Posts by MrRCSound

    As requested the "main.mcf" and screenshots. The first screenshot is with no changes to the "main.mcf". As you can see, it spans correctly. When I add the lines from the wiki in so that I get 90* right and left, this other image is what I get. Worked on it for hours, tried everything.

    I have three 1080p's, and it works when I select the correct total resolution. Are you sure it will work if all the monitors don't have the same native resolution?

    Thanks for the response Oldar. Let me clarify a little. I can get all 3 to work, image spreads across them just fine. It is when I edit the Main.mcf to set the side windows to 90*, so I have one monitor in front, one 90* left, and one 90* right. The wicki says to add these lines between the two. Every time I do it, the graphics look like they went through a blender. I was able to get the right hand window clear, but forward and left were all messed up.

    Ok, what is going on here. I have all 3 monitors set up now, and all I get is garbage images, no matter what I do. One monitor is 1080p native, the others are 720, all are set to 1080. Correct video resolution selected.

    Don't say go to the Wiki. It is worthless. Give me some real support here. I have done what the wiki says time after time, and the image always comes out garbled up, like more than one image over top the other.

    I like Aerofly, but the lack of communication on what is going on, and the lack of support sucks.

    Is there anyone there that I can actually talk to about this. I just dropped big money into building an actual cockpit, it would be nice if the software works like it claims.

    Sorry to rant, but after hours of trying I am getting really frustrated.

    I am in the starting stages of building a home cockpit, based on a Cessna 172. I am planning on running 3 monitors. Initially a 42" for the main screen, to be upgraded to a 50 or 55" at a later date, and two 32" screens for the side windows. I have one 32" screen I was going to use for one of the side windows, but it is 720 res, but should be OK for a side window. I need to get another.

    Before going out and dropping money on another screen, I wanted to test it out.

    Yesterday I used a small computer monitor as the second screen. It does do 1080p. Set up the Nvidia Surround screen app, went to Aerofly, and it worked like a charm. Split it down the middle, but I know there are some changes to be made to make it look 90* off. No big deal.

    Pulled out the 32" screen today. Set it up, and sent 1080p signal to it, no problem. Set up Surround screen, and it works on desktop no problem. Launch AFS2 and it launches on one screen only. Either the 42" or 32" depending on which one I have set as the main. The other monitor goes off line. Tried changing resolutions, forcing 1080, etc. nothing seems to work.

    What am I missing here, or will AFS2 just not work with monitors of different resolutions?

    Yes, I have been over the instructions like 100 times. :)

    Those look really cool. :)

    I have decided to take a different approach, away from VR. Something like this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Crzz9ySNPuI&t=80s

    Instead of a real panel like the one shown, I am going to use a yoke, throttle quad, and a few switches, but leave the main flight panel VR. Then use an IT touch pane to make the monitor/TV touch screen. That way I can operate all the controls via touch. By using the virtual panel it will save a lot of money, plus I can us it with most any aircraft, not stuck to the Cessna style panel.

    I still may have to get the gloves when the PiMax 8K comes out. I like VR, but for slower simulations the screen door effect of the Rift just drives me nuts.

    I just did some testing with OGL vs. Vulkan. This is single monitor, non VR test.

    Test flight took place over Manhattan heading east. Details on Ultra. Quite a few buildings in front of me, but no sky scrapers. Went back and forth several times to make sure of the results. FPS is rounded, as they did jump by 10 or so FPS.

    OGL: Solid 240 FPS (super fantastic for the level of detail!)

    Vulkan with advanced AA off: 275-280 FPS

    Vulkan with advanced AA on: Solid 265 FPS

    On my PC I am seeing close to 40FPS difference between OGL and Vulkan! Unbelievable. Even with the advanced AA on, I get higher FPS than OGL.

    PC specs: Asus Prime Z270-A, i7 7700k (slightly overclocked), 16gb, and GTX 1080 (non TI)

    Is there a setting somewhere, maybe an ini or cfg, that I can increase the number of trees beyond the max in the settings? I think I have the overhead for it, or at least to try it. I want dense forests, trees just a meter apart or less.

    Interesting.... I have been dying to try out Vulkan on my machine. Unfortinately it is like a 100*F here today, and I turned the sun porch into my sim room. It is like 120*+F out there. I hope it cools down as evening approaches.

    My setup is: Asus Prime Z270-A with i7 7700k, GTX 1080 and 16GB. Similar, but not exact. I am curious if the non Ti board likes Vulkan better or not.

    Nice comparison although I can't see much of the purchased updates for P3D: looks quite default to me. AFS2 wins easily when compared to default P3D. Anyway, I am also only flying in AFS2 at this moment: can't be bothered with all the performance problems that other sims have for now.

    It is running A2A Cessna 172 ($$), REX SKY Force (awesome clouds and weather but $$, just used clear skies in this video though) REX 4 (for water textures, and airport textures $$), REX world wide airports ($), ORBX Trees HD ($), and I think I had ORBX Global on as well.

    In all, probably 3x the money over AFS2, but still does not look or preform as good. It probably would look better with photoreal scenery, even so the city would have about 1/3 of the buildings that AFS2 has.

    Being a bit disappointed with the lack of weather, ATC, and aerotow, I decided to try out a couple of competitors products. I spent hundreds of dollars on new hardware to make it run as smooth as possible. Purchased updates to make the graphics look better. Struggled for hours and hours to get rid of stutter, and make it look as good as possible in VR.

    In the end, I think I am just going to scrap it and come back to AFS2. Even after all that, well.... You can see in the video. Watch the whole thing full screen, and compare the ground details.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=583qU4u0Qc8

    Dog gone it!!! I just spent $700+ to upgrade to a Asus Prime Z270-A motherboard, with an i7-7700k, and a new GTX 1080 so I could run one of the other sims at higher detail in VR, when if I waited my previous parts would have been fine with Vulkan. Oh well, future proofed for hopefully a lot of good things to come in AFS2.

    Anyone in need of a good mb, processor and video card? LOL

    I've read it struggles outside a certain field of view. Haptic feedback is the one I'd really like - vrgluv or ultrahaptics.

    I mounted the sensor to my Rift, so it would track my hands as I was looking for what I was reaching for. No problems really, it seemed to track within the field of view of the Rift. Of course since there is nothing that really supports it, I was limited to the Demo stuff that came with it, and FlyInside, but with both of those it works the majority of the time.

    Haptic feedback world be awesome. The VRgluv looks so big and cumbersome though. Not sure how I "feel" about ultrahaptics yet. Seems neat, but is it practical?