I'm happy to report I'm having no problem with VC framerates (very comparible to the PAX version on my machine)... :-jumpy Sounds have been much improved in the 744 overall, Flight Model is solid as a rock, and she is a real joy to look at and fly (Cabin night lighting looks great as well)... :-beerchug My only problem is the hole in the Cabin... :-hmmm http://forums.avsim.net/user_files/145465.jpg

Interesting topic. I completed a brief test flight yesterday with the F and found the frame rate better in VC of the F vs the pax. One observation is that the frame rate in the VC with DX3 textures was better than 32 bit textures.Regards,AndrewP3.6 ATI800XT 2G DDR

Steve-I'm proof that you have to be reasonable about matching your FS settings to your machine's performance.It runs very well on that machine- but if I were to load it up with heave scenery packages, AI traffic, Weather and all the other trimmings- it'd be like trying to carry Thanksgiving dinner on a single-ply paper plate....The ISFD is most certainly the source of additional strain in the VC, as I mentioned above. It's another full screen that includes all of the computation magic needed to produce displays...Michael J expressed surprise that it wasn't compensated for by the reduction in steam gauges (in another post) but the steam gauges are really quite easy on the VC, as they don't require much mathematics and/or drawing routines. If we did a -100, say, we'd probably have FPS that were out of this world- as the steam gauges are pretty low intensity.I dread an airplane like the Falcon 900X, etc. It would crawl....We are hoping that the advent of FSX will give us some new tools to work with- and thus improve VC performance overall- but like any other major upgrade- it will probably carry enough of a performance penalty that any gains we get will be wiped out for a year or so until we can upgrade our hardware again.... It never ends. :-)

Hi I thought Id wait a few days and do some tests. Frames are alot worse on the F. They are a little better since doing what George mentioned but still not as good as Pax. I also have the same hole as is in Chris's Pic. Hope you can find a fix for these as they are the only problems that I have with this excellent new addition.Cheers

>>The ISFD is most certainly the source of additional strain in>the VC, as I mentioned above. It's another full screen that>includes all of the computation magic needed to produce>displays...>Looks like PMDG isn't the only one having problems with the ISFD.Maybe Qantas had the same issues with this NG;-) :http://www.airliners.net/open.file/1019182/L/CheersThomas

>Looks like PMDG isn't the only one having problems with the ISFD.>Maybe Qantas had the same issues with this NG;-) :> http://www.airliners.net/open.file/1019182/L/What in the heck is wrong with that isfd. Why is it judding out like that? What if the captain ""bumped" it and it broke? (note how bumped is in quotes:D)

Robert, not sure if there is anything that can be done to improve the efficiency of the ISFD, if not though, could a static bmp representing the gauge be made available for those of use who don't plan on spilling coke down the front of the PFD/ND? :-)Of course if there are some moves afoot to curb the FPS hit then I'm even happier!

hey guys just thought id report that im seeing an increase in frame rates. i reduced my VC frames to 5 but then put it back up to 15, i did a hard drive defrag again AFTER i installed the F and now im seeing nearly the same as the PAX. its strange as yesterday i was seeing 6-10, now my FPS fluctuates up into the low 20s and back to 15 or 16 and back up again, it sometimes drops below 10 mainly due to Active Sky weather refresh. This is the same behaviour as my PAX so im happy. Im not sure if this is gonna help anyone but try a defrag if you havent done one since you installed the F, as ive certainly seen a bit of an improvement

Update as of 14:00Z 21 March...Ok, I have been doing some extensive testing, after doing a complete defrag on both my hard drives last night with O&O Defrag. (This is an excellent defrag tool, would recommend to anyone to get it.)I decided to find an airport that is completely default, apart from some added terrain, to do my testing.I first flew with the Pax version with CRT displays. Took off, did one circuit, and landed again. The smoothness of my sim was good, as the Pax version normally is with my frames in the range of 25 to 30 in VC. The VC in the Display frame rate tuning menu was set to 15, which is normal for me. I also tried flying with this setting all the way to the left, which is 5, and there was not much difference, if any.I then shut everything down, and started on the runway again with the same aircraft, but changed my displays to LCD and reset my Display frame rate in the PMDG menu to 15. I took off, flew a circuit, and landed. Again, everything was just fine, as in the first flight, with my FPS in the range of 25 to 30, and the sim very smooth. I also change the Display frame rate in the menu to different settings, but could not notice much difference. Obviously when I set this to something like 50, I do notice a difference in the smoothness, but not that much.I then placed the aircraft back at the beginning of the runway, with all systems shutdown. I switched to the 400-F version, and started out with the Display frame rate tuning option set to 15 in VC, which like I said, is normal for me. Everything was fine, until I started rolling down the runway for takeoff. I could see the sim was not as smooth as the Pax version, although not as bad as before I did my defrag last night. I could at least fly, although the FPS were in the range of 10 to 15 in the VC. I did my circuit, landed and replaced the aircraft at the start of the runway.I then set the Display frame rate tuning option to 5, and did the same. Although this was not as smooth as the Pax version, it was still ok, with FPS in the range of 20 to 25 in the VC.One this that I did notice is that the LCD display from the PAX version is not identical as the LCD display in the 400F version, but I don't think that this is the problem, or maybe I'm wrong!Now I know that this has all been said before, but I needed to do this after a complete defrag to test. Robert, if there is anything I can do to help with this, please ask. I hope I have given you some helpfull info here.I also am aware that it has been suggested to remove the ISFD from the actual panel, but I don't really see this as an option altogether, unless we can get a dummy gauge to replace it with.Hope to hear some news from PMDG about this soon. ;)Cheers,

I also am aware that it has been suggested to remove the ISFD from the actual panel, but I don't really see this as an option altogether, unless we can get a dummy gauge to replace it with.Of course it's not a permanent solution, but it does make this bird more flyable! Also there's no info that you get with this guage that's not already incorporated into the PFD, so your not missing anything. I much rather have a smooth flight with out the guage, than a slideshow with it. Just fly it as if that guage was down for maintenance (Which isn't far from the truth!), until it's fixed!

Not to be a whiny jerk, but just verifying that PMDG is still looking into this - right now the plane is unfortunately pretty unflyable for me. Not a huge deal, as the pax version is fine, but i'd really like to start hauling some boxes around.I'd be willing to do any debugging/whatever necessary to get it fixed.-stefan

I'd be very grateful if anyone could explain how to remove or disable this gauge.Phil 'Dougal' Symonds

temporarily remove the ISFD:edit aircraftpmdg747-400fpanelpanel.cfgnear the bottom of the file, just add forward slash to the line "gauge15....," like "/gauge15=PMDG_747400_Main!ISFD...See if this helps. Or set the VC frame rate slider to minimum "5."PatAMD A64 4000+ @ 2.6GHz, Zalman7700Cu cooler, Corsair XMS 1GB DDR, LTK6800GT-OC, Asus A8V MoBo, WDRaptor10KrpmHDD, TrackIR4, CH FSYoke + TQ, XP-hsp2

I must admit after spending more time with this Cargo 744, I'm now seeing a difference in performance (versus the PAX) that I didn't notice in my first couple flights. My above post was made out of excitement of having this awesome add-on coupled with an easy flight over water from PHNL to KLAX. Once I ventured into flying over land (KJFK to KSFO for example) I'm seeing a very noticeable problem...I must admit that as of now I'm tired of fighting with the issue so I'm back to using the PAX version. I like many others have to concede and hanger this bird until a fix is found... :-(

>Update as of 14:00Z 21 March...>>Ok, I have been doing some extensive testing, after doing a>complete defrag on both my hard drives last night with O&O>Defrag. (This is an excellent defrag tool, would recommend to>anyone to get it.)>I just downloaded the trial version of O&O Defrag, and am very impressed. I was curious as to whether you use one of the three "complete" defrag algorithms, and if so, which you prefer for FS ie: "Date" "Access" or "Name"?All of my FS files are on a dedicated drive on my machine...Jim Barrett