The next X-Plane 10.30 beta should be out tonight (or maybe tomorrow morning); the release notes are already updated with the latest fixes, and we’re just waiting on upload.

There were some “boneheaded” bugs in beta 1 – things that just didn’t work, should have worked, and were easily fixed; we have addressed all of those that were reported for beta 2.  Despite about half a dozen boneheaded bugs, I actually think the quality of public beta 1 – relative to the amount of source change – was pretty strong.  Remember that 10.30 has perhaps 2x the amount of code change of a normal major patch, so if there isn’t too much nuclear then I think we’re doing okay.

Aircraft Authors: please test beta 2!  I think we may be able to keep 10.30’s beta period down to 4 weeks, which is a lot shorter than normal.  And the remaining bugs are all in clouds and performance, so please do not wait to test your aircraft.  Eugeny contacted me on problems with the A320 Neo on beta 1, and we have X-Plane fixed for beta 2. Don’t wait!

Performance: there have been all sorts of performance comments from users.  I think there are three separate things going on:

  1. For general use, X-Plane 10.30 is faster than 10.25.
  2. X-Plane 10.30’s clouds are definitely slower/more fill rate intensive than 10.25.
  3. There’s something wrong with some combination of AMD drivers and 10.30 that can cause total framerate death.

I am investigating both points 2 and 3, but neither are fixed for beta 2; we wanted to get some of the stupid things fixed ASAP (e.g. the ATIS not working).

To make matters worse, my PC’s SATA controller seems to have finally lost it’s mind. Philipp had to cut the Windows build, and this has halted me from investigating AMD performance problems.  (In my initial tests I couldn’t repro anything but now I’m stuck.)

Clouds: The other area of bug fixing on my plate that simply isn’t addressed in beta 2 is the cloud locations; several users have correctly reported that the bases of the clouds are simply not where they expect.  Since there is an unfortunate link between rendering settings and fixing this bug (if the puffs we use to visualize clouds change, it effectively moves the cloud bases) I have to fix both cloud performance and cloud bases at the same time.

The expected behavior for the clouds, I think, is that if you set a stratus layer with no storms and fly an ILS, you should “break out” (that is, make visual contact with the runway environment) right around the elevation set in the weather screen.  (This is not what is happening now, which is why there is an open bug.)  If you set more ‘creative’ weather, X-Plane will start to vary things and you won’t get “reliable” break-outs.

METARs: One last note on weather: if you find that X-Plane has misinterpreted a METAR (and my sympathy is with X-Plane, because METARs just contain the most random stuff in them sometimes), then please be sure to include in your bug report:

  1. The actual METAR.rwx file!  No METAR file, no way we can possibly debug.  To everyone who has sent METAR files, thank you!
  2. The location of the aircraft.  A fairly precise latitude/longitude, or a FIX or navaid that you are over is good.  The easiest is when you are at an airport and can send us an ICAO code.
  3. A description of what weather you actually got.

X-Plane 10.30 does have a new METAR parser so we’re trying to catch the bugs.

Airports and DSFs: we are looking at including both some fixed DSFs and additional 3-d airports in 10.30.  Both depend on the tech being ready; the airport gateway is in the deployment phase and if it goes smoothly, we could be ready to post airports.  I’m still trying to get to the bottom of DSF bugs, but I am close.  If either of these content updates miss 10.30, we’ll release them in a small patch as soon as possible.

About Ben Supnik

Ben is a software engineer who works on X-Plane; he spends most of his days drinking coffee and swearing at the computer -- sometimes at the same time.

25 comments on “Some Notes From Beta 1”

  2. Hey Ben!, I don’t know if it’s a bug or not… (because I don’t have a last-gen computer) I’ve noticed that when I turn on the New GPS, the FPS drops about 25%, and even worse if I add the copilot GPS (aprox. 50% drop). If I turn the Avionics off my FPS goes back. So, dunno if my CPU is too old (Intel Quadcore 2.4Ghz, Win7/64, XP10/64) to handle the new GPS or there’s a bug within it.

    Jerry C.

      1. I don’t think its the CPU, it’s probably the GPU because the new GPS uses some of the new openGL code for drawing nice anti-aliased lines on the map, and that requires GPU power.

  5. Net connection check boxes don’t work for me why? Please email me if you know

  6. Will any of the betas and the final 10.30 address the problems X-Plane has with prop effects on the “physics of flight” as it is calculated in X-Plane’s FDM?

    I am aware of some new datarefs, giving the devs the possibility os setting “some forces” that might allow their aircraft to get yaw where it should be, and less roll where it presently is on almost each and every prop aircraft designed for X-Plane (less those multi-props which are CR ), but this really looks like giving it to aircraft authors to fix, instead of some sort of a core intervention to fix what is wrong with the core FDM in X-Plane?

    On the Weather side, will the new “extended visibility” fix also allow to set weather at further distances from the present aircraft position?

    1. There doesn’t appear to be any spiraling slip stream in XPX ? Single prop AC should yaw to the left on climb out ! This my biggest pet peeve in the sim! Maybe Austin can chime in ?? Hope it can implemented one of these days !!

      1. It’s not just a matter of spiraling slip stream, there is also the so-called P-factor which produces a yaw moment adding to that produced by the spiraling stream. I wonder if these effects are actually taken into account, since I noticed an almost absent yaw effect, especially when performing go around maneuvers (abrupt change from low to high power, where you typically expect an appreciable left yaw – for clockwise rotating propellers).

        1. Yes, this is my major grip with X-Plane, since version 9.

          Austin introduced the torque effect, but he didn’t combine it with other effects.
          Stable state ( in the sense of sideslip ) situations are apparently difficult to model
          in X-Plane’s BET approach.

          New datarefs have been introduced, and talented devs will be able to explore their use
          and create some sort of prop effects, but it’ll have to be specific for each aircraft
          they design.

          I would rather prefer to see this limitation addressed in the core FDM, even if partially :-/

  7. Where can we see the release notes for 10.30b2? Update itself is available. Thanks for being quick on this update.

  8. Hi Ben, Nice work! Work flawlessly!
    just one question. Concerning fog,will it be possible in the future releases to set thickness of the fog layer? Will it be possible to set minimum thickness of the stratus layer less than 2000 ft (e.g base 1500 foot tops 2500 foot)

  10. Please forgive the dumb question, but are the clouds something that eat up VRAM?

    I think I’m maxing my 3GB VRAM after using my Windows install to closely monitor my 780ti – Thus leading to big performance drops.

  11. Ok, this is not a bugreport Ben, but as a user I would wish you guys could implement options for selecting the new GPS instrument on default planes such as the b58 in quickstart. I tried to implement this myself, but found it to difficult to do.

    Why should an cool new feature only be available for planemakers and not general use?

    1. We are _not_ going to do that. We are going to install the new GPS in the Kingair, B58, and Cessna before we go final.

      The new GPS is _part_of the airplane – we don’t provide a quick-flight option to “use jet engines” when you pick the C172. The integration with the aircraft is too tight.

  12. Clouds are very high above the ground, such as tier 38000ft. clouds directly below the aircraft always lower clouds below, closer to the ground.

Comments are closed.