Next Flight - Ideas, and a discussion on FSHost or FSX direct?

[SeanTK]

All,

To those of you who showed up for the NZFF group flight in early August, THANK YOU!
We invaded the airports on our trip with up to eight DC-3s during the flight, and it certainly proved to be a fun and challenging event.

I'd like to discuss a few factors for the next flight, which will hopefully occur sometime within the next couple of months:

I'm acutely aware of the fact that using the method of connecting (to Ian) directly through FSX leaves out our FS2004 and P3D users. This can be mitigated through the use of FSHost.
With that being said, there are a couple of drawbacks I can think of immediately to using FSHost, but if people are willing to put up with it, maybe we can use the service for the next flight:

Drawback 1: Choppy/laggy aircraft movements. As a result of how FSHost operates and enables the capability of FS2004 and P3D users (I think X-Plane too) to connect to an FSX session, the movements of other aircraft which you observe during the flight will be very erratic.
This effectively prohibits practical formation flight. There's an explanation in the FAQ of why this problem is present in FSHost, but not in the built-in FSX multiplayer:
http://www.chocolatesoftware.com/fshost/

Drawback 2: No shared cockpit, and no support for some other visual features like viewing others aircraft lights, and some animations.


Based on if we use FSHost or not for the next flight, the scenarios could be wide-ranging. I will present one or two scenarios I was thinking of (for FSX-direct connections). Let me know what you think, and feel free to post your ideas:

1. Shared cockpit IFR flight. This would require some coordination regarding who wants to fly with each other, and in what, but I'm picturing it as follows.
If we get enough people, we can maybe have three or four shared aircraft (two people each) on a flight in IFR conditions. An additional person (or two, or three, etc) could provide ATC services via the FSX ATC multiplayer system in the program.
I've heard that all of the default aircraft support shared cockpit, as well as any aircraft that doesn't employ extensive custom code for their gauges. I've been advised that most Carenado aircraft work, and I'd personally be interested in using the B200 King Air.
I know a few here have used the Lotus Simulations L-39 in the past as well.

2. Fast jet formation flying. We had a few Virtavia A-4 Skyhawks in the air for the flight a month or two ago and it worked beautifully. Doing this again could be enjoyable.
This could also involve an aircraft carrier as well, as Ian has told me (correct me if the following is wrong) that one person can drive a carrier around, and others are able to land on it.


Let me know what you think,

Sean

[Ian Warren]

Was a Great weekend fly Now to get others interested !

FSHOST really had/has some issues , tested this was a couple of months back .. maybe the lag problems are getting looked at .

Aircraft Carrier MP .. FSX , now that is serious fun ... all you need is Bruce Fitzgeralds CV-6 installed .. very simple and only a 7Mb download .. One great thing with this style off multiplay is since the CV6 USS Enterprise is in the ocean will help with the lower end PC .....

[Fozzer]

One of the reasons for the "choppy flights" in FS Host, is that some Players set their Frame Rates to Unlimited, or very high Frame Rates, which overloads the Server.

The Servers generally recommend that all players LOCK their Frame Rates to 20 FPS to mitigate this problem.

My Frame Rates are always locked to 20/25 FPS max, solo or Multiplayer.

Paul....generally under lock and key.... ...!

[SeanTK]

Here's the FSHost author's perspective on the choppy issue:

Well, it's been just over a year since my last post about this, so it's probably time I updated everyone on the status of this problem. It's not good, I'm afraid.

I believe the main cause of the problem is SimConnect, which is the new system that Microsoft forced us all to switch our programs to when FSX came out. Instead of using the multiplayer system that the last few versions of FS had used, they removed the multiplayer SDK (developer system, for programmers like me) completely and made us build our own multiplayer system in each of our programs, so they could use the GameSpy multiplayer system instead (which is proprietary, and completely closed-off to us).

Just to give you an idea of the impact of that, think about how the multiplayer system works in FS2004 and FS2002... Two players are flying next to each other, and sending each other location updates. Each player's FS uses the location updates to draw a fake plane in the other player's location to represent them. That's why you see the other player's plane flying next to you -- your FS is drawing a fake plane there, and keeping it moving according to the location updates it's getting from that player. And if the other player doesn't send an update for a while, your FS keeps moving the fake plane in the same direction it was moving in the last update, so when it finally does get another location update, the fake plane is pretty close to the correct position and it doesn't look like the fake plane is jumping around each time it gets an update. The important thing here is that FS is keeping the fake plane moving automatically.

FSX has the ability to keep fake planes moving automatically too, but unfortunately that part of FSX was never designed to be used in a 3rd party multiplayer system (like with FSHost), so it's not an option for us multiplayer programmers. Microsoft told us all that we had to build our own multiplayer system, and keep the fake planes moving ourselves by jumping them forward a little bit at a time, several times per second. If we do it fast enough, and if our predictions are correct for where the fake plane should be according to the last known positions, then it looks smooth. But the plane is essentially sitting still in the sky, like it's in slew mode, and then we hop it forward a little bit each time. If the hops are fast and short enough, it's ok.

The problem seems to be related to the fact that FSX is moving your local plane, but FSHostClient is moving the fake plane. In previous versions of FS, the sim itself was moving both, so it could keep the movements in sync. Now the programs like FSHostClient have to move the fake planes using SimConnect, but SimConnect doesn't give us any way to keep our movements of the fake plane in sync with the movements of the local player's plane. The result is that the two planes are constantly out of sync, and if they're both moving, the fake plane always looks like it's jumping forward and backward. It's not really jumping backward, it's just that in the small amount of time between hops when the fake plane is frozen still, your local plane might hop a bit forward, so from your point of view the fake plane appears to be hopping backward. Since they're not in sync, they always appear to be moving forward or backward relative to one another. And as you may have noticed, if your plane is sitting still on the ground, the fake plane flies perfectly smooth -- that's because only one plane is moving, so we don't have the problem keeping the two movements in sync.

I posted a message about all of this on the FSDeveloper forums several months ago, challenging anyone to show me an example of this type of movement working with SimConnect. Several of the top FS developers posted replies, and some tried various methods of fixing the problem, but nobody has yet figured out how to make it work. My only hope is that the next version of FS will work better in the multiplayer environment.

You're welcome to read my two posts on the other forum (posts 1 and 7 in the thread), as well as the other programmers' replies.

http://www.fsdeveloper.com/forum/showthread.php?t=9240

[Ian Warren]

QUOTE (Fozzer @ Aug 4 2014,12:10 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The Servers generally recommend that all players LOCK their Frame Rates to 20 FPS to mitigate this problem.

Already locked and set at the 20 FPS , we tried it both ends and also tried it with , Sean in the US of A and another only across the other side of the city , something has changed in the last year couple of years, I did a FShost MP pre GameSpy downing , ... wonder if you set up a flight Paul and see how we go ? .. may have been a bad connection during the period we trying out.

EDIT: Posted this without seeing the above posting ..... It was great being able to host a MP between the two PCs in FS9 , many screens were done with one aircraft in autopilot and other (me) able to capture screens.

[Kamoflarj]

I would like to do more formation flying with old war birds like, If we were really keen, could have a formation of spitfire, corsair, mustang, kittyhawk, etc, all the crowd pleaser classics. then a group landing like we did at Taupo at every airport!

[Ian Warren]

QUOTE (Kamoflarj @ Aug 4 2014,3:38 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

If we were really keen, could have a formation of spitfire, corsair, mustang, kittyhawk, etc, all the crowd pleaser classics. then a group landing like we did at Taupo at every airport!

Have all those , Avenger Hellcat Bearcat .. them too, but peoples also have to be a greedy bugger like me .. you forgot the Mikes Me109K and Mathias s FW190/TA152-190D series .. we will give the STUKA a miss .. but maybe the JF ZERO added the the mix !

[Kamoflarj]

QUOTE (Ian Warren @ Aug 4 2014,3:04 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Have all those , Avenger Hellcat Bearcat .. them too, but peoples also have to be a greedy bugger like me .. you forgot the Mikes Me109K and Mathias s FW190/TA152-190D series .. we will give the STUKA a miss .. but maybe the JF ZERO added the the mix !

I agree, we should also have a choice of those planes. Hopefully if we get at least 8 people like last time that is. Perhaps we could make a list of freewares and/or paywares to dl for the mp?

[Ian Warren]

QUOTE (Kamoflarj @ Aug 4 2014,4:14 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I agree, we should also have a choice of those planes. Hopefully if we get at least 8 people like last time that is. Perhaps we could make a list of freewares and/or paywares to dl for the mp?

I think to encourage peoples, search for the good freewares first , the carrier everyone has to install .. that is SUPER simple from there the freeware - the aircraft - and carrier able - the Swordfish is fun and a brilliant trainer , love to see the deck chocker with those , we have done it before ... biggest failing is the host runs the Aircraft Carrier .. in a way not so bad .. that man 'me' is ATC ship handler and screen shot shooter ... watching and checking pilot performance

[johnkiwi]

QUOTE (Ian Warren @ Aug 4 2014,4:36 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I think to encourage peoples, search for the good freewares first , the carrier everyone has to install .. that is SUPER simple from there the freeware - the aircraft - and carrier able - the Swordfish is fun and a brilliant trainer , love to see the deck chocker with those , we have done it before ... biggest failing is the host runs the Aircraft Carrier .. in a way not so bad .. that man 'me' is ATC ship handler and screen shot shooter ... watching and checking pilot performance

Tough job but someones gotta do it! Not really my thing, but I'll give it a try... gonna need my lifejacket I fear...

[jpreou]

The trouble with specifying 'a' plane is that many FSX planes do not work properly in P3D.
Therefore we need to present a 'range' of types OR restriction to default types across all platforms (and P3D is sadly lacking in this respect).
No 'easy' answer, I fear.
If we can find a common plane across platforms that is fine; I'd even buy it if we can make it work well and often enough.
Otherwise, fast jet as in option (2) above.
Be keen to try FSHost at some point. We won't know until we give it a go...

[Kamoflarj]

QUOTE (johnkiwi @ Aug 4 2014,5:05 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Tough job but someones gotta do it! Not really my thing, but I'll give it a try... gonna need my lifejacket I fear...

Come on.. this sort of thing is iconic to new zealand. Many people forget the true rhythm of war.

QUOTE (jpreou @ Aug 4 2014,5:05 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The trouble with specifying 'a' plane is that many FSX planes do not work properly in P3D.
Therefore we need to present a 'range' of types OR restriction to default types across all platforms (and P3D is sadly lacking in this respect).
No 'easy' answer, I fear.
If we can find a common plane across platforms that is fine; I'd even buy it if we can make it work well and often enough.
Otherwise, fast jet as in option (2) above.
Be keen to try FSHost at some point. We won't know until we give it a go...

I haven't, personally seen as improvement over FSX with the more 'modern' sim engines. When you get great addon aircraft and scenery for FSX, no amount of structuralism from other developers can even come close to the likes of Orbx, PMDG, the likes of the NZCH rebuild guys.

[Sombrero]

Should we set a similar time this Saturday to try out a FSHost session?

Have everyone lock their frames to 20 fps and see how we get on.

Troy

[jpreou]

QUOTE (Kamoflarj @ Aug 4 2014,5:20 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I haven't, personally seen as improvement over FSX with the more 'modern' sim engines. When you get great addon aircraft and scenery for FSX, no amount of structuralism from other developers can even come close to the likes of Orbx, PMDG, the likes of the NZCH rebuild guys.

Oh, don't get me wrong. I'll fly anything, though I am a GA man generally (RV8 and RV4 being my current favourites) ... its just the collective 'we' need to 'find' one or more aircraft which will provide greatest support over the platforms likely to connect in, that's all.

[Fozzer]

I would suggest trying out a FS Host test flight, using "Default" aircraft, specifically a slow (115 Knot) General Aviation aircraft, like the default Cessna 172!
That way everyone will "see" the same model of aircraft, and the low air speed will not overload the computer...or the FS Host Server!
Note that each player will only see other the players particular aircraft if they have exactly the same type and model of aircraft installed their own hangar!...the problem with non-default aircraft!

For FSX users, this little bit of software will be required to connect to the FS Host Server..>>> FS Host Client: http://www.chocolatesoftware.com/fshost/?fshostclient.html

Just type in the IP address, connect, and away you go...just like it does with FS 2004!

Give this one a try from the FS Host list of Servers...Flightsim.com MP Server: fsmpa.hopto.org
...and have a peek here to see yourself, and other Multi-players on line...>>> http://fsmpa.hopto.org/

Just tried it out...instant connection with my FSX!

Pressing "Enter" will bring up the Chat Window.

Paul..... ...!

[Kamoflarj]

QUOTE (Fozzer @ Aug 4 2014,8:21 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I would suggest trying out a FS Host test flight, using "Default" aircraft, specifically a slow (115 Knot) General Aviation aircraft, like the default Cessna 172!
That way everyone will "see" the same model of aircraft, and the low air speed will not overload the computer...or the FS Host Server!
Note that each player will only see other the players particular aircraft if they have exactly the same type and model of aircraft installed their own hangar!...the problem with non-default aircraft!

For FSX users, this little bit of software will be required to connect to the FS Host Server..>>> FS Host Client: http://www.chocolatesoftware.com/fshost/?fshostclient.html

Just type in the IP address, connect, and away you go...just like it does with FS 2004!

Give this one a try from the FS Host list of Servers...Flightsim.com MP Server: fsmpa.hopto.org
...and have a peek here to see yourself, and other Multi-players on line...>>> http://fsmpa.hopto.org/

Just tried it out...instant connection with my FSX!

Paul..... ...!

115 knots....

[Fozzer]

QUOTE (Kamoflarj @ Aug 4 2014,9:29 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

115 knots....

..... ....!

"Low and Slow" is the way to go.....

(As the Actress said to the Bishop!).... ...!

Using High-speed Military is often the cause of problems with juddering Frame Rates, affecting both scenery and aircraft, both Solo and Multiplayer.

Paul.... ...!

Just be aware that all the scenery that you see before you in Multiplayer, will only be YOUR scenery...NOT the scenery of other Players...The same can also apply to aircraft, etc!.... ...

[Kamoflarj]

QUOTE (jpreou @ Aug 4 2014,6:31 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Oh, don't get me wrong. I'll fly anything, though I am a GA man generally (RV8 and RV4 being my current favourites) ... its just the collective 'we' need to 'find' one or more aircraft which will provide greatest support over the platforms likely to connect in, that's all.

That being said I think the DC3 is a great choice really. Ian says its the 'standard' fsx model, meaning everything goes back to the DC3 if s**t hits the fan

[Ian Warren]

QUOTE (Kamoflarj @ Aug 5 2014,9:44 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

That being said I think the DC3 is a great choice really. Ian says its the 'standard' fsx model, meaning everything goes back to the DC3

Great thing is and done getting people interested, now tried and test yourself , it was a WICKED afternoon .. tho that Saturday here in Christchurch we should have bee all outside .. bloody weather .. say its going to STORM up and next turns Tropical !

[johnkiwi]

Just to add to Seans OP, option 2 with "modern" military you could have an additional point of interest with a midair refuel on the way to / from carrier...

l would also be keen on option 1 for ifr shared cockpit + atc etc