OK, in Windows 2000 Pro in the Task Manager looking at the difference Total Commit Charge pre-FS2002 vs loading to the main panel and then spot view I see the following:C172 startup with main panel: 75MBto spot view: 85MBDF737 to main panel: 138MBto spot view: 163MB767PIC + POSKY + TCAS to main panel: 153MBto spot view: 160MBPSS A320v to main panel: 198MBto spot view: 213MBPMDG 737-600 2D to main panel: 458MBto spot view: 503MBWow, PMDG really is using a LOT more memory than everything else! Look at that 458MB just to load into the panel and not touch a thing. No wonder it starts so slowly.Does PMDG recognize they have a memory use problem with even the simplest visual model and no VC? I'd really like to use it, but even with 512MB RAM it is tough, and I'm not even using the bells and whistles like the VC or stairs.Lee Hetherington (KBED)

Sorry to sound like a stuck record (heheh, remember records??) but what I don't understand is that if this memeory usage is consistent for all users, and it must be as they all have the same version, how come there is less reporting of the problem than the VC issue which PMDG have announced that they've fixed?Can it be that there is something simple at work that makes it more apparent on some systems than others? I had an email exchange with Robert Randazzo yesterday and he suggested defragging. Now, whenever a developer suggests that as a solution, I usually get worried because it sort of says " I don't know what the problem is, but take this pill and you'll feel better." In any case, I'd defragged about a month ago so I was sure that this wouldn't make a great deal of difference.Well, to my astonishment, the 737NG performance is substantially improved. Long load times are still there, but down to about a minute, from the previous 1m 30s - 2m. In flight performance is smoother, I guess because the page file swapping is swifter with the optimised page file. There are still the occasional hiccoughs when switching to spot view.I'm going to conduct some more emperical tests, but I do think that optimising the drive with the swap file is a critical issue. The extremely high memory requirement remains and I fear we're simply stuck with it, which is my there's been no offical reaction and it's not mentioned in Lefteris' latest update.Cheers,

I'm no Windows nor an FS programmer, but I know that Anticyclone has the same problem with low framerates with their A320PIC.The reason for this is that they used GDI for the graphics of the cockpit instruments.Some programmer suggested in their forums to use DirectX/Direct3D instead, and others agreed that this would help improving the framerates tremendously.If that would be true true, it would explain the framerates problem of the 737NG.Just my 2 cent...Andreas