oldflyguy

Impressive response! Kudo's to the team. Full disclosure - XPRealistic is a "cute" plug-in but not one I would miss terribly if interaction with another plug-in caused a major issue. Still, it's a fun type of plug-in and I hope that dev will continue to work with you folks. Thanks!

Hi @Willies! Please attach a log.txt file (found in the XP root folder). The support team here may require additional information but please start with this.

Hi @Steve Carlson and welcome! The TBM has so much to offer besides the AOA indicator, the rain effect and the ILS function. Use the time before the update to become familiar with this great model (and to practice your RNAV approaches...LOL!) I have had this model since release and the dev team has been very good with updates. This one is taking a bit longer I admit but I would rather they get it right. I don't use VR but I'm supportive or those who do use it - I think some of the delay has to do with that function.

Hi @acsuadi! Have you started to use any "landing rate" plug-in (or any other plug-in) recently. I left my xgs plug-in in my resources folder the other day when I went to play with the M20 collection and the engine would not turn over (prop did not turn). Then I remembered I still had that plug-in active. Duh!!! So, try removing any new plug-in's and see what happens.

Well said @mgchrist5!

@fehrster Sarcasm aside I took the time to look at your log.txt to see if anything stood out. Nothing in there struck me as a cause of your issue. It is puzzling since my install has a good number of plug-in's, Orbx, Ortho and 3rd party airports yet it is smooth with the TBM. And everything else for that matter. So, looking outside of the basic install and the TBM are you at 1080, correct? More than one monitor? Other processes running? I see you've been at this for a while so I'm guessing you know all the Nvidia "stuff" - max power preferred and high performance selected in the control panel. Have you tried using a utility like HWiNFO64 to monitor the CPU and GPU while flying? I'm looking to upgrade my Mobo and CPU shortly but I'm concerned about issues that some i9-xxxx users are reporting. I hadn't considered AMD but it's in the mix now...

@fehrster and @Greaser, I have no stuttering issues with the TBM when using 11.50 Vulkan. Not so with 11.50 OpenGL unless I turn the graphics settings down a bit. Same for earlier versions of XP. And the same with other 3rd party aircraft models as well. This has nothing to do with the TBM expect perhaps there's a lot going on with the system modeling. And you need to take that and other factors - plug-in's, etc. - into consideration when tuning your system.

Yes, having re-read my post I can see how I came off as upset. Actually, I agree with your take on MSFS and don't know what I was thinking when I made that response so let me apologize for that lapse. Please chalk this up to the difficulty I sometimes have with digital conversations...

I realized that but too late . Sorry!

Yes, the flight model(s) in MSFS is the only thing that's "far from being polished" in MSFS said no one ever. What's the point of that statement? MSFS is new, streams ortho (very convenient) and does a nice sky. Not actual weather, just a nice sky picture. Purchased the super deluxe or whatever and am looking forward to see where it goes. Right now it's just a promising public early access beta that will probably require a lengthy period of patches and fixes.

I caught a Discord conversation with totoritko back when the P factor was modeled and some folks were complaining about control. He said he could "fix" that but "you probably won't like it" or something very close to that. He was correct! Well, we can always hope. Still, it's an outstanding piece of work!

Hi @LKN! I hope there are enough of us asking about this issue to have the devs seriously consider adding this back into the model. It was there at the release but did not last long. I don't think the devs were that keen about "adjusting" the P factor but here we are.

Using Xjet, Ground Traffic and XPRealistic with no issues. Just FYI...

No issue here at all. Intel/Nvidia. I just wanted to complement this team on terrific customer support. That is all...

Hi @Igor Chacon! I've had the TBM since release. I have a fair amount of plug-in's and 3rd party "stuff" and do use SMP / RWC (you should be using RWC as well but that's for another time). My non-expert take on your situation is that it does look like a plug-in conflict. However, looking at all the 3rd party stuff you have going on and only having 16GB or RAM might be an issue. Again, not near expert enough to know for sure. Could be a combination. In any case if this were me I would move all your 3rd party plug-in's to a safe place on the desktop and try a flight with the TBM. If you are successful begin to add the plug-in's back one at a time until you find the conflict. If still not able to complete a flight send a log from that attempt. If I may ask a question - why XPRealistic and Headshake? I have XPRealistic but don't know a thing about Headshake although I believe they accomplish the same thing. Finally, I know each users rig is like a snowflake - no two alike - but let my say I've never had an issue with the TBM through all the XP and XAviation beta's and updates. Other than what became non-functional until addressed. But no crashes.

I'm completely satisfied with the level of after purchase support I receive on my X-Aviation purchases. Thank you to the developers and the sellers. Now get back to work...

Hi @JohnV! Your graphics settings must be "off the charts" to get those cpu/gpu time per frame numbers! You should be looking to set your graphics options so that you are well under .03 for both cpu and gpu times. Preferably in the .02 area. The screen res of a mac is probably an issue as well with a detailed model like the SR22...

Busy hand are happy hands!

@TheTrueDuck Hello! Just a shot in the dark. I would remove all 3rd party plug-in's along with FlywithLua (scripts and all) to a safe place and try a flight with the Islander at that point. You may have some conflicts going on. Perhaps not but it's so easy to find out.

@air320 As a typical XP user I can assure you that the TBM works very well with the current XP beta and / or the stable version. While it is complex it is also pretty nicely optimized for XP. I own other "less complicated" payware aircraft where my fps is lower - still very nice, but lower. And a lot of tried and true add-on's. Please take the advice given above and attach a log.txt from your last TBM flight. Don't just give up on this excellent model. There has to be something else going on.

@Kiwi0ne I'm sure you are using the latest version of ASXP. There is a fix for the METAR.rwx file not updating. Go to This PC/users/*you*/app data/roaming//HiFi/AS_XPL/weather. In that folder you will find a "lastdownloadedWX" file. Delete it. Then restart XP and ASXP. It should work. This happens on occasion and ASXP sometime back suggested this to sort things out. It does work. I did try to locate you on the ASXP forums but could not. X-Aviation guys - hope you don't mind this response...

Resolved. OK folks I will never know (thank goodness) what the issue was but after re-installing SMP / RWC the issue disappeared. Sometimes it's very good to not be an "expert". Now I don't have to think about this any longer...

I'm thinking I don't need to post this in the SMP / RWC forum area...

Well, the latest XP beta - 15 - seems to have created a conflict with some plug-in's and the TBM. I launched a TBM flight with SMP / RWC / ASXP with the new beta and was amused to find a cockpit full of sky / clouds. Kind of like being in a planetarium - the sky was all around me. Outside views displayed the same way - like the sky came down to ground level. When I disabled (did not have to remove and restart) the SMP / RWC plug-in's things returned to normal. Testing with other 3rd party aircraft did not result in the "effect". No worries, until this is sorted I can fly the TBM without SMP / RWC or fly anything else with SMP / RWC.... I've attached a log.txt. I seem to recall a "clouds in the cockpit" thread somewhere but can't pin it down. If you need a screen shot I can do that. Too funny! Log.txt

@B738 "Broken Clouds" covers a lot of ground. It can mean from 5/10 to 9/10 coverage. The Metar doesn't provide this information. So, ASXP / SMP / RWC produces one result consistently and ASXP produces another result consistantly. Neither is correct all the time. And neither is wrong. Just the way it is.