Recently we have seen a lot of codes used to unlock our products being offered for discounted prices. Almost all of them are bought using stolen credit cards. These codes will all be blocked by our systems and you will have to try to get your money back from the seller, we are unable to assist in these matters. Do be very careful when you see a deal that is almost too good to be true, it probably is too good to be true.

Jump to content
Premek

Mega Airport Prague - advisory thread

Recommended Posts

7 hours ago, Premek said:

Hi Lapi

 

Isn't it weird you have bigger proc consumption in P3D than in FSX?

Sorry, but I'd doubt about your configuration...

 

Sorry from my humble side too but doubting my configuration has nothing to do with the actual problem I have tried to bring out.
REGARDLESS my configuration (which is I7-4790, 980Ti), your program sitting there consuming MORE CPU resources than ANY add-on I have ever seen, and waiting to fly close to Prague or Zurich with taking the very same resources is the problem and NOT my configuration.

 

You can name the possible candidates for taking more resources but you will not find any.

As far as CPU consumption goes neither SODE, UT2, UTLive, FSTramp, RaasPro (the list can be long)  take the half of resources compared to AirportController and all those utilities do something which might be needed continuously, whereas AirportController is needed to inject scenery at a very few locations only.

 

But from the programmatic point of view I could also ask: what is AirportController doing with its constant CPU resource-hogging when there's no chance to do anything it was designed to do?

Are you really certain the problem is with my configuration and that NOT with this awfully written little program?

Have you ever seen in the FS-world a small utility that does so rarely so little and at the same time it takes 2-3% of overall resources?

Share this post


Link to post
4 minutes ago, Lapi said:

 

Sorry from my humble side too but doubting my configuration has nothing to do with the actual problem I have tried to bring out.
REGARDLESS my configuration (which is I7-4790, 980Ti), your program sitting there consuming MORE CPU resources than ANY add-on I have ever seen, and waiting to fly close to Prague or Zurich with taking the very same resources is the problem and NOT my configuration.

 

You can name the possible candidates for taking more resources but you will not find any.

As far as CPU consumption goes neither SODE, UT2, UTLive, FSTramp, RaasPro (the list can be long)  take the half of resources compared to AirportController and all those utilities do something which might be needed continuously, whereas AirportController is needed to inject scenery at a very few locations only.

 

But from the programmatic point of view I could also ask: what is AirportController doing with its constant CPU resource-hogging when there's no chance to do anything it was designed to do?

Are you really certain the problem is with my configuration and that NOT with this awfully written little program?

Have you ever seen in the FS-world a small utility that does so rarely so little and at the same time it takes 2-3% of overall resources?

 

Please read, what I have written...

Share this post


Link to post
6 hours ago, DarrianCZE said:


first of all, thank you for your feedback. Unfortunately the solution with multiple APC airports remains the same, because we have to wait until the Aerosoft will fix the installers.

 

However, if you have only 30 - 45% of CPU consumption in P3D, then I think that you have some serious bottleneck somewhere. My money is on the GPU. Because P3D may transfer a lot of computing to the GPU, but if you have a low or mid-end GPU, your performance may be even worse. Also you have not provided us the real numbers. Could you please write here your HW setup and FPS difference with APC running and not running?

 

Therefore I would like to join to Premek and say, that there must be something wrong either with your sim configuration, or hardware setup. On my build (i7 3770K OC to 4.3 GHz, Nvidia GTX 980), P3D is always taking 90% or more of my CPU, and GPU varies. Sometimes 50% sometimes 100%, however my FPS are roughly the same. Yes... Airport Controller always takes around 2 - 3% of my CPU.. BUT... since these are only few percent, it changes NOTHING on my overall P3D performance whether I have APC running or not.The Prague (which uses APC the most) is also one of my most FPS friendly sceneries I have. Performance is possibly even the same like with the default scenery. Also I recommend reading the first post, because Premek is explaining there, why is the APC running continuously wherever you are in your sim.

 

The last thing which I would like to mention, is that your statement "FSX often peaking at 100% of processor usage" is only partially correct. FSX is able to use 100% only CPUs with 2 cores or less, and is not able to effectively use 4-core and "more"-core CPUs.

 

Jan

Hi Jan,

 

If a program - ANY program - takes 2-3% of your overall CPU resources, you simply cannot say or claim that it changes NOTHING on your overall P3D performance, because it is still eating up 2-3% of CPU resources while most of the time it is actually doing NOTHING or nothing needed at the moment!

 

Lapi

Share this post


Link to post

No.. it is not changing. Take it as you like, but on my setup, it changes nothing on my performance. Also... if that process is so heavy on the CPU, why are you the only one who is complaining about the performance of APC / LKPR.

Share this post


Link to post
1 minute ago, DarrianCZE said:

 

Please read, what I have written...

What you have written doesn't say or claim a single pragmatic point against what I have tried to bring up.

If you do not mind having the proportionally MOST resource-hungry little utility in the present FS scene, then I understand that you have nothing meaningful to say.

 

If you have anything to write to defend the continuous 2-3% of CPU power taken by the program, then please try to do that. I'm listening.

 

Lapi

Share this post


Link to post

Premek has already clearly stated what the APC does, and why is it running in the "standby" mode. Also I am currently flying in P3D v4. I am above the Italy, and my APC takes only 0.1% of the CPU. So this is clearly not an APC issue ;-)

 

 

Bez názvu.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
3 minutes ago, DarrianCZE said:

No.. it is not changing. Take it as you like, but on my setup, it changes nothing on my performance. Also... if that process is so heavy on the CPU, why are you the only one who is complaining about the performance of APC / LKPR.

Who is complaining about the performance of LKPR???
I'm complaining about the utility part which most of the time does nothing, most of the time is NOT actually needed but still takes this amount of resources!

 

I hope you do not want to say that other utility type of programs or add-ons take the same resources while doing 100-1000 percent more computing?

There are system and other integrated solutions out there, moving maps, traffic add-ons, just name it - which take half of the resources compared to AC.

 

Who cares for your setup in this question? Who cares for my setup? It's not related to different setups, it seems to be a very easy to be seen fact that AC takes those resources while it does nothing if I fly in Australia.

That's the question, that's the problem which needs to be understood, specially if you are related to the program.

 

Lapi

Share this post


Link to post

Half of the resources? You have possibly not looked at my screenshot. APC takes 0.1%, and Navigraph Charts Desktop (moving map) takes 2.4%. So your arguments are simply not true. At least regarding other setup than your own.

 

Let's look at it mathematically.. APC takes 0.1%, and Navigraph Charts Desktop takes 2,4%. So Navigraph Charts Desktop takes 24 times more than APC.

 

Sorry... I took APC and LKPR as a whole.

Share this post


Link to post

Nice try!

Would you kindly also LOG the CPU resources of AirportController for me when it is in "standby mode" as you put it?

Just asking, because for me it rarely ever went below 1%.

 

But to cut the long story short: when it is doing NOTHING a well written small utility should also consume NOTHING of the resources. As simple as that.

Share this post


Link to post

Well... if you would have read what Premek said in the first post, then you would have found out, that APC is not exactly "doing nothing". It is in standby mode and it is periodically checking your position in relation to the closest APC using airport. Also I will then log it for you. But right now it is changing between 0,1% and 0.4%. Also my colleague in VA is flying too, so I have asked him, because I was curious, and his CPU usage of APC (when far from Prague) never exceeded 0,5%.

Share this post


Link to post
2 minutes ago, DarrianCZE said:

Half of the resources? You have possibly not looked at my screenshot. APC takes 0.1%, and Navigraph Charts Desktop (moving map) takes 2.4%. So your arguments are simply not true. At least regarding other setup than your own.

 

Let's look at it mathematically.. APC takes 0.1%, and Navigraph Charts Desktop takes 2,4%. So Navigraph Charts Desktop takes 24 times more than APC.

 

Sorry... I took APC and LKPR as a whole.

If Navigraph Charts take 2.4% resources that means it is written as badly as AC has been.

First of all AC takes MORE than 0.1% when "idle" but RaasPro, ProSim, FSTramp, etc. take much LESS, although all of these programs do 100% more compared to what AC does.

 

That is the question and please just leave the "setup" question alone because we can test it on a dozen setups, the result will be the same: AC is an unnecessarily CPU-hungry little application.

 

Lapi

Share this post


Link to post

Alright. It seems that you are not able to process any REAL proofs which I have provided, and therefore this whole discussion is irrelevant.

Share this post


Link to post
2 minutes ago, DarrianCZE said:

Well... if you would have read what Premek said in the first post, then you would have found out, that APC is not exactly "doing nothing". It is in standby mode and it is periodically checking your position in relation to the closest APC using airport. Also I will then log it for you. But right now it is changing between 0,1% and 0.4%. Also my colleague in VA is flying too, so I have asked him, because I was curious, and his CPU usage of APC (when far from Prague) never exceeded 0,5%.

 

With due respect, I think you are simply joking...
Is AC "checking the plane's position" while takes the mentioned resources?

To check the plane's position in FSUIPC - would take nothing

To check the plane's position via Simconnect - would take nothing

To check the plane's position in a LUA plugin with 4 lines - would take nothing

 

But AC still takes x.xx% just for this possible simplest variable check, so please try to come up with something more pragmatic.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
4 minutes ago, DarrianCZE said:

Alright. It seems that you are not able to process any REAL proofs which I have provided, and therefore this whole discussion is irrelevant.

 

Of course the discussion is irrelevant, because you have little to nothing to say WHY such a little piece of software takes more resources than the entire Office suite and other, much more meaningful ones.

 

This is the old method my friend, better to close the debate than lose it...

 

Lapi

Share this post


Link to post

I was a little bit more curious, and I have tried to simulate what you did. I went to Rio de Janeiro and started flying. APC consumption was still the same. So what you are saying is simply not true.

 

Fun fact: FSDT's Couatl is even consuming more than APC. (Roughly 0.6%)

 

This is a cold hard fact. Maybe you should start listening what me and Premek are trying to explain to you.

Bez názvu.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
19 hours ago, DarrianCZE said:

Fun fact: FSDT's Couatl is even consuming more than APC. (Roughly 0.6%)

 

This is a cold hard fact. Maybe you should start listening what me and Premek are trying to explain to you.

 

As a matter of fact it is indeed anything but funny. Couatl is a part of a generic utility, which works on 25000 airports in the sim, whereas your AC merely deals 4 airports - if I'm not mistaken.
Just imagine if all add-on sceneries had a similar approach and have their "taxi-line-displaying" utilities, which "only" consume 1% of resources... Not to mention that SODE for instance, doing the same just better, literally takes zero % of average CPU usage.
Unfortunately this is a bad approach on your end, not to mention that in P3Dv4 it is absolutely unneeded if the scenery(s) is done according to the SDK.

 

Just for your sake I tested AC in a different context today, namely I installed all 4 airports driven by your utility.
You are tricky my fellow developer, because you have forgot to mention that in case 4 airports are installed, the CPU resource-hungry nature of AC even becomes worse. Just see it in my screenshot.

 

Nevertheless I need to reflect upon you last sentence too, which in itself is not just aggressive and apish, but at the same time comes from the conjecture that all users are just computer illiterates. Not a good attitude if you wish to provide support, apart from the assumed factor that you are always right and the poor user can be persuaded to adore the product by almost any bla-bla or by not pragmatically discussing the given problem.

 

Lapi

 

 

AC-res.jpg

Share this post


Link to post

@Lapi - Did you noticed APC is more than "taxi-line-placement"?

More than that - you're all but reliable source of info - day before eysterday you were claiming that out of APC active areas, the APC is taking 5-6%. Now, on your screenshot, I see you have 3.3% of CPU used by APC... It's not worth to spend time on discussions with you, sorry.

 

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, Premek said:

@Lapi - Did you noticed APC is more than "taxi-line-placement"?

More than that - you're all but reliable source of info - day before eysterday you were claiming that out of APC active areas, the APC is taking 5-6%. Now, on your screenshot, I see you have 3.3% of CPU used by APC... It's not worth to spend time on discussions with you, sorry.

 

 

I have never "claimed" or mentioned 5-6%. I said it is 5-10 PERCENT compared to the the CPU usage of P3Dv4 itself.
So you truly need to pay attention to the detail of sentences aimed to you, rather than instinctively attack anyone who dares to complain regarding this horrible and unnecessary small beast of yours.

But you are absolutely right. Indeed there is no use to spend valuable time on incompetent, arrogant and aggressive semi-developers, who know little to nothing about how to constructively accomplish the simplest task of customer support!
The only backfire of your strange, unfriendly and unprofessional attitude is that in the worst case I will stop using Aerosoft scenery stuff, which shades a bad light on the company, specially for whom I had the fortune to design more than a dozen successful scenery products, starting from day-one of the company, but during that 15 years at least they had been choosy and advising their associates how to accomplish the needed support... rather than attacking the user's complaints in an open forum, belonging to the company...

 

Lapi

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post

Does anyone no how to fix this with Aerosoft prague i am running it in P3D V4. Trying to run the config tool and get that error and before anyone asks Yes i do run as admin. 
 

dDB0WNu.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
6 hours ago, Nick Farrington said:

Does anyone no how to fix this with Aerosoft prague i am running it in P3D V4. Trying to run the config tool and get that error and before anyone asks Yes i do run as admin. 
 

dDB0WNu.jpg

 

Hello Nick,

 

Configuration tool is not yet ready for the V4. As I am writing here :-)

 

On 27. 7. 2017 at 11:34 AM, DarrianCZE said:

 

Hi,

I've talked to Premek, and Configuration tool is not yet ready for the V4. But at this time, the only thing which Configuration tool does, is the enabling of Dynamic jetways and HD Textures. Which both can be enabled/disabled in the apc,cfg, Just change true to false and vice versa :-)

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
4 hours ago, DarrianCZE said:

Thank you so much that explains all

Hello Nick,

 

Configuration tool is not yet ready for the V4. As I am writing here :-)

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post

Hi,

I couldn't get jetways and docking systems to work in Prepar3D v3 and the same goes for Version 4. I ran HarvesterLuncher, but it didnt help me.

I am using APC to V4 tool.

 

Any hehlp would be much appreciated!

Share this post


Link to post
48 minutes ago, ornmat said:

Hi,

I couldn't get jetways and docking systems to work in Prepar3D v3 and the same goes for Version 4. I ran HarvesterLuncher, but it didnt help me.

I am using APC to V4 tool.

 

Any hehlp would be much appreciated!

 

Hi,

 

is the docking system showing any text, or is it just black?

 

Darrian

Share this post


Link to post
17 minutes ago, DarrianCZE said:

 

Hi,

 

is the docking system showing any text, or is it just black?

 

Darrian

Black

Share this post


Link to post
32 minutes ago, ornmat said:

Black

 

Could you please try this hotfix?

 

Turn off the sim

 

Open the *sim*/Aerosoft/AirportController and replace those 3 files.

 

Launch sim and try.

 

LKPR Hotfix.rar

Share this post


Link to post
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...