Posky 747-400 models for MSFS, PSX and WidePSX

[18hazelwood]

Morning Hardy,

Thankyou for taking the time to view one of my videos,

The answer to your technical question is; the truth is I didn't pay enough attention to the sounds!  ...
I should have muted MSFS and I did have the air-conditioning sound check box unchecked in PSX, as I did the weather, wipers and ram air. All other sound boxes were checked in PSX.

On the wave question, the "whine" I have not changed any sounds to my knowledge, or intentionally.

I am new to this streaming and really appreciate any feedback (good or bad) to get things right. I will carry out more testing as I want people to enjoy what they are watching, as well as expanding my own knowledge on the technical side of things for my own pleasure.

Again, thanks Hardy for your input it is appreciated.

Kind regards,
18hazelwood

[cavaricooper]

Greetings:

For the views in @cavaricooper's wonderful photographs, please checkout the instructions here: https://discord.com/channels/778190120888041513/778913579587207230

Many Thanks.

PLEASE NOTE- all credit for the COCKPIT VIEW must go to Steve Bell/ @G-CIVA (creator of the incredible PFPX aircraft templates) NOT TO ME.  He is one of my ultimate authorities on the 744 and worked long and hard to achieve the viewpoint in P3D.

C

[Hardy Heinlin]

Hi dvflight1974,

the master volume in PSX is intentionally lower for very important reasons:

1. PSX can simulate an engine compressor surge. This is a very loud BANG (in the real 747 and in the sim). "Loud" is always relative; here it means louder than the average flight deck noise. So the BANG needs some headroom up to 0 dB in order to avoid distortion. This headroom can only be achieved by reducing the other sounds way below 0 dB.

2. PSX simulates very low rumble frequencies when rolling on the ground. In this case the same principle is applied as for the surge BANG.

(This kind of relative volume settings can only be heard in the real 747 and in the big sims. You won't hear such settings in Hollywood films and certain games where drama is more important than realism.)

So when you want to find the best master volume for your amplifier and speakers, keep the aircraft rolling on the ground at 100 knots and on the Malfunctions > "Eng" page activate some engine surges ("Engine stall/surge" in "severe" mode). Start the test with a lower master volume. Be sure that the tire rumble and the bangs don't distort the master sum.



Hi 18hazelwood,

fine, so it's not an error ... :-)



Regards,

|-|ardy

[cavaricooper]

Chris-

As I become more comfortable with our new MSFS ecosystem, I have started using an add-on organizer.  This does a brilliant job of adding and removing items from the Community Folder via Symbolic Links.  I notice, in the case of your models, the CVT folder does not get removed once installed via the Symbolic Link, and the json file cannot be read correctly by the Add-On Manager program.

Without sounding needy, is there any capacity to examine this?  Thanks for what you have done for us all mate!

C

[funkyhut]

Hi C
Let me look.

[Steve Hose]

Hi all,

With an ultra-wide monitor running 3440 x 1440, you can get a reasonable 'in situ' feel with an appropriate choice of PSX layout and MSFS instrument camera position and zoom.

Unfortunately there is always going to be some distortion using the MSFS cameras system so it's never going to be perfect. But here's some examples that in flight feel reasonable.

*You may need to use the horizontal scroll bar at the bottom of the post to see the full image width

Near Everest:



On approach to Amsterdam EHAM:



On approach to Toronto CYYZ:



Takeoff Sydney YSSY:



Tour around Manhatten:



Regards, Steve.

[Adrian FW]

Hi Steve,

Great looking layout.  Very close to the view I'd like to achieve.

Please can I ask what 3440 x 1440 monitor are you using?

Screen size?
Refresh rate?
Response time?

This is a model I am thinking of purchasing.

https://www.currys.co.uk/gbuk/computing/pc-monitors/pc-monitors/iiyama-prolite-xub3493wqsu-b1-wide-quad-hd-34-ips-lcd-monitor-black-10211682-pdt.html

Many thanks,
Adrian

[Steve Hose]

Hi Adrian,

I have an Acer Predator X34P, specs are: GSYNC 34" 21:9, IPS(1900R), 3440x1440, 4ms, 100Hz/OC 120Hz

I've had it for over a year now and it works well as part of a simple desktop sim setup. Panel technology is constantly improving so there are probably even better ones on the market by now.

Cheers, Steve.

[Adrian FW]

Steve,

Many thanks.  Yes technology moves so fast it can be hard to pick the moment to jump in and make a purchase.  I'll continue to research but I'll make a decision soon.

I fly more in our northern winter with my 747 on its never ending world tour.  Currently resting at NCRG.  I'll make YPAD my next stop and give you a wing wave.

Cheers,
Adrian

[funkyhut]

Hi Steve,
Thanks for sharing your pictures. I think you may have found the Holy Grail.

[Will]

I hate to ask, but how is performance of MSFS? Smooth and buttery?

[Petri]

Hello,

Inspired by Steve's screen shots I did a hasty test using a 27 inch 16:9 (1920x1080) monitor. Yes, clock and RMI to the left of PFD are hidden here, I just tried to get the view to my liking. And I do like this view combo a lot!





Performance wise I am very happy with PSX/WidePSX (trial version)/MSFS combo, no complaints at all.

So, thanks Steve for inspiration!

br Petri

[Steve Hose]

I hate to ask, but how is performance of MSFS? Smooth and buttery?

Hi Will,

You'll need a decent system to run MSFS at that resolution behind PSX. My desktop setup has an i9 9900K CPU and RTX2080 GPU. I get anywhere from 25 FPS in very dense areas to 60+ FPS in unpopulated areas, while PSX is steady at 73 FPS.

Having PSX running so smoothly at 73 FPS means your instruments are also running smoothly. In heavy jets this is where your focus is so it's not necessary for the visuals to be running at super-high frame rates. Yet another testament to the amazing piece of software that is PSX.

Overall, I've found performance to be very acceptable given both PSX & MSFS are running on the same machine.

In MSFS I've turned off a lot of the unnecessary eye-candy (like bloom, lens-flare, motion blur, lens correction effects etc.). Essentially, I have texture-related settings at high while object-related settings are set to medium.

I run PSX on 2 physical/4 logical CPU cores to allow MSFS plenty of breathing room on the remaining 6 cores.

In general, frame-rates in MSFS are highly dependent on how well the scenery has been optimized, particularly third-party scenery. Also, many users report poor frame-rates with MSFS even with high-end systems, however this is often due to them running it at 'High' or 'Ultra' settings expecting 100+FPS. This isn't Counter-Strike!

My experience thus far with MSFS is an improvement over P3D. Yes, there are issues with MSFS and it doesn't yet have all the third-party scenery available but this is to be expected and will improve over time.

Regards, Steve.

[funkyhut]

Greetings Will,
I can give you a comparison with the PSX, WidePSX, MSFS combination.
3440x1440 and 32gb ram.
I was running an i7 4790 with a gtx 1080ti but had to keep MSFS on a medium or high setting but it still sometimes stuttered and often the view was far from crisp and often lagged appreciably.
Now I have an i9 10850 with an rtx 3070 and on ultra settings I'm getting much as Steve has reported. In high demand areas I'm getting 30 - 40 fps.
Throughout, PSX is running at 72.
And somehow, with the higher performance and faster rendering, visual reaction and hence performance makes it a little easier to fly.

[Will]

The idea sounds nice, and of course the pics are fantastic... But my monitor is 3840 x 2160, and I fear that almost twice the pixel count would bash the performance.

I could scale back the resolution, but where's the fun in that?

[cagarini]

I might try these combination - PSX + MFS 2020 - but I do not have a rig ready for such a load.

One possibility might be building a new rig just for the sims ( Condorsoaring and MFS ) and let PSX run on my present i5 2500.

Standalone my biggest gripe with PSX has been the landing. I never get satisfactory touchdown performance, mostly ( I believe ) because I miss some visual references  ( proper PAPI simulation and other runway lighting systems used IRL ) / perspective... I performed a lot better when using XP11, FSX or P3D for the visuals, less the fact that those visual generators appears do iron out the intricacies of landing under challenging weather conditions, like turbulence and wind variability / shear.

I wonder how the landing smoothness and sync between MFS-based visual generator and PSX go using WidePSX for the bridge. The videos I've been watching suggest a very good combination, but so did the ones I watched before trying myself with X-plane and P3D... and always reverting back to PSX standalone :-/

[Hardy Heinlin]

Off-topic

I never get satisfactory touchdown performance, mostly ( I believe ) because I miss some visual references  ( proper PAPI simulation ...

All I need for a good flare are the EGPWS height call-out time intervals (50..40..30....20........10) and a look at the PFD pitch. In that phase the PAPI is useless. I don't even need to see the runway. I think some users just don't scan the PFD correctly, and ignore the height call-out timing. You cannot always expect to see the other end of the runway. I think you need to learn to land in low visibility; when you get that, all other cues in sunny weather are just optional luxury :-)


|-|

[cagarini]

I agree, the PAPI is useless during the flare, and you're probably right regarding having to get accustomed to use the PFD - this is probably because IRL I only use external visual references, actually only looking inside for the last time when I lower the gear in my glider at the beginning of the downwind leg.

In a simulator session some years ago - CAE A320 sim - I also asked for 3 landing situations, including one with limit winds for LPMA 05, and used only external visual references. The captain noticed it and commented that it was very evident that 1)I am not a desktop simmer 2) IRL I flew GA in VFR only ...  BTW: all of my landings were good :-)

Will review Peter's tutorials and try to get more skilful with my landings in PSX.

Truth is, while I will probably try to experiment with the external visuals provided by MFS 2020, it's very probable that I'll revert back to PSX standalone, as usual, specially when flying tricky weather approaches.

[Britjet]

Below 100ft - you should be looking outside - all the time..
I still do exactly what it says in my videos...
Peter

[Hardy Heinlin]

Yes, but do you look at the PAPI during the flare? A second before touchdown the PAPI lights may be abeam the cockpit or even behind it.


|-|ardy