX (and probably P3D as well) interprets idle mixture as a fuel cutoff. The Lotussim L-39 documentation flagged this specifically and required full rich mixture for startup. I thought I'd deleted the mixture axis in the DC-6 but there might be a stray one. I'll check - and I'll run these tests in the DC-8 once I'm set up.
  11. Alan_A

    engines not starting

    For what it's worth (and I hope it's worth something in terms of troubleshooting), I have one other payware aircraft that exhibits similar behavior - the PMDG DC-6 in P3D v4. My default flight is cold and dark (I keep it that way because I fly a number of GA aircraft that don't have an easily selectable cold-and-dark state). The only way I can get a good engine start on the DC-6 is to do what TheFinn suggested - I load my default (the Bonanza in my case), start it with CNTL+E, then load the DC-6, then select cold and dark. Following those steps, engine start is 100 percent reliable. None of my other payware add-on aircraft (from A2A, PMDG and Aerosoft among others) or freeware (the Manfred Jahn C-47) displays similar behavior. Based on my DC-6 experience, I'm wondering if the issue might not be the battery state but rather the way the fuel system (or some other engine-specific parameter) is initializing. I haven't put this to the test (I really should submit a ticket to PMDG but haven't so far), so it's just a working hypothesis at this point. I've bought the DC-8 but haven't installed it yet (trying to finish a deadline project) so haven't yet tested things out with your aircraft, but I will as soon as I can. Happy to try patches or alternative suggestions. Again, hope this helps.
  12. Alan_A

    Douglas DC-8 preview (released)

    I'm hoping the same. Think it might be a sweet spot between the propliners (which have to be nursed through their climb and descent routines, not a good fit for modern airspace) and contemporary jetliners, which feel too much like work and too little like flying. Am guessing based on Mathijs' post that this preview forum will be closing up shop soon. Looking forward to seeing everyone over on the support forum.
  13. Alan_A

    Douglas DC-8 preview (released)

    No, I understand - was thinking, based on your post, that I'd want to figure out a flow that works, then write that up as a custom checklist. In general aviation aircraft and single-engine warbirds, I typically do a flow with some kind of directional logic (e.g. counterclockwise around the P-51 cockpit), then verify. But with airliners, it's harder, at least as a simmer. I think that to master a flow-checklist sequence (Do-Verify), you'd have to limit yourself to one, or just a couple of aircraft - as if you were a type-rated line pilot on a current assignment. That way you'd really get the flow under your skin. I keep looking for the airliner that'll be that one aircraft in my sim world. Maybe the DC-8 will be it.
  14. Alan_A

    Douglas DC-8 preview (released)

    Just read an article in the latest Business and Commercial Aviation that argues in favor of "read and do" checklists (officially "Challenge-Do-Verify") vs. the more usual "flow, then checklist" (officiall "Do-Verify") - says CDV is safer and actually faster. I know that's considered sacreligious in some quarters... but it's useful to those of us who are sim flyers - makes it easier for us to jump from one type to another. Based on what you say, it'll take some work to edit the official list into a more useable CDV version. Which, I suppose, will be another interesting step up the learning curve.
  15. Alan_A

    Douglas DC-8 preview (released)

    Thanks, Michael - understood! Feels a little like cheating but I'm happy to tell myself that I'm rushing aboard at the last minute, having (over?) delegated the startup to my trusty crew... Or, alternative... there'll be separate procedures for weekends and for weeknights. And I'll admit to using autostart in a/c like the A2A Connie sometimes when time is really short, so it's not like I'm going to be a fanatic about these things. Am continuing to stand by with credit card in hand.
  16. Alan_A

    Douglas DC-8 preview (released)

    Ouch! I mean, understandable, and it's going to be a fascinating experience. But some of us (me, for example) are going to have to figure out how to fit this aircraft in with real-life demands. Those are sobering numbers. Ah! Wait - maybe starting the aircraft can be a hobby in itself. See? Every problem has a solution! Am feeling better now. Bring it on!
  17. Alan_A

    Douglas DC-8 preview (released)

    @Michael2 - Thanks much for the sound samples - more than enough to take me back to my (1960s) childhood near KJFK. Credit card standing by.
  18. Alan_A

    Douglas DC-8 preview (released)

    Looking VERY impressive! +1 for a chance to hear the soundset, if time permits. Eager to try this one out.
  19. Alan_A

    Douglas DC-8 preview (released)

    That support sub-forum has been lurking there for a while - at least a month, maybe a month and a half. I was excited, too, when I first saw it. But I think it's just a placeholder for now. So the (patient) wait continues...
  20. Alan_A

    Douglas DC-8 preview (released)

    Not to pull this further off topic, but worth noting that Just Flight has a Caravelle III in the works - it's listed on their In Development page. Something I noticed while trying to keep myself occupied while waiting patiently for the DC-8...
  21. The problem for me is that it's not clear what timing "in between" refers to - is it before or after the numbered event? That's why people read the first item - "A318/A319, 14 days in between" - and thought it meant that the A318/A319 would be released in 14 days. What I tried to do was make it more explicit that in each case there was an event, then an interval, then the next event. It's much clearer to say in so many words that we don't know when the A318/A318 will be released, but that the A320/A321 will follow 14 days later - leaves nothing to the imagination. I honestly have no interest in seeing any of these releases happen on any particular date - so I didn't want to misunderstand it. I just did, because of that ambiguity about "in between." I write for people who are distracted (like editors and businesspeople) and I'm used to the idea that all kinds of things will go wrong and all kinds of confusion will happen unless I roll up a newspaper and smack them over the head with what I mean to say. Speaking of smacking things with rolled-up newspapers, we've probably all done it to this topic by now...
  22. Well, the client gets the final vote... especially when the client hasn't asked for help in the first place. So if they take down the post, that's cool. All we can do is try...
  23. Hey, guys, let me try to help with the timeline thing. Sorry to say it's still not as clear as it could be. I think there are some language disconnects at work. Try this version... Not intended as a criticism, just a clarification... coming from someone who was initially among the confused. I do this kind of thing for a living (writing, corporate communications) - and can't contribute to the community in too many other ways, I'm not a pilot or a repainter or anything along those lines. Hope this is something that I can contribute... and that it turns out to be helpful.
  24. Actually, English is my native tongue - and I was still confused! No matter, it all makes sense now. Your timeline was a big help - thanks for that!
  25. Ah, OK, that makes sense. So the way to read it is, numbered event, then time interval in red, then next numbered event. Or to be specific, A318/319 release... then an estimated 14-day interval.... then A320/A321... then an estimated five weeks 'til Service Pack 1... and so on. I think I've got it. Thanks, @walterg74, for the clarification.