Came here as soon as I saw the update, thank you so much for testing so quick for the update! I am just about to do a 550mi flight, so I will let you know if I find anything.
Update: No issues with a 1.5 hour flight!
Asobo may have modified one of the encrypted files that we cannot see so we cannot know what the changes are. Has anyone tested the default aircraft to see if it flies any better?
See Dakflyâs last post
Interesting perspective. When you reference the msfs version are you discussing the default stock Longitude or the modded version that this forum topic addresses? Wrt the various avionics and cockpit instrumentation issues, many of these issues would have to be addressed by the developer since this would involve visual modeling and avionics programming that we (the community) donât have file access to do ourselves - for the time being. Would be very happy to get further feedback from a Longitude test pilot - that would really help with getting some more detailed feedback on control input and âfeelâ that I could then incorporate into the modifications. As Iâve mentioned previously in this forum Iâve had to make some compromises in some areas of performance to create a mod that hits the numbers where it likely matters most to the typical sim pilot. This is entirely due to the underlying Asobo modeling of aerodynamics and turbine engine performance. Would be happy to share more of the details with you if youâd like to talk via PM.
EDIT: Never mind me, this is the working title mod and not your Longitude. Wrong thread, sorry.
Maybe this is already called out and I missed it but there is a discrepancy on the flight plan in the display vs what is on the VFR map.
That said, the AP still follows the VFR map of the flight plan.
Get the Working Title G3000 v0.4.0 Beta1
They just released beta2
1 Like
Yeah just noticed. Iâm loving it!
The Longitude uses G5000 so does the G3000 Beta work for it?
can you please share the location of that version? tks in advance
Yes it works very well
With the mod can the Longitude do KLGA to EGLL?
It should if you keep speed between 0.76 and 0.78 at cruise alt approx FL430. Itâll actually get better range a little lower down (an Asobo turbine model flaw) like FL390 to FL410. With limited headwinds or a tail wind you could probably pick up the pace a bit and still have fuel to spare.
If you mean @Dakfly0219âs mod, then yes, but not at full speed.
I noticed that the lights on the Longitude are no longer as âindividualâ as they used to be. Is this Asoboâs doing or does it have anything to do with the lights modification in the mod? Or is it a graphics settings issue? I prefer the previous ones as they look more realistic. What do you guys think?
VS
VS
VS
Well, the more individual elements is nice, but every object that the simulator has to load and render cuts into FPS. Is it REALLY that important to you if it causes lower performance? The number of times I zoomed in to look at the individual light elements this month was⊠zero. And the number of times last month was⊠zero. And the total number of times Iâve looked this close since MSFS has come out was⊠zero.
Oh, and youâll probably say, âBut how much FPS loss could this little thing really be responsible for. Its just a few objects.â The answer is, yes but where do you draw the line exactly? Every little thing will add up until you get 10-20 fps loss and that can be a lot for some people on mid-range or marginal systems. Asobo has drawn the line and I donât mind the loss of detail in this case.
Well, you are not me, first off. People have preferences, and especially, content creators making videos, sometimes do not just jump into the aircraft and fly. Also, I think I deserve to know why it used to be this way, and then became worse. It could be something I did wrong, it could be the mod, it could be Asobo doing what they have a habit of doing.
Asobo seems to always present a beautiful picture in the beginning, then gradually chip away at that beautiful picture when no one is looking until is not so beautiful anymore. If I saw the second picture from the onset, I donât think Iâd have an issue. They did the same thing with the water textures, the buildings, etc. Itâs a legitimate question, and also, they could put a slider so depending on your system specs youâd have the option of enabling or disabling it. One size fits all doesnât actually fit all.
And to be quite frank, my FPS or smoothness has not improved one bit since the new âfaceâ of the lights. I noticed it first in VR and thought that was done in order to make VR more smooth, and that, to me was a reasonable sacrifice for VR. But then I noticed it was for PC too.
2 Likes
Yes I understand that you are not me and you have your own preferences but in the broader scheme of things, you donât deserve anything, meaning no offense. I completely understand the desire to understand, and I am mildly interested myself.
Assuming this is a change done by Asobo and not a mod, they own the product and they have the right to make modifications to it as they see fit. Being a for-profit company, I tâs assumed they would generally act in a way that would benefit the most customers, or they will not be in business very long.
And yes, I see the same pattern where they are slowly chipping away at the way the product was initially. I think that the initial build was simply too performance intensive and they are slowly realizing this and having to make some compromises. I am guessing that they are trying to make it more available to people with lower systems, which is their choice to make. Itâs not what I would do but I have no say in it.
And I am not saying that your question is in anyway illegitimate either. But I donât think itâs reasonable to fully customize every single design decision with a slider. That would end up giving the customer hundreds of sliders and the average customer would be overwhelmed with how things should be set and then you would see thousands of complaints about why canât they just have simpler detail settings.
As a developer, you just canât win so you might as well do things the way you think is best.
But back to your question, I do know that the Uwa light mod was added to the longitude mod. Have you tried taking out the longitude mod and/or any light modifications and seeing if it looks any different?
One improvement I would like to see, although I donât think itâs possible, is that it looks to me as if the taxi light is attached to the nose wheel and therefore should move as the nose wheel turns. I donât suppose itâs possible to make that happen since Iâm guessing the taxi light is fixed in space?
Iâll check with and without the mod later. Concerning the taxi lights, youâre right, it looks like itâs fixed in space. For some reason I thought the light fixture was attached on the part of the landing gear that does not swivel but I was wrong. Who knows if someone could come up with a trick that attaches the beams on the fixtures. I donât think, though, that itâs fixed in space. Otherwise it wouldnât move with the airplane. I donât know anything in programming, but I believe itâs 100% possible. If the beam is able to be attached to the airplane as a whole, and move with it, then it can also be attached to just the landing gear strut, and move with it. By âattachedâ, I mean coded in some kind of way, relative to the strut, rather than to the aircraft as a whole. And come to think of it, it moves with the strut when the gear is being raised or lowered, soâŠ