VisualPSX.... in anticipation

[brian747]

Whilst we await the next iteration of Garry's brilliant utility, I have been reflecting on the VisualPSX experience so far whilst using the default FSX 747.

It has, of course, been mostly superb.    

Nonetheless there are a couple of concerns. The first one is already acknowledged by Garry himself (http://aerowinx.com/forum/topic.php?post=22796#post22796) when he said:

"I receive occasional reports of FSX gear not retracting under VisualPSX but have never found a cause. I will have another look at my code."

I do continue to experience this problem, albeit intermittently and unpredictably. (It's probably simply a result of my frustration, but so often it seems to be whenever I'm trying to make a video...      )

The other aspect that sometimes troubles me is concerned with lights. I do appreciate that every effort has been made to simulate a response to the PSX controls within the limitations of the FSX environment, but the PSX switches do not seem to reliably operate the lights on the FSX puppet aircraft. So taxying around the airport at night is extremely difficult, especially given the feeble glimmer of illumination from the default 747 aircraft. Has anyone found a workaround for this?

Cheers,

Brian

[GodAtum]

The opensky 747 (http://www.rikoooo.com/en/downloads/viewdownload/55/716) which might have more taxi lights?

[cagarini]

Stability, and smoothness is still my main concern, and one of the reasons I seldom used VisualPSX or XView. Not these apps fault, but rather the limitations imposed by my old rig ( i5 with 1 GB 650 Ti graphics board and a single monitor ).

Using a better visuals model is great, but could have impact on my FPS, yet, I wonder if these models can have their 3d cockpits disabled, or simply erased, because I use only the PSX instruments after all... At most the cockpit winds frame and enclosure could be kept, for visual reference... Anyone using such a cockpit Mod can give me some hints on how to do it ?

Also, I look forward for Garry's modified rw offset algorithm, allowing the adjustments to occur only above a certain ( higher ) altitude / FL, so that as we get close to the rw we do not experience those weird / nasty looking jumps / shifts that can totally ruin an otherwise very nice visuals experience.

If VisualPSX could, for instance, read transition level from PSX internal variables and do the adjustments as the aircraft reaches that level during descent, that would be great... From there on, until touchdown, we wouldn't experience those nasty last minute / rw threshold shifts...

[kiek]

Using a better visuals model is great, but could have impact on my FPS, yet, I wonder if these models can have their 3d cockpits disabled, or simply erased, because I use only the PSX instruments after all... At most the cockpit winds frame and enclosure could be kept, for visual reference... Anyone using such a cockpit Mod can give me some hints on how to do it ?

Use the 2d-cockpit View and get rid off the panel (W key or SHFT-A I believe).
Remove all gauges except the gear from the panel.cfg file of the FSX/P3D 747.

Rgrds,
Nico

[brian747]

@José

> "Stability, and smoothness is still my main concern..."

I have had zero problems with either since I moved my FSX installation onto a separate (powerful) computer and away from PSX. It's a simple solution (albeit at a cost...), but it works well and gives me totally smooth VisualPSX-driven FSX visuals at 30 fps. (Thank you, Garry!        ).

Using a better-looking FSX model of 747 sounds like a good idea, but it would be a possibility only if VisualPSX was able to support the new model. (Not everything, of course: gear, flaps, spoilers, doors, and lights are probably the most essential). However I have tried using the PMDG 747 as the puppet aircraft without much success: the PSX light switches, for example, don't seem to affect the lights on the PMDG aircraft (which is not entirely surprising).    :?

So night flying (taking into account taxying to and from the runway) with VisualPSX is not really a practical proposition as yet.    

Cheers,

Brian