It was gone in the beta I tested but this has not been released. It is back with the rollout of the last big giga update. I do not expect an answer from IPACS over the weekend but within the coming week. I guess the fix did not make it from the beta for whatever reason.
Beiträge von TomB
-
-
The problem is back. After a short flight from Berne to Interlaken the trees near Interlaken disappeared. The tests I did in beta some months ago after admin declared the issue corrected were fine but now the problems are back in live version. Please correct the issue.
-
I think we had this before and it has been fixed in a beta.
Ok, so from all your reports it seems like the broken tree rendering in certain areas is fixed. We will mark this as resolved for now.
Making the tree visibility ( and building visibility ) as far as possible and keeping memory and performance in a good balance is a very hard topic.
-
Ok, so from all your reports it seems like the broken tree rendering in certain areas is fixed. We will mark this as resolved for now.
Making the tree visibility ( and building visibility ) as far as possible and keeping memory and performance in a good balance is a very hard topic.
Yes, I can confirm that in the beta everything is again as before and trees (forests) appear as they should. Thank you!
-
Thank you Pascal. It seems that the problem might be solved but I cannot test it before tomorrow evening.
-
May I say something regarding testing: do allways the same, regarding location, altitide, direction, aircraft. Do not fly too high and not too fast. So all tests with new betas are comparable.
E.G.: I started over Bern in the Robin, 3000 feet altitude, heading east. About one minute into flying the trees (forests) are not loaded (streamed) anymore.
-
Until thursday mai 1st I am away from my pc so I unfortunately cannot help testing.
-
Thank you for your support. Today is Sunday so I do not expect any reaction from IPACS but tomorrow I would like to see some kind of reaction even it is just yes, we have seen this thread.
-
Thank you! This us exactly the problem I report for quite some time but nobody from IPACS shows an interest to take care of it.
Can you please check your tm.log in the aerofly folder in documents and check if it shows 'error: unable to add tree instance' towards the end of the file. Thanks!
-
Hi Pascal
I did not try again. However why should it have changed in the meantime? It does not seem to be a problem for other users nor for IPACS, so nobody cares. I mostly fly over the glaciers in Switzerland and there are still more trees than in reality, at 4000m, in the middle of eternal ice. Also a problem that has never been adressed by the develpers. So, too many trees in one region and too little in another.
-
Maybe they have changed the rendering setting for each profile. Possibly you can change it manually by editing the config text file. Just need to know the correct line.
There is not much about rendering in the config file (main.mcf) except for vr.
-
Here is a part of the tm.log which shows a problem with the trees:
Hopefully this will help IPACS to analyze the problem.
-
All ultra
-
Some more screenshots. The trees disappear after 2-3 minutes of flying, not just when replacing the aircraft in the location tab. It is not a Swiss issue.
Switzerland south of Berne:
North of Saarbrücken, like a clear cut (left side trees, right side no trees):
I wonder why nobody else is reporting this issue. This makes me usually uncertain if it has to do with my setup or Internet. However I do not think so. This behaviour is new.
-
I have read that IPACS changed the render distance in the mobile application. I think IPACS also changed the render distance in the PC version, not for the buildings but for the trees and forests. This is especially visible when the underlaying forest image was not taken in summer. If you fly in the direction of such a forest you can see how the trees slowly fade in. This is not such a big issue, not very nice but I could live with that. However when I replace the aircraft in the location menu I often land in a treeless desert. Has this rendering change been tested properly?
-
You are right Pascal. There are no problems with the A380 and the A350 in other regions, e.g the USA. In Switzerland I personally fly anyway only smaller GA. And if I want to start with the A350 in LSZH I quickly deactivate the corresponding scenery folder.
-
Thank you both, Michael and Pascal. This is the forum I was used to for many years, helpful, supportive.
My findings: there are single swiss airfields that bring down the fps to 40 or less from 170. If I have all activated it kind of sums up and stays with 7-9 fps.
-
Thank you, Jan, I am aware of that as a flight simmer for about 35 years now . As I wrote above the problems are induced by airports I might have downloaded from flight-sim.org quite a long time ago (like lsmi, lsmc, lsgy etc.). I guess thay are quickly converted from Aerofly FS2 format. Interesting is that they only make problems with the A380 and the new A350. But if I comment them out (_lsmi) the problems are gone and I could enjoy a flight with the A350 over the Swiss Alps. Very nice impressive huge cockpit, especially with a Pimax Crystal.
-
OK, it has to do with my Switzerland scenery. No problems in other regions. However it is just the A350 that has these problems. It is not the HD images I have. It must be in relation with airports, lifts, marinas. I will have to coment out each one individually in order to find out what causes these problems. If I comment out the whole scenery folder in documents Aerofly FS 4 the problems are gone.
-
I just wanted to try the new flagship in Aerofly FS4 but I could not fly the A350 in VR with RTX 4090, I7 14700KF and Pimax Crystal. Then I tried normal screen 2d mode, the same 9-10 frames. No change if Open GL or Vulkan. All other aircraft are no problem with average 360 frames/s over Switzerland. Am I the only one with such problems?
