Su-15

[Hooray]

you could also view the 3D model in fgviewer/osgviewer first to see what performance is like there, which will obviously exclude other subsystems (Nasal, AI traffic, terrain/scenery).

And you could post your osg-on-screen stats to see where the bottleneck is.

[Thorsten]

I don't think you can draw conclusions about the 3D model without also having some baseline data first, including different aircraft/locations and runtime settings, but also hardware specs.

No, I really couldn't do that, except I happen to have quite a bit of data.

Vitos in fact describes the vertex count:

- twice more complex than my previous "MiG-15" aircraft model, and even harder than "Vostok-1/R-7" spacecraft/rocket model made by me.

Since I'm rather familiar with both the MiG-15 and the Vostok and the Vostok tends to be too heavy already for my box, I have an idea of how heavy the model is.

Also, in the event, the screenshot tells a lot. You can see the plane pointed above the horizon, but you can see that the horizon is blurry. You see an altimeter in the cockpit which tells you how high we are. The rendering framework is not ALS, and hence from the horizon, knowing altitude, you can see that visibility is low. There's no cloud in the view, i.e. no performance drain due to clouds. From that in turn, you can estimate that there can hardly be any scenery inside the view frustrum, i.e. you can dispense with masks - if you have a shot like this, you know it's only cockpit and sky.

The default skydome has a performance footprint close to zero, so... the 8 fps are exclusively made by the cockpit and you can dispense with the further analysis of the bottleneck

[geed]

I can confirm on that by testing Flightgear 3.4 with Richards F-15 and 35fps at EGOD (with our FGUK scenery installed) and Vitos Su-15 at 7-8fps at the same configuration.

[Hooray]

I can confirm on that by testing Flightgear 3.4 with Richards F-15 and 35fps at EGOD (with our FGUK scenery installed) and Vitos Su-15 at 7-8fps at the same configuration.

ok, it seems then Thorsten was right ... to be sure, you can use DEBUG/Property Browser and navigate to /sim/rendering/draw-masks to disable rendering of the aircraft model and watch frame rate/spacing (or the osg stats) accordingly.

[Thorsten]

To lay another matter to rest, this



is why I believe EarthView is the way to go for low orbit visuals (don't hesitate to open to see a hires version...).

[enrogue]

So on my main machine, the Su-15 gets 8-10 fps *when the lower 8 instruments are within view*, and 25 fps in the 'radar' view where I can see the top couple of instruments & the radar. I also get 4-5 fps when looking up the tailpipes - no idea why

My graphics settings are as follows:

main slider set to 5, ALS on, random veg & shadows on (this is 3.6RC for Mac as it crashes less than 3.4). I also have particles precipitation, 3d clouds & real (advanced) weather.

Richards F-15C gives me 20fps in default cockpit view & 25fps if I shove the view up a bit to hide the radar etc with these settings

both tests done at EGMH with terrasync scenery

I have worked out the startup sequence & managed to get it off the ground - a couple of notes on that:

It's odd & annoying to have to use pageup/pagedown for the throttle - haven't looked at remapping it to my throttle yet

it has auto co-ordination turned on by default, which I can't work out how to turn off except by resetting the property

I haven't managed to *not* crash land it yet as I haven't worked out the correct landing settings yet - at 15 degrees AoA I can't see the runway from the default cockpit view & if I look at the instruments I go down to 8 fps again *sigh*

[Thorsten]

So on my main machine, the Su-15 gets 8-10 fps *when the lower 8 instruments are within view*, and 25 fps in the 'radar' view where I can see the top couple of instruments & the radar.

What drags framerate is the number of model vertices in the view frustrum. When you don't look at the larger part of the cockpit because you're essentially looking out of the window with little of the plane in view, you get decent framerate. When you have the lower part of the cockpit and the forward part of the plane in view, you get lower framerate. When you have most of the model in view, you get lowest framerate.

Doesn't really matter whether you actually see so much of the plane - vertices blocked by opaque surfaces still count in this game. Even if you see an instrument, the nose wheel a few meters before it will still kill your framerate even if you can't see it.

[enrogue]

Thanks for that explanation - it makes sense now - hence why so many objects are usually hidden by conditionals (gear up, view number etc) in xml usually

I've made a video of the startup sequence, takeoff, flight & landing (actually my first landing where I didn't break it - pure fluke) here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m-p5YYPIFg4

[vitos]

Update: "Lazure" command line. Su-15 if second of Soviet planes which was made with ability to intercept guided by ground stations in instrumentation mode. System shows distance to target, course to it, altitude and speed of it. Later "Lazure" was installed at every Soviet interceptors. but, insted of additional pointers at gauges had own indicator.



About conversations here: when I was came with questions and requests years ago, I've been told: "You do not comprehend how FG works. Each one here doing what is interesting to him, and in case it's going some common line it's going to common release.".

Huh, well. We all here just making fun - one deciding what common line is inclusive. OKay. Then, I do care about Your fun just in degree You are caring about mine. On my view it's quite fair.

[Thorsten]

Huh, well. We all here just making fun - one deciding what common line is inclusive. OKay. Then, I do care about Your fun just in degree You are caring about mine.

You can model whatever you like - I personally don't care too much helping you to make it usable if that's clearly not what you want - my time is better spent helping people out who actually want to learn. If you have fun at 7 fps without scenery because you have funny notions on what 'real' rendering as opposed to 'fake rendering' is, you just go ahead.

Your attempts to portray yourself as the best developer around however and to taunt other users are a different matter and go beyond 'your fun'.

[Hooray]

to get back on topic: are you actually posting links to your aircraft, or just screen shots ?
I was going to have a look at the Nasal/Canvas code, but cannot seem to find a single posting with a link to the aircraft including its most recent Nasal code ?

[MIG29pilot]

sourceforge.net/fgspaceshuttledev/files
Oh you mean vitos.

[PINTO]

vitos, the SU-15 is gorgeous, intricate, detailed, and realistic. Good job.
I have a potato for a computer, and am not noticing that bad of an FPS hit. It is comparable to the F-16.
Keep up the good work!

[Johan G]

to get back on topic: are you actually posting links to your aircraft, or just screen shots ?

There seem to be a link in the first post on the first page.

[Hooray]

to get back on topic: are you actually posting links to your aircraft, or just screen shots ?

There seem to be a link in the first post on the first page.

yes, I checked -and even downloaded- that a few weeks ago, and it is definitely not up to date, i.e. in terms of the Nasal/Canvas functionality discussed here (radar), which I was hoping to look at...