Game Discussions Microsoft Flight Simulator

[Faded Glory]

Could use OVR Toolkit to program the FMS in VR, but probably harder (never tried it).

It's actually easy enough to program the FMS in VR as I have my navigational stuff on a different PC, so just lift the headset to get whatever codes I needed. But it is a little easier doing the main bit in flat screen (slightly less wobbly) then entering VR mode - which is a very nice feature! Once the route is in, I don't need to come out of the cockpit again as I can see my routes and altitudes and such in the FMS.

It might be nice to have access to some info in the cockpit. If I remember a previous version of MSFS had a knee board or something, would be nice to be able to jot down notes, or in the case of VR be able to import a PDF or something with info that we might find useful.

 

[Faded Glory]

I think I'll still be doing short range VOR flight for the time being, I just set the departure place and runway, look for the destination VOR from the map and input that on the radio before take off. I might even write down a couple intermediate VOR beacons if the destination is particularly far or has no beacon of its own. I'm not able to follow a precise flight plan so my ETAs are all over, I just use them as a very rough estimate, but once I'm in the range I generally rely more on checking how fast the radial header veers off course and then eyeball the landing point once I know I'm in short visual range. It's everything an half decent pilot wouldn't do, but I'm just there to enjoy the scenery and that's why I love simulators.

I wouldn't bet too much on some miraculous optimization work for VR, considering the standard rendering is already pretty heavy on hardware for good reasons, I found this early implementation to run surprisingly good. Holding barely to its 30-35 fps, I expected the 1060 to completely lose the ball in VR and make a hilarious slide show out of it. Instead, even with its scaled down resolution, scaled down detail and choppy framerate, it still somehow manage to hold it up and make VR flying tolerable to the point of being enjoyable. I would have never bet on that, before actually seeing it.

(Still, what's up with that C152 VR cabin? That's a cockpit for ants!)

Yes, the 152 is small! But I do like how it flies in VR (and to give yourself a bit more room, lean forward when centering your headset - although you probably already know that). And the cockpit instruments are way more clear than the glass cockpits, although that'll improve with the new machine.

I had to remind myself how to do VOR navigation, and then ran into a small issue that I couldn't seem to get the dial to swap from flying to the VOR to flying away from it.

Agreed it runs well in VR at the moment, but so far Asobo have been really good at adding nice QOL fixes, and so maybe they'll be able to improve performance. From what I've read, even people with 3080's and 3090's are struggling in some cases. But all told, I've been mightily impressed with the new Reverb, it does seem to require quite a bit of power, and obviously my 1080 isn't that powerful by today's standards. I will say however that in Elite, apart from a few stutters opening menus in stations, the clarity is exceptional and I'm running pretty high settings there. Maybe Asobo could have a chat with FD to see what they did, because ED is no slouch when it comes to GPU requirements.

 

[Revenant69]

Using Skyvector & Little NavMap I set up a flight plan with over 30 waypoints along 110 NM's, following a freeway from my own hometown as it snakes it's way through the mountains to a nearby city that I've only visited in a car. The feeling of planning, coordination and actually flying the plane is...incredible. Even with my woefully inadequate knowledge and stupid gamepad. Simply incredible.

 

[Faded Glory]

Planning flights can be a significant part of the 'fun' IMHO, particularly the approach to your destination, and of course, if you get the approach right, then the landing does tend to be better...

And if you want to try a fun flight, and a pretty difficult approach take a look (in Skyvector) at Aspen (KASE) and try one of the Roaring Fork Visual approaches. I like to fly from Rifle (KRIL) using the Roaring Fork River as my guide (so this is a flight with no navigational waypoints), but of course very cool scenery up in the Rockies as you follow the river valley through the mountains. I tend to use a small plane such as the Cessna 172 or 152, or perhaps the Diamond DA 62, and the distance from Rifle to Aspen is only about a 15 minute flight.

 

[Revenant69]

Planning flights can be a significant part of the 'fun' IMHO, particularly the approach to your destination, and of course, if you get the approach right, then the landing does tend to be better...

And if you want to try a fun flight, and a pretty difficult approach take a look (in Skyvector) at Aspen (KASE) and try one of the Roaring Fork Visual approaches. I like to fly from Rifle (KRIL) using the Roaring Fork River as my guide (so this is a flight with no navigational waypoints), but of course very cool scenery up in the Rockies as you follow the river valley through the mountains. I tend to use a small plane such as the Cessna 172 or 152, or perhaps the Diamond DA 62, and the distance from Rifle to Aspen is only about a 15 minute flight.

Sounds awesome. At this point I've just been flying from my own real life city and exploring my "stomping grounds" of the last 20 years that I've lived here. There's so much to see and do...

 

[[VR] optimal_909]

After a couple of months of hiatus I'm flying again, in VR.

Making this thing work was a nightmare, and it is still not entirely stable. I had to reduce OC on my GPU to achieve stable flights, but once in VR I cannot go back and forth into pancake mode as it will still cause crash to desktop. On the positive note, it still works better than expected thanks to reprojection, which is a godsend as buying a new GPU is impossible.

But anyway, even in low-mid settings and practically downscaled to almost Rift CV1 resolution, the experience in Reverb G2 is absolutely stunning. Yesterday I flew a two hour long manual flight over Patagonia in an Extra 330, mostly just a 100 meters above ground. High altitude flights and clouds (on high, I don't want to compromise those) are equally breathtaking.
The only thing bugging me are planes that have that small cut-out in the window to open, those are now really in the way when the eyes are focused on the scenery.
So my previous favourite the Baron G58 fell out of the sweet spot, still on the lookout for a reasonably fast prop plane for short-mid range trips.

 

[AkenBosch]

The only thing bugging me are planes that have that small cut-out in the window to open, those are now really in the way when the eyes are focused on the scenery.
So my previous favourite the Baron G58 fell out of the sweet spot, still on the lookout for a reasonably fast prop plane for short-mid range trips.

The Pitts! Also, you can't have canopy cut-outs in the way, if you have no canopy!

All this VR buzz has taken the spotlight away from the other great, great addition imho. This dynamic snow looks like yet another technical marvel. I expected a "blanket/no blanket" situation, not something like this that looks absolutely believable and integrated into the scenery in a convincing way. Took off from my usual runway out of my city and immediately noticed the arc of the Alps now covered in snow, but what blown me away was heading for one the nearby valleys and noticing how the snow build-up was gradual, with just small spots and accumulations at the border of fields and roads at the valley entrance near the plains, and getting ever more present going toward the mountains. I've seen many times the snow in that place (Val di Susa, just at the doors of my city), and when the cover is moderate it looks just like that. A very, very good job.

Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=377woDG_8Gg

Sounds awesome. At this point I've just been flying from my own real life city and exploring my "stomping grounds" of the last 20 years that I've lived here. There's so much to see and do...

Yep, another thing I didn't expect was to spend most of my first month with the game only flying over and around my city and immediate vicinity, just because the visuals are so good. And I still haven't stopped.
Of course it helps when the place can give some quite scenic views.

Spoiler

 

[Faded Glory]

So my previous favourite the Baron G58 fell out of the sweet spot, still on the lookout for a reasonably fast prop plane for short-mid range trips.

Well, the TBM 930 is fast, one of my favorites right now when I'm not pootling around in a Cessna 172. The Bonanza G36 is also pretty good and relatively quick. They made some changes to it in a previous patch that improved its aerodynamic performance, particularly with regards to approaches landings.

 

[[VR] optimal_909]

Well, the TBM 930 is fast, one of my favorites right now when I'm not pootling around in a Cessna 172. The Bonanza G36 is also pretty good and relatively quick. They made some changes to it in a previous patch that improved its aerodynamic performance, particularly with regards to approaches landings.

Well, for the TBM role I using the Longitude, I'm rather looking something 150kts+ speed range with small footprint/good visibility. I guess I'll need to try the SR22 and co. The Extra would be ideal, but it has no autopilot. Decisions-decisions.

 

[AvonNZ]

Hi all, found a potential way to increase your FPS. Check out this video, in particular the 'Disable fullscreen optimizations' part around 7:28 into the video, a bit messy but worth it.

Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3SfrdT0aofo&t=1047s


There are some SteamVR changes I made as well, overall got an improvement in fps from 30 to 42 fps ! Going to start increasing my quality settings in game now to lower the fps but increase the quality. Got a video coming out tomorrow in a Pitts Special using the new settings, the recording doesn't do the in-headset experience justice, but hopefully better than my previous attempts to record VR.
Using a RTX2080 with 8GB of VRAM and 16GB of RAM (running out).

 

[Revenant69]

I'm having as much fun tinkering with SkyVector and Little NavMap planning trips and setting up comprehensive flight plans as I am actually flying in the sim

Speaking of flying, up till now I've been playing like a filthy, console casual scrub and using (don't judge me!) visual nav beacons in the sim. I want to get better, though. I'll be practicing tonight on flying just using my flight plan and nav points on the gps. So far just clear sky presets. I haven't tried real time weather because the only time I have to play is at night.

 

[Revenant69]

Still learning to navigate and fly, but I've also been nosing around the FSEconomy manual a bit and I have to admit that it looks like a really awesome addition to give the simulation "purpose" in the long run. One question I have, and hoping that there are some FSEconomy users around (such as @Mengy if memory serves), can you actually purchase and own various airplanes or are you always restricted to utilizing rentals?

 

[AkenBosch]

Speaking of flying, up till now I've been playing like a filthy, console casual scrub and using (don't judge me!) visual nav beacons in the sim. I want to get better, though. I'll be practicing tonight on flying just using my flight plan and nav points on the gps.

No shame in that, as good as the simulation can be it can hardly give the same situational awareness of actually being in a real plane and looking at the real instruments and outside world for reference points, visual aids can just be a way to compensate for that. Playing "full-on hard simulation", be it planes, cars or whatever, tends to be generally harder and more self-limited than actually doing the real thing!

(I bet you'd hardly have any issue trying to spot a grass landing strip from a few hundred meters above in real life, it gets extremely hard to do within the "limited fidelity" of the simulator, even as visually good as it is, and outright impossible with the limited resolution of any current VR headset, even the best ones. Visual beacons FTW!)

 

[Para Handy]

......Visual beacons FTW!

One of the biggest issues sims have always had wrt VFR operations is the lack of modelled VFR checkpoints - hence the profusion over the years of scenery addons sticking-in models of churches, chimneys, bridges, etc. No matter how well the surface tiles of the sim show roads, railways and rivers for example, because they are just 2-D images it is difficult to use them as navigation cues - 3-D models are much easier. Unless MSFS starts including steeples, chimneys etc then VFR might need to rely on the virtual beacons.

 

[Ralph Vargr]

No shame in that, as good as the simulation can be it can hardly give the same situational awareness of actually being in a real plane and looking at the real instruments and outside world for reference points, visual aids can just be a way to compensate for that. Playing "full-on hard simulation", be it planes, cars or whatever, tends to be generally harder and more self-limited than actually doing the real thing!

(I bet you'd hardly have any issue trying to spot a grass landing strip from a few hundred meters above in real life, it gets extremely hard to do within the "limited fidelity" of the simulator, even as visually good as it is, and outright impossible with the limited resolution of any current VR headset, even the best ones. Visual beacons FTW!)

All too true.

 

[askavir]

No shame in that, as good as the simulation can be it can hardly give the same situational awareness of actually being in a real plane and looking at the real instruments and outside world for reference points, visual aids can just be a way to compensate for that. Playing "full-on hard simulation", be it planes, cars or whatever, tends to be generally harder and more self-limited than actually doing the real thing!

(I bet you'd hardly have any issue trying to spot a grass landing strip from a few hundred meters above in real life, it gets extremely hard to do within the "limited fidelity" of the simulator, even as visually good as it is, and outright impossible with the limited resolution of any current VR headset, even the best ones. Visual beacons FTW!)

I actually enjoy the "where's the airport" / "where's the runway" part of the flight . I love that ATC has options for requesting directions to the airport, it complements this part of the game in a fantastic way.

But I won't judge anyone else's way of playing the game, video games, even simulators, are a leisure product, so if a player is getting enjoyment out of whatever way he prefers to play, then he's doing it right.

 

[AkenBosch]

But I won't judge anyone else's way of playing the game, video games, even simulators, are a leisure product, so if a player is getting enjoyment out of whatever way he prefers to play, then he's doing it right.

Go paste that in Dangerous Discussion, I bet you'll have a happy time.

Oh right, cheers!

 

[Revenant69]

I totally agree with what askvir said, but for me I find myself wanting to go deeper down the rabbit hole. One thing that's been bothering me is my lack of knowledge concerning proper, real world procedures taking off from and approaching airports. My early take is that it will just not be enough for me to simply focus on the physical mechanics of flight and take off. I've been looking into Navigraph to start incorporating true to life SIDs and STARs into my flight plans and have already bought a course on IFR training. Given my work schedule and the complexity of the subject matter it'll probably take me a year to get through it, but I plan to "get gud" at some point. Now if that new Virpil HOTAS would just show up...

 

[Faded Glory]

I totally agree with what askvir said, but for me I find myself wanting to go deeper down the rabbit hole. One thing that's been bothering me is my lack of knowledge concerning proper, real world procedures taking off from and approaching airports. My early take is that it will just not be enough for me to simply focus on the physical mechanics of flight and take off. I've been looking into Navigraph to start incorporating true to life SIDs and STARs into my flight plans and have already bought a course on IFR training. Given my work schedule and the complexity of the subject matter it'll probably take me a year to get through it, but I plan to "get gud" at some point. Now if that new Virpil HOTAS would just show up...

You might want to take a look at this chap's Youtube. He has a bunch of videos on MSFS, also some real flight videos (he is a GA pilot) and he does talk about proper navigation and procedures in many of his videos, spending time setting up the flight, not just flying it. He hasn't been active in a quite a while now, not sure why, but I found some of his early videos very instructive - it's where I discovered Skyvector and Simbrief among other things.

Note that for standard departures and approaches you can access them through the in-game map (so long as you choose low or high level routes, not VFR), and if you manually program the FMS you will find that they are available from there too (at least they are on the Garmin 1000 and the TBM's FMS.

Whether any of that is 'getting gud' I don't know, but it certainly can be a great part of the immersion.

 

[askavir]

I totally agree with what askvir said, but for me I find myself wanting to go deeper down the rabbit hole. One thing that's been bothering me is my lack of knowledge concerning proper, real world procedures taking off from and approaching airports.

I'm certainly not an expert on the matter, but if this helps somehow, here is what the runway numbers mean and how the runway numbering system makes it easy to identify them visually from the air (if you already knew, just ignore me):

By the way just in case anyone doesn't know how to make sense of the runway numbers, this is how it works:

All runways are numbered according to the compass heading of their direction, without the last zero. So a runway pointing directly north on the compass will be runway 36 (heading 360 without the last zero). That exact same runway, but in the opposite direction, will be named runway 18 (heading 180 without the zero).

This is useful for orientation on the airport while taxiing (although ATC provides directions that match markings in the taxiways) and also while landing as with the runway number you'll know the proper heading orientation.