Hi, I just thought I would share my own experiences with OOM and the MD11 for FSX. First, this aircraft in my opinion is the only wide body boeing for FSX that functions as it should as far as flight dynamics, profile and performance are concerned. It even flies a bit better than the 747( not to take anything away from the guys at PMDG, this is called progress and I still have high regard for the aircraft). So bravo PMDG!Now, as far as the OOM issue is concerned, I didn't have one untill I upgraded my ASX to ASA. Now they happen all the time, so I went back to ASX and all was fine. I think, like Ryan has stated, that the aircraft performs excellent on it's own but it depends on what you add to the equation in terms of memory usage :(

HiI can confirm that on my PC, PMDG MD11 is not cause of memory leak.I try relatively short flight between LDZA and LDSP, on route LDZA NIVES Y137 PALEZ L862 OKLAX LDSP.I put aircraft in hold at OKLAX for 2 hours. Mem usage (i read it from task manager ) was all the time between 790000K and 815000K.I have WinXp 32bit+ASV6+FSQ Croatia&Slovenia+UT Europe (with last patch which cured my OOM).Hope this helpHas

Both the operating system (for instance Vista 64) And the program's ".exe" file must be setup to recognize memory forcasts (ie virtual memory) of greater than 2Gs. Once again, this has nothing to do with actual physical memory or page file loads. SP2 took care of setting up FSX's "FSX.exe" file to recognize memory forecasts (ie virtual memory) of greater than 2Gs. However inconveniently, there is no automated way to modify the FS9.exe file to recognize memory forecasts (ie virtual memory) of greater than 2Gs. For FS9, - only - switching to a 64bit system (or installing the nefarious "3G switch" for 32 bit systems) will not let FS9 recognize memory forcasts (ie virtual memory) of greater than 2Gs. It's gotta have Both the op system And the .exe file hi-mem enabled. This is why you are seeing OOMs, even with 64bit op systems with FS9. The FS9.exe file has not been setup to recognize memory forecasts (ie virtual memory) of greater than 2Gs. There's a way to do it, but it's a bit of a computer science project that one attempts at one's own risk. (But really, how bad could it go? Just keep a copy of your old FS9.exe file! If you smell smoke, just stop and over rite with the old FS9 file).The most vulnerable systems will be 4G installs in hi horsepower system. FS will shoot for the memory moon and OOM when its memory-load-forecast hits the stratosphere (which is 2G for that vintage program). With all the FS9 bells and whistles now available, the MD could put the memory's - forecast - load (ie virtual memory) one bit over the line. Then bamm, OOM. There's a way to mod that FS9 file to enable it to recognize memory forecasts (ie virtual memory) of greater than 2Gs. Hopefully one of ya'll can help us with a simplified D&O.Thanks in advance.

HiI can confirm that on my PC, PMDG MD11 is not cause of memory leak.I try relatively short flight between LDZA and LDSP, on route LDZA NIVES Y137 PALEZ L862 OKLAX LDSP.I put aircraft in hold at OKLAX for 2 hours. Mem usage (i read it from task manager ) was all the time between 790000K and 815000K.I have WinXp 32bit+ASV6+FSQ Croatia&Slovenia+UT Europe (with last patch which cured my OOM).Hope this helpHas

Unfortunately, the PMDG 747 and MD-11 are causing OOM's on my machine.I have a Q6600, 4GB of RAM and an 8800GTX SLI card... and both the 747 and the MD11 suck the resources right out of it. In FS9, with the 747, I can do a flight of under 2 hours and still land, but if I try to fly longer than that, it'll eat up the VM and I'll inevitably get an OOM. It's interesting, though, that I never experienced OOM errors with the 747 until I updated with the last patch. Prior to that, I never had a problem... I'm thinking seriously of reverting back to the previous version of the 747 to see if I still get the OOM'sIn FSX, which by the way is a CLEAN SP2 install with NO add-on scenery, weather, etc, I can't even get past take-off with either the 747 or the MD-11 without getting an OOM error. My very first flight in the MD-11, I was running the tutorial flight and about 2 minutes after take-off from EGLL, I got an OOM. So that tells me that the resources needed for the MD-11 are MUCH greater than most people haveI think the 747 and the MD-11 are both very great products, but that they are really only enjoyable for someone running a 64bit OS.Unlike other people, I'm not going to do the 3GB switch because it negatively affects other add-ons (like AES) and I'd rather not mess around with BIOS settings and other things that shouldn't need to be changed to be able to enjoy the sim.So for me, the my PMDG planes (except for the 737) will have to go into the hangar and start collecting dust. :(- Alex

Unfortunately, the PMDG 747 and MD-11 are causing OOM's on my machine.In FSX, which by the way is a CLEAN SP2 install with NO add-on scenery, weather, etc, I can't even get past take-off with either the 747 or the MD-11 without getting an OOM error. My very first flight in the MD-11, I was running the tutorial flight and about 2 minutes after take-off from EGLL, I got an OOM. So that tells me that the resources needed for the MD-11 are MUCH greater than most people have- Alex

I'm amazed by the performance of the FS9 version also on the memory front it uses 500 mb less memory footprint as the FSX counterpart and just works fine in all conditions...That is with all sliders right 100% AI 100% cloud cover ASA and RC4 and AES and UT!Curious what the patch will do for the FSX version.As for OOM change EGLL aerosoft to UK2000 and you never will see again a OOM at LHW :(

Hi, the PMDG Aircraft are definitively NOT the cause for OOM's I have a new PC since MondayE8600 Asus P5QDeluxe4GB Kingston PC800Club 3d R4870 1GB XP Pro 32-BitWith all the Add Ons installed (Cloud9 Amsterdam, UT-Europe, German Airports, Simwings Heathrow, AES etc) I did a testflight from Munich via Frankfurt, Amsterdam to London. The Peak of the Page File was 1,37 GB. Sliders were at max (except AI-Traffic which was switched off, as I only fly online) I also didn't use the 3GB Switch. The cause for OOM's are missing Land Class Texture Files in some Add On Sceneries. Fs9 doesn't find them and eats up the memory. Maybe there are also corrupted AI-Traffic Files. Read the Thread from Oliver Pabst in the AES Forum regarding this topic. There is also a way to Identify Sceneries with missing LC Files: Use Total Commander, open the search. Search for: *.bgl Mark the HEX Field and start the search with the following Header Fragments: Header for Water Class and Landclass Files: 2C000000020000000000000000000000FFFFFFFF Header for Landclass Files only: 34FFFFFF24000000000000000101000001010000FF00 It will show you LC BGL Files. Now when there are no LC Texture Files in the Texture folder of the scenery, it will cause OOM's To avoid this you have to move the LC Bgl's out of the folder and add them in an own folder to the scenery libary ---> OOM fixed. Caution: Some Scenery's have own local Land Class Textures (Austria Professional ) In this case there is no need to move the LC BGL's because the textures are there. It is also usefull to check this type of sceneries for additional missing texures with File Mon. When missing textures are shown, move them from World\Scenery to your Add On Scenery (Make sure you copy over all Season Times(Not only summer SU for example). Also WI, HW, FA, SP, if not you will have the leak again at different seasons. LC Files have following Names: example 023b2su1.bmpSo don't bash the MD-11 regarding OOM's ;-) Jan-Paul

Just completed my first long haul yesterday KORD - EHAM. No OOMs, maximum VM size was 1.48 while taxiing to 32L at KORD. While landing at EHAM 18R, I have VM ~ 1.34. I use UT USA/Europe, ASV, FE/GE (manually converted DTX3 textures), 100% home-made AI Traffic with DTX3 texures. E6700, 4GB RAM with 2.68 RAM available under XP-SP3, 8800GT/512.FPS is lovely by the way. 23FPS from VC while landing at NIGHT!!!

Well I certainly agree, PMDG have done a great job, and the perfomance is exceptional. I tried the same flight (EGLL-LIMC) with a wellknown 767 and had no problems. Of course I don't want to 'bash' PMDG for a problem which could not even have anything to do with them, I simply associate one thing with the other. I have now switched my virtual memory to one drive and will see if I get any more OOMs. Don't get me wrong I'm a customer of the 737, 747 and the md11 and have enjoyed thousands of hours with no problems, so hence why this comes as a suprise.Cheers

Well I certainly agree, PMDG have done a great job, and the perfomance is exceptional. I tried the same flight (EGLL-LIMC) with a wellknown 767 and had no problems. Of course I don't want to 'bash' PMDG for a problem which could not even have anything to do with them, I simply associate one thing with the other. I have now switched my virtual memory to one drive and will see if I get any more OOMs. Don't get me wrong I'm a customer of the 737, 747 and the md11 and have enjoyed thousands of hours with no problems, so hence why this comes as a suprise.Cheers

Try the same flight with default Heathrow no add on scenery (just disable the scenery in FS9)

As for OOM change EGLL aerosoft to UK2000 and you never will see again a OOM at LHW :(

Please re-read my post... the OOM's are occuring in a CLEAN install of FSX SP2 with NO ADD-ONS at all... so Aerosofts EGLL has nothing to do with it

So don't bash the MD-11 regarding OOM's ;-) Jan-Paul

Where did I "bash" the PMDG MD-11??? I merely stated that the OOM's happen ONLY with the PMDG 747 and MD-11... Considering that, it means that the PMDG aircraft may not CAUSE the OOM's, but they do CONTRIBUTE to the OOM's because of their higher memory requirements.

Please re-read my post... the OOM's are occuring in a CLEAN install of FSX SP2 with NO ADD-ONS at all... so Aerosofts EGLL has nothing to do with it Where did I "bash" the PMDG MD-11??? I merely stated that the OOM's happen ONLY with the PMDG 747 and MD-11... Considering that, it means that the PMDG aircraft may not CAUSE the OOM's, but they do CONTRIBUTE to the OOM's because of their higher memory requirements.

Please re-read the topic from the poster again we are here talking about FS9 lol FSX is indeed another matter.As for FSX you could try to bring down the level of detail radius to medium (which solved the issue temporary for me) Please consider the next time to start a new topic about FSX or contribute in the topic that already exist instead of mixing things up in a FS9 topic which can be confusing for other users :( EGLL from Aerosoft has all to do with OOM at EGLL but then again you don't have to believe me.

Both the operating system (for instance Vista 64) And the program's ".exe" file must be setup to recognize memory forcasts (ie virtual memory) of greater than 2Gs. Once again, this has nothing to do with actual physical memory or page file loads. SP2 took care of setting up FSX's "FSX.exe" file to recognize memory forecasts (ie virtual memory) of greater than 2Gs. However inconveniently, there is no automated way to modify the FS9.exe file to recognize memory forecasts (ie virtual memory) of greater than 2Gs. For FS9, - only - switching to a 64bit system (or installing the nefarious "3G switch" for 32 bit systems) will not let FS9 recognize memory forcasts (ie virtual memory) of greater than 2Gs. It's gotta have Both the op system And the .exe file hi-mem enabled. This is why you are seeing OOMs, even with 64bit op systems with FS9. The FS9.exe file has not been setup to recognize memory forecasts (ie virtual memory) of greater than 2Gs. There's a way to do it, but it's a bit of a computer science project that one attempts at one's own risk. (But really, how bad could it go? Just keep a copy of your old FS9.exe file! If you smell smoke, just stop and over rite with the old FS9 file).The most vulnerable systems will be 4G installs in hi horsepower system. FS will shoot for the memory moon and OOM when its memory-load-forecast hits the stratosphere (which is 2G for that vintage program). With all the FS9 bells and whistles now available, the MD could put the memory's - forecast - load (ie virtual memory) one bit over the line. Then bamm, OOM. There's a way to mod that FS9 file to enable it to recognize memory forecasts (ie virtual memory) of greater than 2Gs. Hopefully one of ya'll can help us with a simplified D&O.Thanks in advance.

So for someone like myself who runs FS9.1 and winXP 32bit - the only solution to OOM errors is to get a 64 bit OS (either XP64 or Vista64) AND to do the 3GB switch modification to my FS9.1.exe file? Is that what you mean when you say "and the .exe file hi-mem enabled" or does that quote mean something else? Sorry if this is a stupid question but much of what you said is over my head (I don't know what memory forecasts are and I'm definitely no computer science major.I currently have only 2GB of memory, from your post I take it to mean that systems with 2GB of physical ram are actually LESS susceptible to OOM errors than those with more ram?Thanks,NC

Please re-read the topic from the poster again we are here talking about FS9 lol FSX is indeed another matter.As for FSX you could try to bring down the level of detail radius to medium (which solved the issue temporary for me) Please consider the next time to start a new topic about FSX or contribute in the topic that already exist instead of mixing things up in a FS9 topic which can be confusing for other users :( EGLL from Aerosoft has all to do with OOM at EGLL but then again you don't have to believe me.

And if you see MY post, I did INDEED address issues with FS9 in addition to FSX... I merely corrected you about my not using add-ons in FSX... and for the record, I've never ONCE had an OOM at Aerosoft's EGLL (just like you've never had an OOM with the MD-11! :( ) But then we aren't talking about EGLL in this thread, are we? :( Besides.. it doesn't matter WHICH FS version we talk about, the fact DOES remain that while PMDG's aircraft are very good and very realistic, that realism comes at the price of heavy system resource demands... and some people would like to try and understand how to adjust their systems to meet that resource demand without resorting to buggy 3GB/switches and having to install 64bit operating systems. If you have no problems with your FS9 version, then good for you... that doesn't mean that others don't have issues which they would like to somehow resolve.

And if you see MY post, I did INDEED address issues with FS9 in addition to FSX... I merely corrected you about my not using add-ons in FSX... and for the record, I've never ONCE had an OOM at Aerosoft's EGLL (just like you've never had an OOM with the MD-11! :( ) But then we aren't talking about EGLL in this thread, are we? :( Besides.. it doesn't matter WHICH FS version we talk about, the fact DOES remain that while PMDG's aircraft are very good and very realistic, that realism comes at the price of heavy system resource demands... and some people would like to try and understand how to adjust their systems to meet that resource demand without resorting to buggy 3GB/switches and having to install 64bit operating systems. If you have no problems with your FS9 version, then good for you... that doesn't mean that others don't have issues which they would like to somehow resolve.

Search is your friend get your facts straight if you assume I didn't had an OOM :( Yep it does matter which FS version there are differences and I contributed to the FSX OOM thread... Just sharing my experience with the FS9 version that's all and after reading tried to help you alongapology for that (you should read the OOM discussion with EGLL at Aerosoft) :(As for the OOM it's wise to be open minded and take all possibilities into your account just sharing a fewwith you because it's even different local on so many configurations related to hardware/software/settings....The beauty of sharing your own experience is that maybe you can find a common factor...Ps. I never suggested that "I don't have problem" so you all shouldn't have

Despite my initial reluctance and anxiety, concerned with OOMs, the 2D/VC question, wings, high price, etc, I couldn't resist the temptation.I'm just too long in this stuff to skip such famous simulation. So I bought the FS9 version of MD-11 last night.As I was one of the persons labouring the point on possible OOMs, I feel somehow honour-bound to share my impressions.So far I've made two full flights, the tutorial EGLL-LSZH and one more with Lufthansa Cargo from Frankfurt Main.Believe me I was afraid to get an OOM like few others. OOMs were my nightmare, especially that most happened on final approach after a long flight.Almost always they were with PMDG 747-400 and usually complex sceneries (I usually fly from and to such). Since other known complex aircraft (by Level-D, Digital Aviation, PSS, FeelThere, Leonardo, VMax or Project Tupolev) did not want to give me an OOM (strange, heh?) I was first to blame PMDG for them. That sounds logical, doesn't it?However, since I didn't want to drop the Queen, I decided to make a huge final cleanup in my FS9.1. I have tried to solve all potential problems by e.g.:- defragging and optimizing my HD (can by done by freeware applications like SmartDefrag for instance)- making sure no unnecessary processes work in Windows in the background- checking and tidying XP with antivirus and antispam- rechecking and fixing all my AI flightplans (there were a lot of mistakes in them, sometimes even in the WOAI ones)- resizing cloud textures- converting both flown and AI aircraft textures from 32bit to DXT3 (I use Imagetool from FS2004 Terrain SDK)- removing landclass files from addon scenery files and adding them separately (doesn't concern photoscenery)- removing empty texture folders from scenery folders containing landclass file(s)- removing double (and faulty) AFCADs (yes, I've found some!)- removing suspicious sceneries (freeware and payware)- removing not really used and not really necessary sceneries and airplanes (man, I had A LOT of them!)- deactivating DEM/flatten/mesh files in SimWings sceneries (mostly LEMD and LFPG)- making sure that flying from an AESed airport I fly to another AESed one (not necessary, but more safe)- replacing EGLL from Aerosoft with the one from UK2000And guess what? Much to my surprise OOMs almost disappeared. Yes I got a few of them occasionally (yes, with the Queen), but for exmple arriving at Heathrow used to be a definite OOM. And now... imagine my joy touching down on Heathrow's runway and taxiing to the terminal without any problems!That was a huge job, but restored my willing to fly.My two flights with MD-11, including heavy real weather, 100% traffic, complex airports, AES and very high settings, gave me no problem.The VM use was around 1.40 GB. Similar to 747-400. Quite high but seemingly not enough to case any OOM to me.Of course I still have to make a real long haul. Then I will surely return here and report.My final conclusion is that (IMHO) PMDG is not responsible for our OOMs, although if may look like it is.Yes, they make very complex aircraft which ARE memory eaters. But that is the price we must pay for having these addons as they are.Their memory usage only adds to the one we already have due to our addons. And this is where we have to search for cures, providing we want to be PMDG pilots.If you reasonably clean up your system (feel free to follow my above set of advice), you are likely to finish your flights without OOMs.Of course there is another option to apply the 3GB switch, which I will not do due to the importance of my PC (I work with it).Or to go for the 64bit system with more RAM, but I've spent enough money on my hobby for now (glad my wife is not reading this!)If I get another OOM, I'll tell you what I'm gonna do: uninstall UTE. I haven't so far, since I can't imagine my FS world without it...Happy unOOMed flights.Best regards,Rafal, virtual MD-11 captainFS9.1Windows XP 32bit Home SP2Intel Core 2 Duo E8400 3GHzAsus P5KC motherboard2GB RAMNVidia GeForce 8800GT