P3Dv5 is here.

Discuss anything here...nothing political or controversial please.
User avatar
TimC340
Lieutenant Colonel
Lieutenant Colonel
Posts: 1242
Joined: 07 Mar 2015, 13:18
Version: P3D
Location: Hadleigh, Suffolk

Re: P3Dv5 is here.

Post by TimC340 »

There are a great many graphics issues atm with v5. Particularly, but not exclusively, with AMD 5600/5700 GPUs. VR is also not working properly, and - Joseph29 well spotted! - cloud shadows aren't working. Probably worth holding off a few weeks on this till the teething troubles are sorted.
User avatar
Victory103
Colonel
Colonel
Posts: 3975
Joined: 13 Aug 2007, 03:35
Version: P3D
Location: KPHX

Re: P3Dv5 is here.

Post by Victory103 »

Sorry for the thread rebirth, wanted to see the state of V5 now with the recent 5.3 regarding MAIW packages. A long awaited add-on (VRS Tacpack, F-18E Super Bug) has finally come to P3Dv5. Although I do most of my mil flying in DCS now, I still fly mil aircraft in P3D while spotting AI packages. I also recently got into MSFS, so bouncing between the 3 sims.
DUSTOFF
ARMY PROPS
NAVY SAR

-Chris
jetpilot1980
Captain
Captain
Posts: 301
Joined: 04 Oct 2015, 20:17
Version: P3D

Re: P3Dv5 is here.

Post by jetpilot1980 »

...and thus starts a long migration process for me
User avatar
Victory103
Colonel
Colonel
Posts: 3975
Joined: 13 Aug 2007, 03:35
Version: P3D
Location: KPHX

Re: P3Dv5 is here.

Post by Victory103 »

Well I got it. Since my initial P3Dv4 install involved Matrix, I'm assuming I can change the folder locations to v5 without any massive movement of large AI files? I was running the external add-on method for flyable aircraft as recommended on v4, again should just able to change directory. Oh it is nice to see the start-up/loading speed of a vanilla sim install!
DUSTOFF
ARMY PROPS
NAVY SAR

-Chris
User avatar
Greg
MAIW Admin
MAIW Admin
Posts: 4035
Joined: 12 Aug 2006, 19:56
Version: MSFS
Location: Belgium

Re: P3Dv5 is here.

Post by Greg »

Indeed Chris, you can simply copy the Matrix add-on structure in "\Documents\Prepar3D v4 Add-ons" to "\Documents\Prepar3D v5 Add-ons".
User avatar
TimC340
Lieutenant Colonel
Lieutenant Colonel
Posts: 1242
Joined: 07 Mar 2015, 13:18
Version: P3D
Location: Hadleigh, Suffolk

Re: P3Dv5 is here.

Post by TimC340 »

If you're going to keep v4 installed, you may want to duplicate the Matrix folder structure and retitle it so that any changes you make to the v5 version of Matrix don't screw up the v4 version. One of the reasons for this is that there are several changes to ICAO codes in v5 - they've updated lots where old military airfields have become civil airports, and reused old codes on completely different airfields (often for specious reasons). You'll also need to run your traffic files through the latest version of AIFP which will pick up the various changes and apply them to the traffic files - for this reason, don't use P3Dv5 traffic files in earlier iterations of the sim!

There are quite a lot of changes to the scenery mesh, and many adjustments to airfield elevations. It becomes a bit of trial and error, but you may need to change the elevations of some of the MAIW airfields to get them to sit properly in the landscape. If you have a reasonably comprehensive installation of Orbx global and regional scenery, this may obviate this requirement.
User avatar
Victory103
Colonel
Colonel
Posts: 3975
Joined: 13 Aug 2007, 03:35
Version: P3D
Location: KPHX

Re: P3Dv5 is here.

Post by Victory103 »

Tim,
Just downloaded the beta ADE from ScruffyDuck to check v5 ADEs. Any particular method you are using to convert older FS9/FSX MAIW files to fit in the sim? Glad I re-read John's recent Ft. Campbell Little Bird package for the included v5 files. I'm somewhat familiar with the basics of ADE as I run R. Smith's FSX-only large international airports through to work in P3D, most of the time everything checks.
DUSTOFF
ARMY PROPS
NAVY SAR

-Chris
User avatar
TimC340
Lieutenant Colonel
Lieutenant Colonel
Posts: 1242
Joined: 07 Mar 2015, 13:18
Version: P3D
Location: Hadleigh, Suffolk

Re: P3Dv5 is here.

Post by TimC340 »

The basic process of converting FD9 airfields to v5 is similar to doing so for FSX-P3Dv4. You'll need to get rid of the VTxx files and replace them with a CVX. However, exclusions in the pre-V5 airfields may well not work for v5 - especially v5.2/5.3. To tackle this, open your airfield in ADE 1.79 in P3Dv5 mode, then 'import stock data'. That will give you an option menu as to exactly what you import; usually you can get away without importing taxi signs, approaches and navaids, but you want everything else. You can then delete anything that you don't want to appear (those damn masts that appear just about everywhere, for example!) and spot exclusions will be created by ADE. You can't see them, but they're there. This is also the best way of getting rid of default buildings, which seem to be more persistent in v5.

If the real-world airport is now defunct or has become a civil airport, v5 may well have re-allocated or changed its ICAO. If that is the case, you'll need to search out and deploy Scruffyduck's technique for deleting a stock airport. The bgls you create in that process can be added to your airfield scenery folder. If you subsequently look closely in the in-sim map (or, for more detail, in LittleNavMap) you'll see the deleted airport is actually still there, but will not be visible on the ground. Beware that any AI flight plans that go to the deleted airport will still be active and may cause issues, so update them using the flight plan text file and text-replace the up-to-date ICAO for your historical one. You may also need to add the airfield data to AIFP if you are creating or editing flight plans for use in v5. This all sounds like a lot of work, but it's pretty straightforward and quick to do. The resultant flight plans may however be unique to your system, so make notes and share them with any flight plans you distribute. Just as you can with converting FS9 plans to FSX, you can bulk-convert all your flight plans to P3Dv5 once AIFP has all the airfield data.

Updating the airfield library for v5 is quite a task, and is one that I've done a good deal of. Many of the FS9-era MAIW airfields can look ok at a distance in v5, but - as has been noted ever since FSX came along, 'Z-fighting' of flickering superimposed FS9 textures can be really bad - and annoying - in v5. Just to take one airfield, I'm working through John Stinstrom's FS9 Navy Jacksonville and replacing both the old AFD and every building that is no longer accurate or causes issues. That's pretty much every building, and I'm having to create maybe 1-200 more! It's a real rabbit hole of work (several months at least!), so beware what you take on!
User avatar
Victory103
Colonel
Colonel
Posts: 3975
Joined: 13 Aug 2007, 03:35
Version: P3D
Location: KPHX

Re: P3Dv5 is here.

Post by Victory103 »

DUSTOFF
ARMY PROPS
NAVY SAR

-Chris
User avatar
TimC340
Lieutenant Colonel
Lieutenant Colonel
Posts: 1242
Joined: 07 Mar 2015, 13:18
Version: P3D
Location: Hadleigh, Suffolk

Re: P3Dv5 is here.

Post by TimC340 »

Prepar3D v6 is now confirmed for July. It’s not likely to compete with FS20/24, and maybe not even X-Plane 12, but then the enthusiast market isn’t Lockheed’s aim. But hopefully it’s good enough for our purposes, and a step up from v5 which has been a bit underwhelming.
Joseph29
Colonel
Colonel
Posts: 2174
Joined: 20 Sep 2006, 20:35
Version: P3D
Location: Long Island New York

Re: P3Dv5 is here.

Post by Joseph29 »

Regarding P3D v6. In the immortal word of BJ Hunnicutt, put me down for a definite maybe.
User avatar
Firebird
MAIW Admin
MAIW Admin
Posts: 12069
Joined: 11 Aug 2006, 21:04
Version: FS9
Location: EGLL

Re: P3Dv5 is here.

Post by Firebird »

I think that Radar O'Reilly already said that.
Steve
_______________________________________________________
Image
Quid Si Coelum Ruat
_______________________________________________________
User avatar
TimC340
Lieutenant Colonel
Lieutenant Colonel
Posts: 1242
Joined: 07 Mar 2015, 13:18
Version: P3D
Location: Hadleigh, Suffolk

Re: P3Dv5 is here.

Post by TimC340 »

Having watched the video and done a bit of scouting around the nets, I don't think v6 is going to bring us a great deal. The changes may be relevant to the military training applications that the professional product is aimed at, but the improved lighting and weather effects are unlikely to be any kind of game-changer. Most v4/v5 users don't use True Skies (the Unreal Engine 4 based weather generator) as it's a frame hog, and I don't think the upgrade to a UE5-based weather and lighting system will make the sim any easier to run!

LM are definitely not aiming this at the enthusiast market, even if the Academic version remains available.

The total lack of interest at FSDeveloper is telling.
Joseph29
Colonel
Colonel
Posts: 2174
Joined: 20 Sep 2006, 20:35
Version: P3D
Location: Long Island New York

Re: P3Dv5 is here.

Post by Joseph29 »

Firebird wrote: 27 Jun 2023, 11:34 I think that Radar O'Reilly already said that.
I looked it up and I got the quote wrong. The full quote is "Come on. Who's kidding who? All we got is a definite possibility of a firm maybe." This is from the episode "The Party"
Joseph29
Colonel
Colonel
Posts: 2174
Joined: 20 Sep 2006, 20:35
Version: P3D
Location: Long Island New York

Re: P3Dv5 is here.

Post by Joseph29 »

TimC340 wrote: 27 Jun 2023, 12:19 Most v4/v5 users don't use True Skies (the Unreal Engine 4 based weather generator) as it's a frame hog, and I don't think the upgrade to a UE5-based weather and lighting system will make the sim any easier to run!
I can't say for sure, but I think most P3D users DO use TrueSkies. I mean all the videos I have seen on YouTube and P3D screenshots all are using TrueSky.

I for one will not fly P3D with the legacy skies. TrueSkies or nothing for me.
User avatar
TimC340
Lieutenant Colonel
Lieutenant Colonel
Posts: 1242
Joined: 07 Mar 2015, 13:18
Version: P3D
Location: Hadleigh, Suffolk

Re: P3Dv5 is here.

Post by TimC340 »

Interesting, Jo. I'll turn it on for screenshots but otherwise don't bother, and my impression - when I last took any interest in the topic! - was that very few over at FSDeveloper used it either. A lot had gone for Rex products when they were still using FSX, and didn't feel that TS had moved the game on significantly.

However, the point really was that LM's use of Unreal Engine is for peripheral purposes, and not necessary for the running of the sim. I suspect that the same will be true of UE5 in v6, but I wouldn't be surprised if longer-term developments moved the entire sim into the UE sphere. By then, there aren't likely to be that many non-professional users left...
User avatar
Firebird
MAIW Admin
MAIW Admin
Posts: 12069
Joined: 11 Aug 2006, 21:04
Version: FS9
Location: EGLL

Re: P3Dv5 is here.

Post by Firebird »

So, as a non-user I have a question.

If your feelings are correct, Tim, do you think that L-M have decided not to try and compete with MSFS for the the enthusiast market and this is why new features for that market is scant?
Steve
_______________________________________________________
Image
Quid Si Coelum Ruat
_______________________________________________________
User avatar
TimC340
Lieutenant Colonel
Lieutenant Colonel
Posts: 1242
Joined: 07 Mar 2015, 13:18
Version: P3D
Location: Hadleigh, Suffolk

Re: P3Dv5 is here.

Post by TimC340 »

Absolutely, Steve. I've always felt that LM's interest in the sim was for its potential as a training aid, but that its compatibility with FSX gave them a useful incidental revenue stream and a hook to keep 3rd-party developers onside. As the professional market has firmed up, LM have contracted certain of those developers to provide mission-appropriate content. The advent of MSFS and, to a lesser extent, X-Plane 12 has taken away much of the legacy FSX customer base and has provided those 3rd-party developers with revenue far beyond the FSX/P3D markets. Those that have direct contracts with LM have no doubt taken advantage of the huge mark-up possible for military suppliers, and probably won't need to supplement their income with revenue from casual simmers.

In 2017, FSX/P3D had around 60% of the market, and XP11 had 20%. the other 20% was FSW, AS2 etc. In 2022 MSFS had 60%, XP11/12 had 25% and FSX/P3D had around 6%, about the same as DCS. Other sims had pretty much disappeared. The enthusiast market for P3D has bombed, and I doubt there's any way back now.

For our niche, FSX:SE and P3Dv4-v6 will probably sustain a small (and decreasing) audience until such time as Asobo sorts out AI in the new sims, and - like you FS9 peeps - there will be a hardcore who will maintain that 'things never got better than P3DvX' and will stick with it so long as Windows will run it! There will also be a few people who'll continue to provide content for these sims, but I think the writing is on the wall and has been for some time: FSX/P3D is rapidly approaching death as a mainstream enthusiast platform.

John has documented how much time he's put into MSFS without getting to the point where he's confident he can produce working AI aircraft in MSFS, but I feel sure that the time will come when it is possible. Kai is adamant that AIG have essentially cracked it, though how FS24 will affect that calculation is yet to be seen. I haven't yet sat down for a concentrated session of getting to grips with AIG's products, but I'm sure that doing so would be time well spent as we look to the future. Which, of course, we must unless we are to become the flight simulator version of the Four Yorkshiremen!
User avatar
TimC340
Lieutenant Colonel
Lieutenant Colonel
Posts: 1242
Joined: 07 Mar 2015, 13:18
Version: P3D
Location: Hadleigh, Suffolk

Re: P3Dv5 is here.

Post by TimC340 »

As I was writing the above post, a reply came in to the P3Dv6 thread at FSDeveloper from Dragonflight Designs where he makes the point that P3D is a simulator and MSFS is a game and that it can't be used to simulate aircraft systems in the same detail.

I think he's wrong - there are several MSFS-based products now that are every bit as good as has been available in P3D. The MSFS sim infrastructure is less well suited to training scenario simulation than P3D purely because of the poor implementation of AI, but Microsoft say that is better sorted for FS24 (probably only for the civilian live traffic picture for now, but we can hope). I would have agreed that cockpit interaction in MSFS is inferior to FSX/P3D had he made that point, but he didn't. Anyway, XP-12 is arguably better than both in this context!
User avatar
Firebird
MAIW Admin
MAIW Admin
Posts: 12069
Joined: 11 Aug 2006, 21:04
Version: FS9
Location: EGLL

Re: P3Dv5 is here.

Post by Firebird »

Thanks for your thoughts.
Steve
_______________________________________________________
Image
Quid Si Coelum Ruat
_______________________________________________________
Post Reply