"I don't at all agree. Actually I think it's through postings like these that we can make things change.Because of the constant "rant sessions", we finally found a temporary workaround for the autogen bug (the xml file), and if we keep it up maybe MS will actually notice this and release a patch."Please read my entire post above.My point is that we must have a benchmark that we can all use to develop troubleshooting hypothesis. Very few folks having problems reveal ALL the important config settings (system and sim) when they post about their problems. Makes it hard to arrive at scientific and useful suggestions.Case in point... your claim that AutoGen is buggy. I don't have ANY of the problems you mention. The only time I see stuttering is when I have shadows enabled (both aircraft and/or ground), and when I use real weather (FS's or addon... FS Meteo is really bad on my system). So what's going on here? I have the addon AG packages installed, but never really did see any AG induced stuttering even with the original MS AG.This software is so tweakable and offers a huge latitude in how it is configured. Until we start using a working benchmark to test our different systems, we're simply poking holes in the air while trying to offer a valid and meaningful critique to MS.Regards,

" don't have ANY of the problems you mention. "You DO have the problems mentioned, it's just that you haven't noticed it yet. I didn't realize exactly what was going on until after several weeks. "My point is that we must have a benchmark that we can all use to develop troubleshooting hypothesis."I have posted several times steps how to reproduce this error, just do a search and you'll see. This is why I'm so sure this is a bug. It happens EVERYWHERE, on ALL systems WHEN previously displayed Autogen comes into view (even if it's 20-50 miles away). Win9x, XP, Geforce2, Radeon 9800, FX 5900 - doesn't matter.I'll once again post a short summary of what to do to reproduce this problem. This is just a short summary, for a more detailed one, do a search on the forums.Set all sliders to Max, including autogen. Mipmap detail to 4. Default fs9.cfg file (no special tweaks). Framerate lock: Unlimited. Zoom: 0.5x, Resolution: 1024x768x32 no AA/AF (just to keep things simple).Start a flight at Montgomery field. Enable slew. Slew up to about 4000 ft. and spin the view so that you look toward towntown. Note the framerate at this point. Now, move toward downtown, then back again. Move back and forth over the city several times, then return to the original position and note the framerate. It will be much lower now than before, even though you're at the same location. Now, go into options and turn Autogen to NONE, click OK. Wait for sim to load. Go into options again, and set Autogen back to Extremely dense. Let the sim load and note the framerate. It will have rteurned to almost the original value.Now, delete the Default.xml file from the FS9Autogen directory and repeat the test - no accumulation of autogen objects, NO loss of performance.It doesn't just happen over San Diego BTW. It happens anywhere where there's a lot of "new" autogen and you circle over the same area for any amount of time. It also happens both when slewing and when flying normally, allthough slewing makes it occour much sooner because you're moving faster.

Yesterday I flew with FSMeteo and after my flight from Savannah to Memphis I had good frame rates and fluidity up until I touched down, then my frame rates dropped to 4-6 with stutters. Then I removed FSUIPC and flew with Real Weather and had much better results. Today I noticed that there is a new version of FSUIPC in the library. Upon reading the updates, it said that a memory leak was fixed. I downloaded and installed the FSUIPC V3.07 and flew with FSMETEO from Memphis to ST Louis, then to Atlanta, and landed smoothly at both airports. Has anyone considered that FSUIPC could have been the main culprit for a memory leak? Eddie

No need to beat this thing to death, but I tried and I can't duplicate the problem during normal flying at sensibly locked framerates. And, no, I'm not going to try slewing all over the place with my framerates unlocked to create a "bug" if I can. It doesn't make sense as I mentioned before. There are a limited number of autogen objects in the library, and an even more limited number of them that are used in each geographical area, be it North America, Europe, whatever. These objects are loaded into RAM and then randomly (except for specific buildings in cities) scattered over the terrain depending on the landclass information for that area (city, farmland, etc.) I doubt that Microsoft loads multiple duplicates of all displayed little houses and barns into RAM and then just uses each one of them one time, then loads another identical bitmap, displays that, loads another one, etc. That's what would have to happen if RAM became overloaded.But are you having RAM problems, or CPU load problems, or graphics card problems? If you have an unrealistic framerate set (and unlimited is unrealistic on ANY computer), and you use slew mode, your system is unable to do much of any graphics work since you are forcing it to an even more unrealistic effective framerate by moving an aircraft maybe 1,000 mph during slew and then asking it if it has caught up with the scenery display yet. If you insist on leaving your framerate unlimited, you are, in effect, doing the same thing only a bit slower. Dump autogen demands to clear the buffers (sure), and let it start all over again at autogen=0. Works every time, I'll bet.I'd love to hear from Microsoft on this "bug", but I can tell you that they'll tell you to lower your framerate slider and set autogen to a realistic level for your system. And I'm no big fan of Microsoft as many of my previous posts will attest. I just don't think it's fair to blast a very good product for specific hardware weaknesses caused by maxed out slider settings. I fly a lot of procedure approaches and don't have a problem. You will always have smaller framerates on approaches than on takeoff (see my other posts) unless you stay within the reasonable limits of your hardware with commensurate slider settings.I tested this on my old faithful 700Mhz P3 with 786 megs of RAM, fps lock at 18. Didn't try it on my 3.2Ghz HT box with 2 gigs of RAM because I didn't think that would be fair.Sorry, I don't agree. Works on both my setups.MDavis

Hi, Geof.It is my hope the you qualify some of these statements in the future. I think some of these statements are very misleading, specially when they refer to real flying. TV>by practicing every maneuver to the finest detail over and over

Sorry JimmieG, but I have to go with MDavis on this test of yours. Simply put, I agree with all that he wrote.Testing after using any form of slew without a complete restart of the sim simply is not the way to go.OTOH, I have been creating some stutters on my system (which is very much like yours), but I believe they are related to an addon. I'll test some more before making any conclusions.Cheers,

HiI have the same problem and it gets worst when I use fs meteo.The computer goes very slow when I'm landingfaemy pcp4 1,71024 ram memgeforce2 m2/200

I've qualified my statements many times.Why don't you take it up with Rod Machado-I had a nice long conversation with him about the great training value of MS at Oshkosh-he lives out your way doesn't he?http://mywebpages.comcast.net/geofa/pages/Geofdog2.jpg

On approach and landing! You got that right. It's time for the omputer to figure that out and do it right.JimCYWG

Congratulations. YOU FOUND A BUG.Yep. Sure as heck. That's a bug. Plain and simple.And that bug is basically a Sev 3 Pri 5 bug.Severity 3 = MinorPriority 5 = Fix as possible.Why? Because it doesn't adversely affect game play, The menu's are still usable, And most importantly, it won't generate a tech support call.A single Tech support call to the company basically wipes out the profit for that game (even with the customer picking up the long distance)It's not that Microsoft didn't "catch" the bug, it's that they were not about to slip the shipdate (Oshkosh) to fix it.They were gonna make sure that the product was ready for purchase, after they got done showcasing it at the Wright Exhibit they were sponsoring.Yes, someone made a basic mistake, and it was probably found immediately, but given the nature of it, it was deemed not serious enough to fix.You see it in other businesses too. Many magazines and newspapers often have spelling errors. Yet you don't see a note in the next issue explaining..."We are sorry, but in last months column we spelled neighbor wrong..."Magazine and newspapers only make retractions if the mistake affects the journalistic integrity or accuracy of the story. That is, if it is SEVERE enough.The bug you have pointed out is basic, and is embarassing, and if they DO release a patch, there is a good chance it will be fixed in the patch. However that bug alone doesn't justify a patch, anymore than fixing it would have justified pushing back release.Something tells me the programmers were more concerned with ironing out other issues during the weeks before RTM (Release to Manufacturing). Another thing that is possible is that the bug could have popped up during that build.If you want to be enlightened, spend some time, as I have, being a software tester (I was a core tester for Close Combat III: The Russian Front, and MSN Gaming Zone for a Year) and it will open your eyes. I'm not justifying any bugs, it's just that you would be amazed at how many are opened and then in the final weeks rubber stamped as "fix later".The truth is, if that "menu" bug you caught had been reported in the early milestones, it's quite probable that it would have been fixed. It's my guess that it cropped up right before RTM, and as a result, had no chance at ALL of being resolved.

Hi, Geof.>Why don't you take it up with Rod Machado-I had a nice long conversation with him about the great training value of MS at Oshkosh-he lives out your way doesn't he?

I think that real-world pilots are able to transfer the experience to flight simulator much better than flight simulator pilots are able to translate the experience to real-world flying. I fly my father-in-law's J3 Cub out of a private field north of Dallas. I can tell you that flying it is not really like the experience in FS2004. However, the procedural aspect of it is dead-on. That's what the training is EXCELLENT for in FS in my opinion. I remember flying with my father-in-law and hearing him say, "Do you see the airport? Go down there and land." I was able to fly the approach and touch down without his assitance, and it was because I knew what it was supposed to LOOK like from flying Flight Simulator. However, the complete experience was very different.Training in FS is an important aspect for many armchair pilots just for that reason.Jim

I'm truly sorry you feel that way. As for exact replica-for procedures-yes.Your last question I already answered on the other thread, but your implication , your need to make it, along with other continual assumptions and innuendos on your part frankly continue to amaze me.http://mywebpages.comcast.net/geofa/pages/Geofdog2.jpg

well said JimmiG. i agree 100% happy flyin, fm

" but I tried and I can't duplicate the problem during normal flying at sensibly locked framerates"It depends entirely on HOW and WHERE you fly. So, with YOUR flying style it does not happen. It's obvious that others are experiencing this problem and that it's possible to reproduce on all computers."And, no, I'm not going to try slewing all over the place with my framerates unlocked to create a "bug" if I can.You can create this bug without slewing too. The reason for "slewing all over the place" is to make it happen quicker. Most people who experience it during flight only experience it after an hours or so. Slewing makes thing happen much quicker, making it easier for people to identify this bug. You don't have to keep the framerate unlocked, it occours with framerates locked too. The reason I said to keep framerate unlimited is to see the big difference in framerate after autogen has accumulated."There are a limited number of autogen objects in the library, and an even more limited number of them that are used in each geographical area, be it North America, Europe, whatever. These objects are loaded into RAM and then randomly (except for specific buildings in cities) scattered over the terrain depending on the landclass information for that area (city, farmland, etc.)"Thanks, but after experimenting with Autogen for four weeks during my research of this problem, I know exactly how autogen works."I doubt that Microsoft loads multiple duplicates of all displayed little houses and barns into RAM and then just uses each one of them one time, then loads another identical bitmap, displays that, loads another one, etc. That's what would have to happen if RAM became overloaded."I too doubt that and I never said they did. RAM is not being overloaded."But are you having RAM problems, or CPU load problems, or graphics card problems? "We're dealing with CPU overhead caused by a bug in the autogen code."If you have an unrealistic framerate set (and unlimited is unrealistic on ANY computer), and you use slew mode, your system is unable to do much of any graphics work since you are forcing it to an even more unrealistic effective framerate by moving an aircraft maybe 1,000 mph during slew and then asking it if it has caught up with the scenery display yet. If you insist on leaving your framerate unlimited, you are, in effect, doing the same thing only a bit slower."It happens when framerate is limited and it happens during normal flying. Framerate lock has no effect. Slew makes it happen quicker because you're moving faster.The reason I told people to set framerate to Unlimited was because that's the only way to get an idea of the highest FPS recorded. If you limit the framerare to 20, how will you know if the system was capable of producing 60 or 21? But, you can try this with framerate locked as well, the same error will still occour.The reason I told people to use slew is to speed up the testing. Sure, if you want to, you can fly for one hour instead, but for the sake of finding a workaround for this problem, slewing was more practical since you could test various tweaks in a matter of minutes."I'd love to hear from Microsoft on this "bug", but I can tell you that they'll tell you to lower your framerate slider and set autogen to a realistic level for your system."Did you read about the WORKAROUND at all?? AFTER DELETING THE DEFAULT.XML FILE, I CAN PLAY THE SIM AT FULL DETAILS WITHOUT THESE SLOWDOWNS. The xml file only controls a small number of all the autogen objects.I have spent WEEKS researching this and I have come to the conclusion that the objects in the default.xml file are not handled properly by the sim. Normal autogen is handled properly. After deleting the default.xml file I can slew back and fourth over the scenery as much as I want.In fact, I get BETTER framerates with Autogen at Extremely Dense AFTER deleting the default.xml file, than I did with Autogen at Dense, but without deleting the default.xml file."You will always have smaller framerates on approaches than on takeoff (see my other posts) unless you stay within the reasonable limits of your hardware with commensurate slider settings."Please, please, please READ the previous posts. This has NOTHING to do with SLIDERS AT ALL. READ THIS:After deleting the default.xml file, I can max out all sliders and still get reasonable framerates.Without deleting the default.xml file, I get stutters as soon as I enable even Sparse autogen settings.The problem is the objects defined in the default.xml file (and to some extent, the vector objects) not being released properly. It has nothing to do with underpowered computers, too high detail settings or anything similar.As soon as someone finds a flaw with FS, 20 people jump up to defend it. Denying that there is a bug will NOT make MS fix it. I will uninstall FS9. I have wasted several weeks finding a workaround and trying to fix this only to be told there is no bug to worry about. To me, it's so obvious that something is wrong here. Ask anyone who got a +20 FPS increase after deleting the xml file...