When FS9 works, the eye candy is gorgeous (the clouds, the autogen, the SRTM) but never have I encountered so many frustrations. For every hour of flying there are two hours of trying to get FS9 under control. CTDs are starting to come under control (probably until I start-up tonight). My ATI 9800Pro is finally functioning thanks to the Catalyst 9 drivers. The planes, forget it. The default planes, e.g., Baron, are touchy. Replacing the air files with Steve Small

First, I went through my own frustrations, especially trying to get a minimum spec system to run with FS2004. But that's over and done with, and surprisingly the fuss was fairly little....Now, some advice. A general rule of thumb when coming into a forum for the first time, is not to post offensive comments directed at hobbyists like Pete...he has deservedly achieved godlike status. Yes, I haven't paid for his newest software and fall into the cheapskate category--but those are my words, not his feelings.If you are asking for help, people here will freely give it. From a quick glance, you mention a ton of add-ons. Even today I have both sims on my system--one for add-ons, and another for the new technology it introduces. Add-ons take time to catch up, and some never will.I haven't had a problem with twitchy aircraft, but I've studied enough in these forums that I know how to tone 'em down a bit if they are twitchy. For the most part, my FS2004 aircraft fly virtually the same as their 2k2 counterparts with a little tweak here or there. But almost every aircraft I've installed I've had to tweak because my game controller is old and twitchy itself.I have had no problems shooting ILS approaches either, but you need to know that FS2004 adds new .cfg settings that some 3rd party aircraft will need to have updated in order to track the ILS well. But you can't autoland with it unless you have an autoland gauge installed. FS2002's ILS implementation did not represent a true autoland either.... Many simply "flew the ILS into the ground"... But there was a completely different set of issues. If anything FS2004's ILS tracking is almost exactly like FS2000's...As for the ATI, I guess many ppl are seeing better results with the Cat 9 drivers. Seems like the ball was in ATI's court and they responded. CTD's are reported here by only a small minority. Look up a recent post on the forum--someone solved his when he discovered his RAM was running below the suggested voltage. FS2004 uses more RAM than most apps, more GPU resources, etc.... It will find any weakness in one's system, as does all the latest software...I've tried to tread a fine line without picking you apart as a person--some do that when ppl voice complaints and those are usually the ones who've forgotten their own days of frustration with a specific product. As to whether you keep FS2004 or not--if your mind is made up, then the post really serves no purpose here. If you are seeking help from ppl who may be able to improve your hobby, then you may very well change your mind. Your call....-John

Why not try a fresh basic(complete) install of FS9(with absolutely no addons )and see how it compares. You can retain your present copy by just renaming the MS Games folder as anything you like - or copying complete it to another drive, and deleting the FS9 .cfg file in" documents and settings"( may pay you also to delete any registry enties before doing the new install)Run the new copy- see how it performs,then gradually- one at a time- add your Addons.Keep a log of what you do exactly then its easy to backtrack if things start to go downhill.If you decide you want to go back to your original copy ,either just rename it back (renaming the new one first) or copy it over the top of the new install.As John says- you have a lot of addons and this is possibly some of the cause of your problems- assuming your system is up to the task of running FS9(can't remember if you gave system details).Here - it ran just fine straight out of the box- itstill does, and any subsequent problems have all been traced to unco-operative addons.Good LuckDave

Thanks Dave. I think that makes the most sense because you're right in that I've got many times more add-ons then what came out of the box.Kent

Hi Kent, Be aware of any 3rd party:Higher resolution that`s do not respect the files size and format will decrease Frame rate, on anything area, scenery, aircraft,sound and others.Too many aircraft in your fs2004 aircraft folder will decrease the loading time of fs2004. complex panels and modeling will decrease fps.Imcompatible stuff with fs2004 will crash your fs2004 and decrease performance.Photo sat imagerie scenery that`s contains tons of texture will decrease the loading time of fs2004 and will overdone the 3d card memory already use it from the default fs2004 stuff.Be aware of some 3rd party files before installation. Now imagine mixing all these stuff togheter, make some new crash, more stutters, lower frame rate + your system will have to manage the default fs2004 stuff. It will just screw up your flight sim experience.ThanksChris Willis[link:fsw.simflight.com/FSWMenuFsSim.html]Clouds And Addons For MsFs

Howdy,Photo sat imagerie scenery that`s contains tons of texture will decrease the loading time of fs2004 and will overdone the 3d card memory already use it from the default fs2004 stuff.Whilst I cannot (and will not) dispute your very valid points Chris, it sometimes is necessary to have photo-real scenery, simply because Microsoft just gets it so darned wrong when they're dealing with areas outside of the continental United States. :-(Yep, I know that 2.2 Gb of photo-real New Zealand South Island scenery textures is gonna make my rig gag (at some point during a flight), but it's a hell of a lot better than the "crop circles" MS would like simmers to believe is the norm down here in this part of the world.

"but it's a hell of a lot better than the "crop circles" MS would like simmers to believe is the norm down here in this part of the world."I'm in a heck of a lot of trouble... One of our DBA's is headed to Australia and New Zealand in several weeks. He asked if I had ever been to either locale, and I said I hadn't. But I told him I knew what it looked like because I flew Jon Murchison's great BAE-146's over New Zealand all the time. Showed him my screenshots, and he said "it looks just like Iowa!"

Howdy,Boy, is he in for a surprise then! :-lol