Slimming down my FTX regions?

[norfolk mike]

Whilst I can appreciate the enhanced detailing of the customised 'default' airfields, I'm wondering if a little 'house clearance' on my part might be of some performance benefit?

 

Let me explain. In FTX England [for example] I only ever depart from and land at pay ware airfields. Mostly the FTX ones, but I also have the UK2000 offerings installed. I'm not sure if it works quite like this, but I'm 'assuming' that each and every time I overfly a beautifully detailed default airfield that I never actually get to see, with its volumetric grass, people flow and statics, I'm incurring some sort of a system hit? Maybe I read things incorrectly, but my current understanding is that the VAS takes a hit, even if flying in the vicinity of such a field?

 

I was wondering if going into the ORBX folder and placing all of the associated 'default' airfield scenery object BGLs into a backup folder would create a problem? Such as FTX Central recognising a 'missing file' issue maybe? I guess I could rename the BGLs to BGL.OFF [for example], but physically removing them to an 'off drive' backup would be my preferred option.

 

I'm not having performance issues myself [with regards to FPS], and I haven't received an OOM for a VERY long time, but having read so many posts about such memory issues I've now got 'Simmer's Paranoia'! If removing the files would lighten things up a little bit then I'll sweep a few into a folder, but if doing so ONLY results in a little more hard drive space then I'll leave well alone.

 

 

[Ian Routley]

If you remove files that place objects, there should be no issue with missing GUIDs.  Don;t alter any ORBXLibs folders though.

 

Note that it is nearly impossible for us to provide help for users to customise their FTX installations in this way.  Strictly speaking it is frowned upon, but what you do in the sanctity of your own man-cave is entirely up to you!

 

Please don't distribute the modified folders or files, though.

 

I think the hugest resource consumer is Autogen, rather thancustomised objects.

[norfolk mike]

Thanks Ian.

 

I wasn't thinking of "modifying" anything as such, but merely removing the airfield object placement BGLs that reside below the actual airfield files. I'm assuming they just tell the sim to place static objects from the library into certain areas? Yes, I appreciate that tampering with the internal workings of the ORBX folder would void any support, but I would keep them backed up and therefore easily replaced should things go 'pear shaped'. That might be a "UK expression" so I'll substitute it for Tits Up.

 

Thanks for speedy reply. 5 minutes IS pretty quick!

[Snave]

The cause for many OOM's from consumed VAS space is not just the loading into VAS of the textures and files, but also the growing of error files that highlight missing items, and these are being shown (in P3D at least) to be a contributing factor to unreleased VAS.

 

Or to put it another way: This may not work.

[Ian Routley]

...but I would keep them backed up and therefore easily replaced should things go 'pear shaped'. That might be a "UK expression" so I'll substitute it for Tits Up.

Thanks for speedy reply. 5 minutes IS pretty quick!

Pear-shaped works fine.

[norfolk mike]

Thanks Snave. I think I understand the reasoning behind that. For example, if FSX was calling up an object with a missing texture, it might just keep on searching and using up resources in the process? Or if a placement file was calling up an library object that was similarly missing it might not know to just give up the hunt?

 

I may be wrong of course, but the hope was that the files I was intending to remove from the ORBX folders were simply 'object placement guides' and would have no influence over anything actually within the libraries themselves? A bit like a self created 'instant scenery' file that merely says to FSX "I want that static Cessna 172 putting right here". I wouldn't be messing with anything contained within the libraries themselves, so hopefully I'll be okay. If I suddenly get a dreaded OOM as a consequence, I'll stick em back in!

[tuisong]

Can't you just uncheck them in the scenery library?

[norfolk mike]

The files I'm referring to aren't scenery library entries in their own right Tuisong. You have FTX England so we'll use that as an example. Look in your Orbx folder, then FTX_EU and you'll see the ENG_05_SCENERY folder, yes? Below all of the enhanced airfield files you'll find about 200 'objects' files, each relating to a specific airfield. That equates to several thousand static objects that I personally will never see, but will be all chipping away to a small degree at my VAS and performance.

 

IF removing those files doesn't result in problems, then as a 'payware field to payware field' cyber aviator I can happily live without them. For anyone (perhaps the majority) who DOES use those default airfields, the static objects, people flow and volumetric grass will be an asset of course, but for me personally, surplus to my requirements .

 

Hope that clarifies?