ckyliu

Are there any decent simulations of direct-drive geared turboprops in MFS yet? They're not natively simulated so you can't have an accurate Dart or TPE331 without a fair chunk of fancy third party code, but it's important as it really changes how you fly the aircraft. Will be interesting to see what JF do with the F27 since it's Dart engined (along with the Viscount and HS748 mentioned in this thread) For those unfamiliar with this engine design: engine and prop operate at 95-100% rpm ALL flight, changes in thrust are achieved by adjusting propeller pitch and a governor alters fuel flow to maintain commanded 95-100% rpm (the closest flight simulator analogue are the turbine helicopters). Reductions in RPM and use of bleed air increase EGT so care must be taken not to melt the engine! Most cannot be started with a feathered propeller and must have fully fine pitch for engine start. The Dart also has water methanol injection and fuel trimmers.

I'd sooner the HS748 than the Viscount myself, then perhaps a BAC 1-11. Most likely would be Aeroplane Heaven and/or JustFlight as the have form in this area. But right now JF need to crack on with the Avro RJ!

Agreed. Slightly odd it spawns with the brightness knobs set at max too, you think they'd be at 70% or something.

Yep, in your screenshot, no issue. I've got brown eyes and I'm myopic af.

That says more about those "airline simulation products" then it does about Fenix or PMDG aircraft. I have often questioned the arbitrary nature of the judgements/scoring implemented and that's why I don't use them.

The 4060Ti 16GB isn't a bad card per-se, it's just massively overpriced - really only worth £400 tops. And the additional VRAM (over the 8GB version) is a fudge because the bandwidth is quite limited, for most games the 8GB version is just as quick but then MFS isn't most games so it will use that extra memory. Performance of the 4060Ti is only marginally than the 3060Ti generally, it is distinguished by lower power consumption, DLSS3 and Frame Generation features rather than any performance gains. A 3070 will outgun it comfortably and probably be the one to pick if it's cheaper, provided you don't want to use FG with MFS. The 4070 is vastly more capable than everything else I've mentioned so if your budget can stretch, that would be the one to have. I am currently waiting for the 4060Ti-16GB to come down in price, hopefully post-Christmas, as I want FG. EDIT: FSR3 FG can be made to work on RTX2x and RTX3x cards in MFS, so a used RTX3070 looks like a good proposition

Don't see many benefits to being on 11, only drawbacks in the UI, so why bother with the hassle of upgrading it? Scientifically proven and 100% inarguable that Windows releases always alternate good then bad (98✅, Me☹️, XP✅, Vista☹️, 7✅, 8☹️, 10✅, 11☹️)

Unfeather! In theory they should've been on the start locks from the last shutdown but you had to check... we could use the electric pump in sim but IRL it was a hand pump in the cockpit to get enough oil pressure in the prop hubs to unfeather them! Not sure if all variants of the TPE331 were quite so fussy, the J41s were the most powerful they did by some margin I think.

@ryanbatc Well I didn't expect an accurate ATR 42 & 72 for $20 but here we are

Has the TPE331 been simulated accurately? It's a geared turboprop so it operates at 95-100% rpm all flight and propeller pitch is used to vary thrust, with a govenor maintaining the engine RPM. If it behaves just like a PW100 or PT6 it will be a no-buy for me.

You could consider a quality TN? I have an AOC Q2778VQE and it's got less blur than a VA whilst still having a very good colour space. Contrast is better than an IPS but not as good as VA. If you only flight sim then the quicker response and less blur of a TN won't really factor in your decision. But potentially a good TN will be cheaper than an average VA.

So the 4060 Ti 16 GB is here. And the reviews are very meh, the conclusion is basically that both the 8 or 16 GB cards are $100 too expensive for what they offer. The 16GB version is $100 extra vs the 8 GB and that makes little difference to most current games it's more for future proofing, but also what it should have had from the start. That makes the total price of the card 16GB card $500 (and this is the cheapest card on the market with over 8GB VRAM). The 8GB card is $400, which is more than what you paid 5 years ago for a 1070 with the same amount of VRAM! Reviews at https://www.techspot.com/review/2714-nvidia-rtx-4060-ti-16gb/ and https://www.techpowerup.com/review/nvidia-geforce-rtx-4060-ti-16-gb/40.html indicate an overall performance boost of just 1%, although at higher resolutions with more memory intensive titles you can see upto 20%. This leaves me with a problem as I can't continue with my GTX980 4GB forever and want a 4 series card for the frame generation and DLSS3, but also can't really justify the $600 of a 4070 for the amount of flying I do, and the $400 4060Ti 8 GB just looks poor value - I wonder if it'll come down to the $300 price point soon as it's not selling very well? The mid-tier market just seems to have been abandoned these days.

At this point they could literally pull on the logic within the now default WT G1000 and G3000 for VNAV.

I did a fair amount of research for my 27" 1440p build (including standing in front of them in shops, trying friends'), and I found that was very much the sweet spot. Below 24" my experience was you may as well stick with 1080p so I'd recommend that size and resolution for those on budget hardware. At 32" I started to see the benefits of 4K over 1440p but not massively so. My conclusion is that about 100 ppi (pixels per inch) at a typical monitor viewing distance of 70cm is ideal, because 24"@1080=92PPI and 27"@1440p=109PPI. 32" is a bit of an awkward size when it comes to typical render resolutions, at 1440p it's 91 PPI which I find a tad fuzzy, and at 2160p(4K) it's 138 PPI which is the limit of detail the human eyes can resolve, especially given you might be sat further away - although these days you have render scaling in most games to counteract somewhat and gain back some FPS. To really see the benefit of 4K, a monitor of at least 36"-38" is needed giving a 119-115 PPI or you get a big TV and sit much further away. 4K(2160p) is still very hard on a system as it has to generate 8.8 megapixels, vs only 3.7 megapixels for 1440p. If you are running older hardware, 4K will not be fluid unless you turn the settings right down. There's a visual acuity calculator at https://stari.co/tv-monitor-viewing-distance-calculator that will advise at what screen size, resolution and viewing distance your eyes (well, typical 20/20 eyes anyway) can no longer resolve more detail (i.e. beyond that distance individual pixels merge together in your sight) There some more layman explanation on field of view and angular resolution at https://www.rtings.com/tv/reviews/by-size/size-to-distance-relationship

Wait for the higher memory version of the 4060 Ti, the 8GB model is seriously compromised. Or payout a helluva lot more for a 4070.