>Don't miss PIC - to me it's outdated. There are freebies now>easily just as good.Incorrect

Greggerm, I find it strange that you get low performance on a system such as yours. My comparably humble machine took almost no tweaking, no effort or fuss, no crashes to get it working smoothly. You have one hell of a PC, so there must be some kind of fault going on. What OS are you running and how much RAM do you have installed? If the weather is the thing that knocks you out, use Chris Willis' replacement clouds or take off the dynamic weather generator. It will cut you lots of extra FPS when it matters.Keep posting, it would be cool to see if we can find what's wrong. What kinda FPS do you get during flight? How severe is the impact? And what are your FS settings?The program bugs are there forever, but this winds aloft thing is news to me :) ! What's the deal with that?Cheers,ToniMy spec:Athlon 1600 (1400MHz)1024Mb DDR RAMGF3Ti200 64MbWin XP

It's really not about the performance at all...I lock the sim at 20 frames (a personally acceptable number so long as it doesn't stutter), and only in high-AI traffic / high-density scenery / high-weather areas does it drop to an appx. 15. I run Chris's clouds, most detail sliders one notch below max, clouds at 100% 3D. My recent upgrade to 1.5GB RAM greatly improved texture load times, and performance (almost) couldn't be better. If I am in the mood, I'll turn on the water reflections for some sparkle, but they impact frames more than you'd imagine. But, as stated, performance isn't my primary reason for doing this...First and foremost, I miss my airplanes...* The PSS A32x series and Dash-8 were some of my favorites, and last month's patch attempt by PSS was a flaming disaster. They ARE doing reworked patches, but they have understandably not given any hints as to when they'll be available. So, rather than wait and test, I'll revert back to what we know works.* The PIC767 is one hell of an airplane, and is probably the one I miss the most. The level of detail (systems-wise) is stunning, and only rivaled by the PMDG 737NG (which I have as well). * The DF737 is also a great plane. Overshadowed by the PMDG offering, the classic airplane would be nice to fly for my VA efforts. Gives me a "classic" 737 and a "next generation" to fly as well. * All the addon aircraft I have puchased for FS2004 will also work under 2002, so I am not LOSING any functionality. Clickable virtual cockpits are a serious waste of time for me, and I rarely if ever fly in the VC, so that is not a personal issue. Secondly, winds aloft are broken...* FS2004 does NOT smooth wind transitions at altitude, whether or not the wind information comes from the built-in real world weather system *or* a third-party weather program. This causes some big problems on long cruises. Imagine flying from England to Philadelphia, only to have your aircraft crash somewhere over Canada because the winds changed.* Flying without winds aloft for me is too unrealistic. Part of the challenge is fuel and flight planning, and I didn't invest in the weather generation software only to not use it when at altitude. * Sharp wind changes at altitude aren't handled by the FS2004 autopilot and most add-on autopilots. There is the potential for a 100-150 knot IAS difference - leading to massive overspeeds and/or falling out of the sky stalls, depending on the shift direction. Most aircraft can be recovered from the stalls, but you have to be on top of your computer. I certainly don't hover over my computer for a 6 hour flight, so I expect stable performance. Certain aircraft, such as *all* PSS Airbus models (A32x, A330, A340) have major stall issues, and typically cannot be recovered even if you were monitoring the flight. Third, performance gains would be a benefit.... * FS2002 can be cranked to the max on my rig and I'd get better performance than my existing setup under 2004. This is no indictment of 2004, as the new version obviously has a reason for drawing more power.* FS2002 handles multi-monitors FAR better than FS2004. I am toying with the idea of picking up a new flatscreen for my desk for flightsim use. * I can import the FS2004 textures into FS2002, and I'll get SOME visual improvements without a single performance hitch. It's still not going to look like FS2004, but it will look like FS2003. :) What would I lose?! * I know I'd lose the visuals. The FS2004 sky and clouds are very VERY nice to fly through. The low- and transitional- altitude weather is fan-freakin-tastic with FS2004. But in trade for this, I'll gain performance and smoothness.* I know I'd lose the included airplanes, but I don't do much flying in the FS2004 stock aircraft, so it's not a big deal - I have a massive library of FS2002 planes ready to go. * The misc visuals - gas pumps, enhanced autogen, taxi signs, water, the better runway lighting.... all nice to look at, but they don't "make" the sim. Over time, I've found that Microsoft Flight Simulator is not the program that I use, but just the engine which enables me to use programs like the PIC767, PMDG, and other aircraft. I'd miss the autogen the most... mainly because it's so much more dense in FS2004. I like the effect it gives. Having used FS2004 since the day of it's release, I *know* the benefits of the product. But I know the shortcomings as well. After a few months of waiting for updates and waiting for word from MS regarding the inherent issues, I'm taking my problems to the bank to cash in. If and when the problems are fixed, I can ALWAYS just drop FS2004 in and convert over again. And I'd LOVE to hear that they will be. Plus, I might get FS2002 installed and find that I *can't* live without the eye-candy... at least the change isn't perminant!FS2004 is a great platform, but it's not doing well with what I think is most important to me. At least I know I can run both if need be. -Greg...finishing my backups and moves in prep for a system reload.

Randy and MD83...Agree wholeheartedly. It's amazing it took this long for a publisher to come close to the PIC. I haven't sunk my teeth TOO deep into the PMDG, but it is by far the closest. It may even surpass the PIC, but as you say - the PIC is without doubt the father of all modern add-ons, legendary in it's performance, depth, and enjoyment. It's a "sim-guy's" sim. -Greg

While it depressing for me to hear of anyone going back to FS2002, mainly because there is no way I can fly in it and I feel like it would keep others from trying FS9, your reasoning makes sense. I don't use any of the heavies you do (GA flyer), so that isn't an issue with me, all my payware has been ported over and there is nothing I miss from FS2002 that hasn't been updates or replaced with a newer, better aircraft. I have never experienced the wind issues that others have, so I can't comment on thatMy main concern is trying to get all my VA members to drop FS2002 (still a few) as we do not want to keep supporting it. I do all the aircraft mods, repaints and all the scenery design and have had to redo a majority of it due to the switch, but to have it all working in the new sim, it was worth it. I am trying to see the point of your post, unless someone is going to come on here ansd tell you that the aircraft you miss are going to be updated or that the issues that YOU have are going to be patched, then why the post? and the encouragement to reply? Just curious.Regards, MichaelKDFWhttp://mysite.verizon.net/res052cd/mybannercva1.jpgCalVirAir International VAwww.calvirair.comCougar Mountain Helicopters & Aviationwww.cgrmtnhelos.com

With your system of a 3.06HTgig and the ram and video card you have you still dont have good performance? NP

I didn't want to stir the pot...My main reason for posting was to see if there were any additional tips and tricks that were out there for enhancing the FS2002 experience using FS2004 materials, a la' the texture copy.I provided all my reasons because I was certain that there would be people questioning the motive, and/or only participating in the "Why would you do that?" or the "I'd never go back" way. I wanted to cover all my bases and answer those inevitable questions right up front so the goal of the post could be reached with little runaround.It failed. :) I'll be reloading my system, dropping on FS2002 and fully configuring it, then if I find I really miss the eyecandy and weather visuals of 2004, put that back on board. The VA I fly for uses aircraft with complex panels available for FS2002 only (767 and A32x), along with some also available for FS2004 (A330, B737)... I can get away with it. The VA isn't platform specific - just aircraft specific. But yeah - the post goal was to see what FS2002 users were doing with FS2004 textures and items to improve the 2002 platform.-Germ

See post #17 in this thread for response...

http://forums.avsim.net/user_files/54809.jpg:-lol