Jump to content

Can't file a flight plan, FPS d/c only when in xPilot window


Recommended Posts

I have a stable 30+ X-Plane FPS in my most demanding scenery zone.

...except when I'm in another window. When I'm in another window, X-Plane drops to less than half its FPS.

This is a problem because I can't Alt-Tab out to the xPilot window to fill out and file my flight plan fast enough before I get disconnected for low FPS.

Link to post
Share on other sites

But is this specific to xPilot? Or does it always happen when you change your focus from X-Plane, regardless of the program/window that you are looking at?

 

I do not have this issue, something may be odd in your own setup of X-Plane/Windows or similar.

 

EDIT: spelling

Edited by Guest
Link to post
Share on other sites
But is it really neccessary to disconnect users that are preparing their flight at the gate, not moving, just trying to send a flight plan? How do they cause any interference that needs to be penalized?
If you’re being disconnected, then your sim is surely not maintaining >=20fps at all times. If your frame rate only drops when Alt+Tabbing then there’s nothing I can do about that.

 

If you think you’re being unfairly disconnected, then you need to provide sufficient evidence to prove your claim. The next time you fly, turn on the the frame rate logging within X-Plane and upload the full data log file here.

Controller (C1), Los Angeles ARTCC
Developer: xPilot, vATIS

Link to post
Share on other sites
If you’re being disconnected, then your sim is surely not maintaining >=20fps at all times.

 

Yes, that is my problem. The FPS disconnect system is working as intended. When alt-tabbed, my X-Plane FPS drops below the threshold. This is frustrating for me since I cannot file a flight plan after the FPS disconnect update, especially because I cannot continue filling out the flight plan window after the disconnect.

 

Is there a way to take current ground speed from X-Plane, and if it averages less than 2 during the past 15 or 30 seconds (for instance! Just a number I throw out as a starting suggestion), ignore the FPS?

 

I'm all for disconnecting for low FPS while taxiing or in flight in order to allow ATC to actually have fun on VATSIM like we pilots want to do, but there must be a good solution to not disconnect while at the gate/parking while keeping VATSIM's ATC quality of life up.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Is there a way to take current ground speed from X-Plane, and if it averages less than 2 during the past 15 or 30 seconds (for instance! Just a number I throw out as a starting suggestion), ignore the FPS?

 

Someone else suggested this previously, and I initially thought it was a good idea, but then I realized that this would only defer the problem until later when the pilot starts moving. Seems to me it is better to alert the pilot to the frame rate issue as soon as possible.

 

For your particular case of filing a flight plan, would it suffice for you to prefile before connecting?

Developer: vPilot, VRC, vSTARS, vERAM, VAT-Spy

Senior Controller, Boston Virtual ARTCC

Link to post
Share on other sites
but then I realized that this would only defer the problem until later when the pilot starts moving

 

No no, it's not deferring the problem, it's taking away this false positive of sitting at a gate, performing final software functions in order to get started and actually fly.

 

Well, kind of false positive: my FPS *is* low, but I'm saying it doesn't matter at all when I'm just sitting there. ATC complains about time dilation because they can't control *flying* aircraft. I imagine they don't care if I have 0.0001 FPS while sitting completely still and transponder off/standby.

 

I could prefile, that's true. I don't know how and where currently, though. Obviously that's a completely different and more personal problem.

Link to post
Share on other sites
but then I realized that this would only defer the problem until later when the pilot starts moving

 

No no, it's not deferring the problem, it's taking away this false positive of sitting at a gate, performing final software functions in order to get started and actually fly.

 

It absolutely is deferring the problem. If a user gets low frame rates sitting still at the gate, they are in all likelihood going to get low frame rates later when their FPS issue becomes a problem for others.

 

More to the point, it defers the notification of the problem, and thus the opportunity to fix it before it impacts others.

Developer: vPilot, VRC, vSTARS, vERAM, VAT-Spy

Senior Controller, Boston Virtual ARTCC

Link to post
Share on other sites
I have a stable 30+ X-Plane FPS in my most demanding scenery zone.

...except when I'm in another window.

User: "My FPS is only an issue when I'm sitting at the gate, not in anyone's way."

 

Support team: "Too bad; you're out of luck."

 

Come on, guys -- is that really what VATSIM has come to?

Cheers,

-R.

fvJfs7z.png

Link to post
Share on other sites

Agree with Robert. Wouldn't it be good if the ones who enforced this rule started to help these guys that are reporting disconnects in situations where they shouldn't be disconnected? I am talking about FPS>20, stutters with time <30 seconds – or like in this case sitting at the gate and simply switching to the pilot client for sending a flight plan?

gen.php?img=_5_1&cid=899395

Link to post
Share on other sites

Robert and Alexander, I'm not sure if you're directing your comments at me, but I'm only stating that the suggested "fix" of disabling the frame rate monitor when someone is sitting still on the ground is not a good idea for reasons that are much broader than just someone having an FPS drop when they tab over to the flight plan form. I am not at all saying that he's "out of luck". We must all keep in mind that fixing an issue for one person can have negative repercussions for a much larger subset of the user base.

Developer: vPilot, VRC, vSTARS, vERAM, VAT-Spy

Senior Controller, Boston Virtual ARTCC

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ross, from my point: Not especially at you, I am just noticing that there are a lot of reports here and on other forums/social media channels from pilots who should not get disconnected but actually are - and I have the impression these users don't receive the attention and help they deserve (of course, I could be wrong here, maybe the staff and the developers are already talking to them via private channels). My opinion is: If you introduce something like these forced disconnects, you also have the obligation to care about the users who are wrongly affected by it.

gen.php?img=_5_1&cid=899395

Link to post
Share on other sites
Ross, from my point: Not especially at you, I am just noticing that there are a lot of reports here and on other forums/social media channels from pilots who should not get disconnected but actually are - and I have the impression these users don't receive the attention and help they deserve (of course, I could be wrong here, maybe the staff and the developers are already talking to them via private channels). My opinion is: If you introduce something like these forced disconnects, you also have the obligation to care about the users who are wrongly affected by it.

 

And why aren't these people listen to ? Why ?

I was one of that people with quality slider on the right and FPS average between 35 and 60, depending on the scenery, and being disconnected.

I wrote the script which points out the monitor was much sharper than it would be.

 

But it seems there are some deaf people hiding themselves behind the cause the invoke. It is like a crusade, we are renegate, and they are knights, we are wrong they are right. Whatever your flying experience.

And the fact I have evidence in front of my eyes doesn't matter and don't stop them as they just listen to themselves only.

Whatever you write is wrong, just overfly the subjects and the posts ... VATSIM, open minded group, trying to make people sharing flying and controlling experience turned into another kind of organization I wouldn't as it is just a shame !

 

Come on guys ! Wake up and realize you are flying high speed and low or high frame rate against the cliff !

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ross, not to you specifically, but to ALL the developers and VATSIM leadership who have read concerns from users about FPS / time dilation enforcement being overzealous and said, "this is the way it is now, deal with it."

 

VATSIM leadership has tried to say from the beginning that they're NOT trying to say that only high-end gaming PCs are allowed on the network -- just that they're solving the specific issue of time dilation *while flying*. Along comes a guy who says, "my system runs fine while flying, but, kicks me off while at the gate." and the response is, "too bad." That flies straight in the face of the argumemt that's been used to defend this strategy because it basically says that you need to have a high-end enough computer to support all the additional apps used during the flight planning process even though you're sitting on the ground and not moving, and will close all those before you taxi out.

 

You know what would have been good? A little testing. Maybe a month with JUST the warning messages until everyone was sure the detection was working as intended. Not just start booting people off and then make them plead their cases in "guilty-until-proven-innocent" style. Look, I get that this issue needs to be addressed and I get that some of the people crying about it are the ones tracking along the approaches at 75% sim rate. But there are a lot of people saying that the implementation is too tight and kicking off people who aren't part of the problem, and none of them are being listened to. The solution is a good one in principle, but the implementation here has REALLY sucked.

Cheers,

-R.

fvJfs7z.png

Link to post
Share on other sites
Along comes a guy who says, "my system runs fine while flying, but, kicks me off while at the gate." and the response is, "too bad."

 

It sounds like you are referencing this thread. I re-read the thread and found that no one responded with "too bad". You put it in quotes. Who are you quoting? (If it was in some other thread, then nevermind.)

 

What I did see was this response from Justin:

 

Windows is notorious for doing funky things with GL when the GL window loses focus (in this case, X-Plane), so it’s quite possible that you could encounter stutters or frame rate drops on Alt+Tab. Unfortunately there’s nothing I can do about this.

 

That's very, very different than saying "too bad".

 

You went on to say:

 

But there are a lot of people saying that the implementation is too tight and kicking off people who aren't part of the problem, and none of them are being listened to.

 

And in this thread I see this additional response from Justin:

 

If you think you’re being unfairly disconnected, then you need to provide sufficient evidence to prove your claim. The next time you fly, turn on the the frame rate logging within X-Plane and upload the full data log file here.

 

Thus, you cannot say that he isn't being listened to. Not only did Justin read the thread, he also posted instructions on how the user can help him troubleshoot.

 

I realize that I'm focusing on just this one thread, but this is the thread that in which you are making your [Mod - Happy Thoughts]ertions that the devs are responding with "too bad" and not listening to anyone.

 

I agree that communication could be better. In fact, I think that is almost always true. However, I'm calling you out on your generalizations because hyperbole only makes you part of that very same communication problem. If you want to be taken seriously, I encourage you to dispense with the generalizations and object to specific cases with specific objections, rather than painting every case with a broad brush.

Developer: vPilot, VRC, vSTARS, vERAM, VAT-Spy

Senior Controller, Boston Virtual ARTCC

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ross, "too bad" is indeed paraphrasing, but the clear implication of the responses on this thread (including your own) were that nothing was going to be done about this poster's problem. And requiring every user who claims to be kicked off unfairly to post clear and convincing evidence that it was unfair -- when the user in question may or may not be technically saavy enough even to know where to collect or look for such evidence -- is exactly the "guilty-until-proven-innocent" mentality I referred to earlier. Furthermore, this poster did indeed say that the low-FPS detection was working as intended -- but the situation itself was unfair because it only happens when he's on the ground, not moving. There's nothing for him to prove, then, except maybe his [Mod - Happy Thoughts]ertion that he doesn't suffer from low FPS issues once he's underway. How is he supposed to prove that, exactly?

 

The sheer number of complaints from users saying they've been kicked off unfairly should be enough to warrant further investigation rather than simply telling everyone who says they were booted unjustly (AND AGAIN, I AM PARAPHRASING): "oh yeah? prove it."

 

(EDIT: added additional clarification about the unfairness of asking this particular user to prove his case)

Cheers,

-R.

fvJfs7z.png

Link to post
Share on other sites
Ross, "too bad" is indeed paraphrasing, but the clear implication of the responses on this thread were that nothing was going to be done about this poster's problem.

 

I don't know how you get there ... Justin's first response was stating the plain fact that there is nothing that he can do about a Windows quirk that causes GL rendering to suffer when the window doesn't have focus. That is not in any way a refusal to do something about it.

 

And requiring every user who claims to be kicked off unfairly to post clear and convincing evidence that it was unfair -- when the user in question may or may not be technically saavy enough even to know where to collect or look for such evidence -- is exactly the "guilty-until-proven-innocent" mentality I referred to earlier.

 

This is certainly understandable, and I think that at least in this case it's a result of the language that Justin used. He used words like "provide sufficient evidence" and "prove your claim". Sounds like a court room. However, all he is actually doing is the standard developer troubleshooting process that involves collecting data from the user that is reporting a bug. Developers cannot just take every user's bug report as unquestionable dogma and go off and spend countless hours trying to reproduce and correct an issue that may not even exist. Software development simply does not work that way.

 

In other words, it is not "guilty until proven innocent" ... it is "I need more data to see if this is actually a bug." We can all do a better job of choosing our words when interacting with users. Again, it's a communication issue.

 

Ironically, in another thread, you said essentially the same thing as Justin:

 

Stefan -- I wouldn't expect an answer if you are truly asking "what if," as in, asking about a hypothetical situation. If you're saying that you ARE getting disconnected unfairly because of this, I recommend you take some screenshots and/or videos illustrating it clearly.

 

 

The sheer number of complaints from users saying they've been kicked off unfairly should be enough to warrant further investigation

 

Agreed. And that investigation is happening.

Developer: vPilot, VRC, vSTARS, vERAM, VAT-Spy

Senior Controller, Boston Virtual ARTCC

Link to post
Share on other sites
Ross, "too bad" is indeed paraphrasing, but the clear implication of the responses on this thread were that nothing was going to be done about this poster's problem.
I don't know how you get there ... Justin's first response was stating the plain fact that there is nothing that he can do about a Windows quirk that causes GL rendering to suffer when the window doesn't have focus. That is not in any way a refusal to do something about it.

The poster was asking whether the low-FPS check could be suspended when the plane is on the ground and not moving. Justin's response followed by your own justification for why that was a bad idea sure sounded like refusal.

 

requiring {...} clear and convincing evidence {...} is exactly the "guilty-until-proven-innocent" mentality I referred to earlier.
Developers cannot just take every user's bug report as unquestionable dogma and go off and spend countless hours trying to reproduce and correct an issue that may not even exist.

Again, the number of complaints ought to serve as sufficient red flag. I agree completely that it's not as "clean" as having logs, screenshots, and videos from every instance. Remember that in a lot of these cases, the user did not EXPECT to be kicked off and therefore was not prepared to grab such evidence.

 

And that investigation is happening.

I'm glad to hear it. The preponderance of responses has suggested otherwise. Perhaps that's my own, emotionally-charged characterization of it; and if that's true then I apologize and I'll back off and let the dev team dig into it.

 

Ironically, in another thread, you said essentially the same thing as Justin:
Stefan -- I wouldn't expect an answer if you are truly asking "what if," as in, asking about a hypothetical situation. If you're saying that you ARE getting disconnected unfairly because of this, I recommend you take some screenshots and/or videos illustrating it clearly.

I'm keenly aware of when I'm being ironic -- thanks

 

In all seriousness, in Stefan's case I think there may have been a little lost in translation -- and was trying to guide him to clarify whether he was asking about a hypothetical rather than actual situation. And, while not a coder by trade myself, I do understand the developers' side of it to a large extent -- and I'm not suggesting that users SHOULDN'T provide evidence to back up their claims about coding gone wild. They absolutely should, when they can. I'm just asking that we step back and look at the big picture, here -- this is a piece of code designed to KICK PEOPLE OFF of the network, and my overall impression is that not NEARLY enough due care has been exercised to ensure that this code affected the FEWEST number of people possible to solve the issue it was meant to address.

 

Thanks for letting me air it out (not that you, specifically, had a choice, LOL -- but thanks to forum admins for not shutting the discussion down). I'm hopeful that a month from now this will all have gotten ironed out and we'll all have moved on to debate the CTP planning process, LOL...

Cheers,

-R.

fvJfs7z.png

Link to post
Share on other sites

Admittedly, when I said “there’s nothing I can do about this” in response to the Windows GL issue, it did come across as being punitive, which was not my intention. I was referring to the fact that it’s outside of my control that Windows decides to do funky things with GL windows. With that being said, I am working through some ideas on how to improve the end-user experience because a user definitely should not be disconnected while sitting at the gate trying to submit a flight plan.

 

If a user feels that they are being unfairly disconnected, then I need evidence that supports their claim. Enabling frame rate logging within X-Plane is the preferred option because it shows each frame line by line and the amount of time it took the process the frame, etc.

Controller (C1), Los Angeles ARTCC
Developer: xPilot, vATIS

Link to post
Share on other sites
“there’s nothing I can do about this”{...} was referring to the fact that it’s outside of my control that Windows decides to do funky things with GL windows. With that being said, I am working through some ideas on how to improve the end-user experience because a user definitely should not be disconnected while sitting at the gate trying to submit a flight plan.

Thanks for the clarification. You know, or at least I hope you do, that I generally respect and appreciate what you do. My emotions are getting involved here because it regards m[Mod - Happy Thoughts]ive numbers of users getting kicked off of the network by intent, and I feel as though those water-rapids weren't waded into with enough caution. It doesn't help matters that I myself am running X-Plane on a pretty marginal machine and so I sympathize with users here on the edge-cases. Clearly I've let myself get over the edge on this, so I'll reign myself back in now...

Cheers,

-R.

fvJfs7z.png

Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't know how you get there ... Justin's first response was stating the plain fact that there is nothing that he can do about a Windows quirk that causes GL rendering to suffer when the window doesn't have focus. That is not in any way a refusal to do something about it.

The poster was asking whether the low-FPS check could be suspended when the plane is on the ground and not moving. Justin's response followed by your own justification for why that was a bad idea sure sounded like refusal.

 

I think you might be conflating two different things here. What I brought up were the problems with suspending the framerate check when the aircraft is sitting still. That is not the same thing as refusing to address the poster's specific issue. Rather, I was addressing his suggested fix. And Justin was simply stating that the Windows/GL quirk is something that is beyond his control.

 

Put another way, if a user has a problem and suggests a fix, and developers respond stating why that fix is problematic, that is NOT a refusal to address the issue.

 

Developers cannot just take every user's bug report as unquestionable dogma and go off and spend countless hours trying to reproduce and correct an issue that may not even exist.

Again, the number of complaints ought to serve as sufficient red flag.

 

We've covered this ground already. The number of complaints can only serve as an indicator that there is likely an issue. In this thread, neither Justin nor I have tried to claim that there isn't an issue. Quite the contrary ... Justin has asked for information to help determine if there is an issue, and if so, how to fix it.

 

Thanks for letting me air it out (not that you, specifically, had a choice, LOL

 

I did have a choice ... I could have just ignored the thread, but that's not in my nature. (As much as I wish it was.)

Developer: vPilot, VRC, vSTARS, vERAM, VAT-Spy

Senior Controller, Boston Virtual ARTCC

Link to post
Share on other sites

Let me know your preferred format of illustrating my problem, and I'll get to work on it.

 

I can send an FPS log, I can record gameplay with OBS and upload the video to Twitch or Youtube, I can take screenshots of the whole monitor when X-Plane has and hasn't Windows' focus...I can jump through whatever arbitrary hoop you want.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...