Com-Central.net

If that time is used, I work from 10:00 CST until 1900 hours CST, or 20:00 EST, and won't be able to join in on any day except sunday's or mondays.

- JG300-Stoopy

So, if I followed this right, this would be about fourteen hundred hours Ascout's time, or twenty-four hundred hours Fled's time, which would be about six or seven hundred hours EDT time, so if I wanted to join in, I should wait about 300 hours, or what?

(Ahem*)

I'm on Pacific time, so from 1500-1830 PDT is best for me (good for your east coasters, but maybe not Dutch guys. Also from 2000-2200, but that's late for most.

I can fly if somebody wants....send server and password, if any.

Fled, Bush...I see you guys at VVPB, but I don't have the password to join.

send ya a pm with requested data ..... just now after this message

Ohhh mannnnn!! I missed it, I thought there was still 80 hours to go or so....

So how'd it go??

I was gonna' let Fled and/or Bushy comment if they wanted, we had three online at the time.
I think the consensus was that framerates seemed not to be affected by the MP experience or most aircraft choices and that it was flyable as is. In the "mission", we wouldn't be living at the base anyway, rates went from single digit to 20. We tried a variety of aircraft, stock and addon.

I also have a PM at HC from another tester with some good observations and no anomalies (no floating stuff, etc.). He experimented with turning the exclude switch off to increase autogen buildings an noted in some views the old runway and tower re-appeared. I'll have to ask where they were relative to the new runway...and maybe a screenie.

He suggest dumping the flying Chinook and thinks the biggest hit is the static UH-1's, not the other aircraft, including the OH-6. I had already tried using a simple UH-1 macro though, and it made no difference. Maybe I'll retest that. IIRC correctly, the static UH-1's are customs based on Jordan Moore's UH-1 source files, but it's been so long, I've fogotten. Gotta' check.

I'd like to see Fled and the Bush check in on their impression in MP too.

Sorry to be late in my reaction.....................but it was waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay past midnight here and I had been at it all day allready trying out all possible settings for fs9 to see what it would do to it

As for the online expiriences:

1. the "pyramid", if I lower my display settings it's gone, but my gut feeling tells me that there is some org scenery stuff remanent there alltough invisible, wich could account for some stutters as the "invisible" data still will be transferred back and forth.

2. on the side of the terminal and the radio station fps stay in double digits so no probs on that side.

3. on the side with the choppers and the "church" area is where the fps hits are, at least for me, so I think org scenery effect there, because when I get on ground to the parked choppers fps goes up again if I turn my view to the church they go down again, same applies for the RWY 9 end when I view 10 O'clock the fps drop.

4. as for differences on or offline, when closer to other aircraft from other players it's normal to "loose" a frame or two, same was the case here, so no anomalies on that end

5. me thinks you'll need a separate exclude bgl for the "org" airfield and create a new one for the "new" field, with that said then you can create a AFCAD file for all the parking spots ( I'll gladly help out on that ), be it for fixed wing aircraft be it for choppers, makes life a lot easyer for the multiplayer option, everybody can select a different spot and no hussle of people zooming around for a spot.

I'm confident that between all of us we can get this licked and will end up with a wonderfull scenery add-on second to none.

What would be a blessing is if we could have voice comms when testing, this saves a lot of typing and also could forecome "misunderstandings"

I also think we are on a learning curve here, all of us, and would like to emphasize the tremendous amount of work that Ascout has put into it, for wich he deserves all credit, we merely enjoy the fruits of his hard labour.

So get yer A** down to "Miss Kitty's" for a extra BIG portion of fresh strawberry's and a Laaaaaaaaaaaaaaaarge BEER !!


fled

- Uhu_Fledermaus

Me thinks you'll need a separate exclude bgl for the "org" airfield and create a new one for the "new" field, with that said then you can create a AFCAD file for all the parking spots ( I'll gladly help out on that ), be it for fixed wing aircraft be it for choppers, makes life a lot easyer for the multiplayer option, everybody can select a different spot and no hussle of people zooming around for a spot.

I'm confident that between all of us we can get this licked and will end up with a wonderfull scenery add-on second to none.

Thanks, Fled, for your time and comments...most helpful.

Brian at HC sees all the stuff you see (except the Pyramid ) and also turned "exclude" off and saw the old runway and tower in some views. I've since asked for a screenie so we can see where it appears. I'm using the "exclude" that is integral to FSSC...because it's the only one I know how to use.

He doesn't have any of the floating objects such as Wingy described...I'm now convinced that's a isolated phenom since no one else (of 6 testers, plus myself) has reported it.

I confess, I'm a little nervous about another approach because I had the devil's own time of it getting the runway to consitantly appear (and not fade or float) when switching between mesh and no mesh. There is a significant elevation difference on that ground between the two. If you fly low over the north side, you can detect a "slope"of about 40 degrees maybe 15-20 feet high just beyond the barracks on the NE side with mesh "on". This is the elevation setting combined with the flatten area at work with mesh on. It's not bothersome, but an indication of the difference.

In fact, I'm amazed that it works at all (having the runway appear normally whether mesh is on or off). It took a lot of trial and error...and I'm nervous about messing with it. I suppose I could save the scenery file under another name for experimentation purposes if you have something you'd like to try. I know nothing about AFCAD and don't even have it. I wasn't going to sweat the designated parking areas and the like and not experienced about doing anything about it anyway. But, you can have any files I have for the purpose of experimenting (though I think you have everything anyway).

Let's see if Brian comes back with some screenies and what we can infer from his "exclude" experiments....

While using different aircraft beit add-on or stock, the frames seem to remain the same or within 1 fps.

Of the FPS readings, the parameters were: 2.3(at the worst) to 20(locked). When you turn the view anytime to the airfield, the frames drop. It did seem as if they didn't stay there for long, approx. 2 seconds at the most and I think that's because the machine had processed the info and started to stabilize.

While sitting on the ground parked. The machine kept 20 fps unless you did a quick 'look-a-round' at the field, then I was getting a drop to about 7.8 to 8.5 fps, but only for a 1 second time span.

Could we use a MP version? Perhaps, but the version now has very nice detail and worth installing. If the worse you get are 2 second 'stalls' on FPS, that's really not that bad unless you're landing.

I think if the runway were done with AFCAD, I won't see it floating. It will automatically adjust to the scenery level like the current ramps and taxiways do. You can also designate starting areas with it as well that coincide with the runway and any parking spots. You can also set up taxiway lighting for the night time as well. As for the plane and man, I'm not too concerned. They won't effect the flyability of the base.

- RCAF_Wingnut

I think if the runway were done with AFCAD, I won't see it floating. It will automatically adjust to the scenery level like the current ramps and taxiways do. You can also designate starting areas with it as well that coincide with the runway and any parking spots. You can also set up taxiway lighting for the night time as well..

That could be interesting, but is it compatible with FSSC? Would it mean "redrawing" the scenery and especially the runway?

The taxiway lighting I have deliberately turned off, as there was none. I'm not even sure it's there today and I flew in there at night last year.

Nope, no taxi lights now even. This is the view from the control tower looking WNW...essentially in the direction of where the chapel is in my scenery. I'm not even certain the runway was lit during the war...I can ask Tom, my ATC guy who was there...I turned it on in my scenery for those wanting to use the field for modern flights and other stuff.

img.photobucket.com/al...Oly001.jpg

I presume there must have been sumting for the pilots to find it during the nightly hours.

or was it shutdown for the night ?

Can hardly imagine that in sight of the conditions at those times