Can't we just let this prepare3D die down?People here are mature enough to decide what they want to do with their dosh/cash.

Your post was more than tongue in cheek when you got cocky with your "how dare they". You chose to add attitude to your post, so don't get all defensive when people attack back what they may see as rude.

Now I am really laughing, seriously. Cocky? My reply was a intentionally overblown attempt at sarcasm with regard to the prevalent argument regarding the cost of use to Prepar3D nothing more. It is an often used defense for hating the platform. If someone who's tried it, doesn't like it, fair enough I can completely respect that on all levels. If someone states in their opinion that it's not worth the monthly cost, fair enough again. I by no means feel personally attacked by the statements made, just how they may be interpreted by any reader, I'm far more thick skinned than that, and I understand that posts can be very difficult to infer intentions and attitude. My point was that people should read what they post and look at how it may be construed. The statements made imply as Zach clearly indicated "I'm glad we weren't vague when we stated exactly the point we wanted to get across" , that these points to get across apply to any user of Prepar3D who reads this thread, no? It is a statement that will come across that the points stated are coming from minds and judgement far more superior to those who willingly choose to use Prepar3D.I enjoy a good professional, objective, fact based debate at any given time. With the right people often the best results come out, if they can throw bias and personal feelings out the window. Often new things are learned and discovered with such things. I have used MSFS for over the last 16 years and nothing else, yet when something different comes along and I try it and I can say, this is better than what I have and doesn't disappoint, I consider that a personal strength. For myself it was a big step to move outside the MSFS comfort zone, and to my surprise, I was not regretful. In my belief, I gained, and that's something I want to share with the community. If there is something good in the flight simming franchise should it not be put out for others to see? Does it not deserve support or constructive debate?I already am all too aware that in a MSFS dominant franchise, I'll walk with a target on my back. Prepar3D offers what everyone wanted FSX to be but for a price, and people don't like that. I can appreciate the sentiment, but I don't blame Lockheed Martin for what Microsoft failed to do, and that's where I see the sticking point. Examples are thrown around about replacing a car over a broken headlight and such, but every time we purchased a new version of a simulator, in essence, we were replacing the simulator to fix a problem or gain improvements from the platform. This has been the case with FS95, FS98, FS2000, FS2002, FS9, FSX, and MS Flight. If you can't find a replacement for your broken headlight, in fact you may have to replace the car. The rain texture issue, is only one of such examples. In Prepar3D it does not exist. As a FSX user as well, this fact sucks for me too. In Prepar3D there is no CTD, menu crash errors, hangs or lock ups. There so far has been no need for added .DLL folders in it's root directory. I have never lost control inputs from devices into the platform either, and these are just some of the points. Yes, I do have to pay to have it, but I get more time using it than fixing it.The current subscription does not allow commercial use. The full licence must be purchased for that. The full licence entitles users for version updates up to V2.0 if I understood there current statement correctly. Right now Prepar3D is V1.2, so that would imply 7 more updates with the single licence purchase. Even if updates were released frantically every 6 months, that's 3.5 more years of coverage and you get to keep what you have to use indefinity. Under the current subscription there is no cap to the amount of updates. All these terms may change with time based on users and how L.M. chooses to court the market.I don't have any affiliation with Lockheed Martin, or the Prepar3D development team. I am nothing more than a very satisfied user that feels I am getting my moneys worth for the return, and I'm willing against my own good judgement to stand in the middle of the MSFS battlefield and get shot at. As long as the facts get out and poorly conceived speculation or misinformation is stamped out, I'll feel I've done my job in supporting what I and others believe to be a product that deserves a chance within the community. In the end, may the best product win favor. From that, we as a community all benefit from. yes?

Small contrail like "cloud" under the airplane. What is it?

Did you manage to fix it?

tl;dr

Now you're a martyr. Seriously just chill with the Prepared advertisements! It just may catch own if they do away with the subscription. Until then they'll have to rely on customers like yourself for the good word. Sorry if I offended you, btw. I come across as less hostile in person. I can't convey that through type.

Did you manage to fix it?

Stein-Ove, as stated before. No fix. It happens some of the time with certain aircraft when taking off from a rainy airport. There's no work around, unfortunately.

Now I am really laughing, seriously. Cocky? My reply was a intentionally overblown attempt at sarcasm with regard to the prevalent argument regarding the cost of use to Prepar3D nothing more. It is an often used defense for hating the platform. If someone who's tried it, doesn't like it, fair enough I can completely respect that on all levels. If someone states in their opinion that it's not worth the monthly cost, fair enough again. I by no means feel personally attacked by the statements made, just how they may be interpreted by any reader, I'm far more thick skinned than that, and I understand that posts can be very difficult to infer intentions and attitude. My point was that people should read what they post and look at how it may be construed. The statements made imply as Zach clearly indicated "I'm glad we weren't vague when we stated exactly the point we wanted to get across" , that these points to get across apply to any user of Prepar3D who reads this thread, no? It is a statement that will come across that the points stated are coming from minds and judgement far more superior to those who willingly choose to use Prepar3D.I enjoy a good professional, objective, fact based debate at any given time. With the right people often the best results come out, if they can throw bias and personal feelings out the window. Often new things are learned and discovered with such things. I have used MSFS for over the last 16 years and nothing else, yet when something different comes along and I try it and I can say, this is better than what I have and doesn't disappoint, I consider that a personal strength. For myself it was a big step to move outside the MSFS comfort zone, and to my surprise, I was not regretful. In my belief, I gained, and that's something I want to share with the community. If there is something good in the flight simming franchise should it not be put out for others to see? Does it not deserve support or constructive debate?I already am all too aware that in a MSFS dominant franchise, I'll walk with a target on my back. Prepar3D offers what everyone wanted FSX to be but for a price, and people don't like that. I can appreciate the sentiment, but I don't blame Lockheed Martin for what Microsoft failed to do, and that's where I see the sticking point. Examples are thrown around about replacing a car over a broken headlight and such, but every time we purchased a new version of a simulator, in essence, we were replacing the simulator to fix a problem or gain improvements from the platform. This has been the case with FS95, FS98, FS2000, FS2002, FS9, FSX, and MS Flight. If you can't find a replacement for your broken headlight, in fact you may have to replace the car. The rain texture issue, is only one of such examples. In Prepar3D it does not exist. As a FSX user as well, this fact sucks for me too. In Prepar3D there is no CTD, menu crash errors, hangs or lock ups. There so far has been no need for added .DLL folders in it's root directory. I have never lost control inputs from devices into the platform either, and these are just some of the points. Yes, I do have to pay to have it, but I get more time using it than fixing it.The current subscription does not allow commercial use. The full licence must be purchased for that. The full licence entitles users for version updates up to V2.0 if I understood there current statement correctly. Right now Prepar3D is V1.2, so that would imply 7 more updates with the single licence purchase. Even if updates were released frantically every 6 months, that's 3.5 more years of coverage and you get to keep what you have to use indefinity. Under the current subscription there is no cap to the amount of updates. All these terms may change with time based on users and how L.M. chooses to court the market.I don't have any affiliation with Lockheed Martin, or the Prepar3D development team. I am nothing more than a very satisfied user that feels I am getting my moneys worth for the return, and I'm willing against my own good judgement to stand in the middle of the MSFS battlefield and get shot at. As long as the facts get out and poorly conceived speculation or misinformation is stamped out, I'll feel I've done my job in supporting what I and others believe to be a product that deserves a chance within the community. In the end, may the best product win favor. From that, we as a community all benefit from. yes?

So all this babble by you has helped the op with his problem none