Jump to content

Bushhawk Xp


Recommended Posts

I've found she is really really tough on FPS. I don't quite understand why either. It isn't a complex airplane. It has a TON of textures though. None of them were in DDS format either. I changed all of them to DDS and it gives me about 2 FPS more, but reduces texture loading time by a factor of ten. There's no reason a small aircraft like this should hit performance this badly. I get better FPS in the new PMDG MD-11's VC.

I'm going to try to change the textures to 1024 x 1024 and see if it helps at all, unless Aerosoft has a set of lower impact textures.

Quite disappointing. Not sure how much I'll fly this one. 20 FPS in the VC is not tolerable for a VC-only aircraft.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 405
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I've found she is really really tough on FPS. I don't quite understand why either. It isn't a complex airplane. It has a TON of textures though. None of them were in DDS format either. I changed all of them to DDS and it gives me about 2 FPS more, but reduces texture loading time by a factor of ten. There's no reason a small aircraft like this should hit performance this badly. I get better FPS in the new PMDG MD-11's VC.

I'm going to try to change the textures to 1024 x 1024 and see if it helps at all, unless Aerosoft has a set of lower impact textures.

Quite disappointing. Not sure how much I'll fly this one. 20 FPS in the VC is not tolerable for a VC-only aircraft.

Interesting... I wonder, what is your card?

I get very good framerates on this aircraft. I would have to say, slightly lower than the Cessna? In the video I am filming for it, I'm easily getting aroudn 50FPS or higher in bush scenery.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting... I wonder, what is your card?

I get very good framerates on this aircraft. I would have to say, slightly lower than the Cessna? In the video I am filming for it, I'm easily getting aroudn 50FPS or higher in bush scenery.

I've got a 8600m GT 512 mb overclocked to 540/500. Rest of my specs is 3 GB ram and E6700 dual core. I really don't see how I get better FPS on a complex airliner simulation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, I am no hardware/software guru, but have you defragged since installing it? The file is rather large. Also, where are you flying it, and what are your settings?

I'm not going to compare it to the MD-11 because I don't yet have it, but I am still curious why you are getting such low performance. Again, this is not my case. I am only below that of the stock Cessna. I still attain 35FPS with my graphics cranked at KSEA facing towards the city.

I have a Core 2 Duo E6400 OCed to 3.1GHz on air, 2GB RAM and a Nvidia 8800 GTX 768 VRAM on an ASUS p5b mobo with a SATA II drive. My specs, short of the video card, are lower than yours... yet I get better performance?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, I am no hardware/software guru, but have you defragged since installing it? The file is rather large. Also, where are you flying it, and what are your settings?

I'll try defragmenting soon. No matter where I fly it, I can't get more than 20-21 FPS. My settings are mostly high. I won't turn down my settings to fly this plane. If I can fly the MD-11, I should definitely be able to fly a little bush plane.

I hope defragmenting works. She looks and sounds like a pretty nice plane :(

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll try defragmenting soon. No matter where I fly it, I can't get more than 20-21 FPS. My settings are mostly high. I won't turn down my settings to fly this plane. If I can fly the MD-11, I should definitely be able to fly a little bush plane.

I hope defragmenting works. She looks and sounds like a pretty nice plane :(

Well, hopefully someone else along the pipeline can help you out if not me. I helped beta tested this aircraft, and I don't remember anyone mentioning issues with framerates...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My computer's defragging right now. I can't believe how fragmented it was. Something I recently installed must have screwed it up because I had this thing completely defragmented a couple weeks ago.

It'll probably take all night to space and name defrag. I guess it is worth the wait.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I find the BH a slight bit heavier on frames than some other GA aircraft in my stable, but still very acceptable. There's absolutely no way it should be harder on performance than the MD-11--nowhere close, in fact. If you're finding otherwise, then maybe a defrag and some troubleshooting is in order.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I find the BH a slight bit heavier on frames than some other GA aircraft in my stable, but still very acceptable. There's absolutely no way it should be harder on performance than the MD-11--nowhere close, in fact. If you're finding otherwise, then maybe a defrag and some troubleshooting is in order.

I beta'd this plane with less than 10FPS... on any addon. The difference between sliders nulled and sliders high is barely 2 FPS

Before we had the dynamics smoothed, I could still take off in a straight line, fly this plane, land it and check the performance against the manufacturer's performance charts.

OK, I know my system is creaking along and breaking up, but please, any FPS rates over 20 for ANY addon are more than workable.

My system?

AMD FX62 dual core, 3 GB Corsair RAM, AM 2 motherboard, 8800 graphics card and three 250 GB hard discs.

I know I have bad Ram, bad sectors on my C: drive and a hot CPU. I defragged and was only 0.03% fragmented.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've got a 8600m GT 512 mb overclocked to 540/500.

Hmmm, maybe it hates 8600s; that's what I have and this plane's VC is tough on frame rates for me too. :( Cold & dark, fair weather, I get about 18 FPS in the VC. My frame rate is locked at 30. I spot-checked several planes in the same conditions and didn't find a native FSX plane that's worse. The CS C-130 and A2A B377 both give me about 25 FPS. Most planes that seem comparable to the Bushhawk in complexity lock in at or near 30.

My system is a dual-core Athlon 5200+, 512MB 8600 GT, 4GB RAM, 32-bit Vista, FSX w/ Acceleration in DX9 mode.

I'm very disappointed, I was really looking forward to this one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That still doesn't explain why I get better performance in the PMDG MD-11 than in a little bush plane...

I won't be flying this if I can't get in the upper 20's FPS-wise. 20 is not enough for smooth visuals and flight.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with this. Still the Cockpit of the Bushhawk is very detailed. All those 3D gauges, hundreds of animated parts, lots of gimmicks like the windshield fx,...

The last thing we wanted for this aircraft was that you say after 2 hours of flying "it's dull and doesn't look good".

You might be right that on certain PC systems it may take more frames than on others, but still you shouldn't compare it to, say, the BeaverX for example. The depth of the Bushhawk was never seen before in a GA aircraft in Flightsim. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I still stand by my comparison to the PMDG MD-11. The Bush Hawk is NOWHERE near as complex as the MD-11 but yet it can't even come close performance-wise.

I'd like to see some lower resolution textures. Perhaps those would help?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On my system (look at picture in the sig.) the BH degrades frames nearly by the half, regarding to the AES Twotter.

With the Twotter I get > 30-35 fps anywhere exept near large cities, on the BH it´s not more than 15-20 fps even over open water.

For now the BH will still remain on my HDD, but won´t be flown very often.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with this. Still the Cockpit of the Bushhawk is very detailed. All those 3D gauges, hundreds of animated parts, lots of gimmicks like the windshield fx,...

The last thing we wanted for this aircraft was that you say after 2 hours of flying "it's dull and doesn't look good".

You might be right that on certain PC systems it may take more frames than on others, but still you shouldn't compare it to, say, the BeaverX for example. The depth of the Bushhawk was never seen before in a GA aircraft in Flightsim. ;)

Really? How..? And you can be as technical as you like.

So far I see nothing that hasn't been done before, and there's no mention of where this depth comes from in the sales literature so the new depth is something I'm sure many of us would like to know about. Can it do WAAS approaches?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It looks like the GNS430 included has few features vs. its real counterpart or the RXP WAAS version.

It probably just has an overabundance of polygons and high resolution textures. I counted over 90 in the texture folder.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It looks like the GNS430 included has few features vs. its real counterpart or the RXP WAAS version.

It probably just has an overabundance of polygons and high resolution textures. I counted over 90 in the texture folder.

Yes, it does begin to look like hyberbole is taking over from fact. There is nothing I can see in the product description to justify the statement so would like to know precisely how this differs from, say, the Dornier 27 (The Hawk doesn't acquire bug splats or need engine oil topping up I take it?) If it doesn't have the MODEL sophistication (and lots of textures is simply a measure of lack of sophistication in my book), it doesn't have TEXTURE sophistication (bmp textures, in a native FSX model? Whatever were they thinking?) and it doesn't have the SYSTEMS sophistication ( I rather think the Eaglesoft Cirrus and Columbia kinda have the integrated electronics of the Bush Hawk licked in this area, and they also offer a payload editor that can be adjusted `on the fly`) then it MUST have something really clever going in the background that we don't know about!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Really? How..? And you can be as technical as you like.

So far I see nothing that hasn't been done before, and there's no mention of where this depth comes from in the sales literature so the new depth is something I'm sure many of us would like to know about. Can it do WAAS approaches?

I didn't mean avionics system depth - that's not important for a bushplane.

I meant system depth for the flightmodel.

You want to know what we have that's never been there before?

- frosting windscreens

- several (3D) notes on the panel that are visible only under certain circumstances and can be detached

- night reflections on windscreen if dome light is on (no generic reflections like most other aircraft)

- 3D cargo depending on payload settings

- complex animations like the ignition key, opening cockpit window, rolling coffee cup, ropes below the wings,... (watch them inflight and you will spot that they behave rather realistic)

- dimmable lights (ok, the MD11 had them before us, but I'm talking about dimmable 3D needles or a 3D dimmable compass ;) )

- NO generic night lighting (on most aircraft the panel switches between day texture and night texture when fsx switches to dusk; we use c completely different technique)

- rotating lightbulbs

We built this aircraft to give you long-lasting fun with it (that sounds like that porn-spam I receive all day ong :D ), so we decided to make it more complex, thus more enjoyable on longer terms. ;)

If you really want to compare complexity between 2 aircraft models you have to compare the size of the actual MDL-file. Everything in this file is palygons and animations. You might wonder why the Bushhawk's MDL is much bigger than the PMDG 747. The answer is in fact all those things mentioned above, that needed to be coded into the model.

It's hard to explain, you have to experience it. But I'm sure we'll have several videos coming up soon that will show all those animations and gimmicks I'm talking about.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK, I really hate to do this...

- frosting windscreens

- several (3D) notes on the panel that are visible only under certain circumstances and can be detached

- night reflections on windscreen if dome light is on (no generic reflections like most other aircraft)

- 3D cargo depending on payload settings

- complex animations like the ignition key, opening cockpit window, rolling coffee cup, ropes below the wings,... (watch them inflight and you will spot that they behave rather realistic)

- dimmable lights (ok, the MD11 had them before us, but I'm talking about dimmable 3D needles or a 3D dimmable compass ;) )

- NO generic night lighting (on most aircraft the panel switches between day texture and night texture when fsx switches to dusk; we use c completely different technique)

- rotating lightbulbs

It's hard to explain, you have to experience it. But I'm sure we'll have several videos coming up soon that will show all those animations and gimmicks I'm talking about.

Frosting windscreens has been done.

Cargo has been done.

"Complex" animations have been done before.

As you said, dimmable lights have been done.

Rotating lights has been done.

You got me on the notepad. I'm sure a notepad isn't worth the 15 FPS drop? At least I hope its not.

I spent 33 dollars for this. I don't want to watch videos of the features, I want to experience them myself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Thorsten,

I think, you lost the focus on usability as you made this plane. On a customers point of view i ask you. "What should I do with an "overfeatured plane" in FSX when I´m not able to fly it regarding to its impacts on the system I use?"

I think, here´s less more; cut a few "features" and give us 5-10fps more; maybe with a "light version" of the plane.

P.S. Are you in PAD at the conference?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I didn't mean avionics system depth - that's not important for a bushplane.

I meant system depth for the flightmodel.

You want to know what we have that's never been there before?

- frosting windscreens

- several (3D) notes on the panel that are visible only under certain circumstances and can be detached

- night reflections on windscreen if dome light is on (no generic reflections like most other aircraft)

- 3D cargo depending on payload settings

- complex animations like the ignition key, opening cockpit window, rolling coffee cup, ropes below the wings,... (watch them inflight and you will spot that they behave rather realistic)

- dimmable lights (ok, the MD11 had them before us, but I'm talking about dimmable 3D needles or a 3D dimmable compass ;) )

- NO generic night lighting (on most aircraft the panel switches between day texture and night texture when fsx switches to dusk; we use c completely different technique)

- rotating lightbulbs

We built this aircraft to give you long-lasting fun with it (that sounds like that porn-spam I receive all day ong :D ), so we decided to make it more complex, thus more enjoyable on longer terms. ;)

If you really want to compare complexity between 2 aircraft models you have to compare the size of the actual MDL-file. Everything in this file is palygons and animations. You might wonder why the Bushhawk's MDL is much bigger than the PMDG 747. The answer is in fact all those things mentioned above, that needed to be coded into the model.

It's hard to explain, you have to experience it. But I'm sure we'll have several videos coming up soon that will show all those animations and gimmicks I'm talking about.

Frosting windscreens - The A2A 377 has these, as did an FSD GA plane from a few years ago, IIRC

3D notes are a feature of the MAAM-Sim product range, and have been since FS2002 days

3d Cargo is a feature of both Maam-Sim DC-3 and FSD Turbo-Porter

Complex animations are nothing new. I've got a Tiger Moth who's wires vibrate, and a default glider whose wings describe graceful arcs depending on G-load with a tow rope that snakes in the wind. DreamFleet have had `removable` keys and opening windows on ALL their GA products for years. And the Dornier 27 has conditional animations which mean if you use the emergency door release, you don't get the door back, engines get smoky with lack of maintenance, persistent mdl variations (bent prop blades until repairs are carried out etc). And even the old stalwart Aerosoft Katana has a bookmark that flutters in the breeze when the cockpit is open.

But I thank you for the explanation. A complex mdl with framerate issues is not really a `solution`. It's a problem.

I shall revisit this product when those issues have been resolved!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi,

I´m so sorry to say that this nice bird have to stay here in my hangar untill we get some issues fixed (first aircraft i got from Aerosoft that not fill my wishes) :(

P E

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Privacy Policy & Terms of Use