I uninstalled the plane, then reinstalled the original download plus only added SP1b. I cleaned out the multiple instances of C++ runtime modules and kept only the x64 bit versions of C++ 2005, 2008 and 2010, and limited each to ONE runtime for each of the three years. This made a huge difference in my performance and frames. Having bunches of C++ runtimes and different flavors (x86 and x64) seemed in my non-scientific mind, to pose potential for conflicts (which one would take precedence)? So by limiting to the 'most current' runtime for each of the 3 years (05, 08 and 10), my perception (which may not be YOUR reality) was things got a LOT better.I have read posts by other Avsim members who do NOT recommend cleaning up (narrowing down) the C++ runtimes, so I am NOT advocating this for anyone else to try. I did it, and I'm happy. You might have different results. I am not afraid to try stuff like this because of my software development background, I have faith that the latest iteration of the runtime modules "SHOULD" be backward compatible with prior versions of the SAME YEAR series runtimes (e.g. 2005 later versions replace earlier 2005 runtime versions). HOnestly, I can't see a benefit to having 2 or 3 runtimes for the same C++ year model, particularly 32-bit AND 64-bit on the SAME system. Makes no sense to me. So this is working ok for ME and no CTD's since I adopted this schema. Again, I remember admonitions by other members and if you're happy with 2 or more copies of a given year runtime, MORE POWER TO YA! Me, not so much!Reinstalled all the applicable PMDG liveries.Reloaded the aircraft from the FMC.Altered some key settings, most notably the actual THROTTLE position to over-ride the A/T. This finally gave me the punch I was looking for for steeper and more aggressive climbs "on demand". Even without Bumping up the Engine rating to 27K. (Flying the 800)JOY.Plane peforming better than EVER, climbing strong, even without pre-configuring the FMC on the ground (just set 3 fixes and entered a route while airborne, flew the route perfectly, landed CAT III at Seattle on the numbers, center of the runway, I hit the reversers and JOY).I re-ran the ******* Bojote FSX config webpage, seemed to help refine things. Is it just me, or is it amazing that MICROSOFT doesn't have an online web-tuner for FSX? (similar to ******* Bojote's site). I find this incredible. One can only hope that whenever "FLIGHT" is released, some kind of online tune-up hangar will be available. It makes so much sense...but I can see from a liability point of view, extreme reluctance on the part of a "major" software vendor if for no other reason than potential heat from users who get less-than-stellar or "unexpected" results.Turned down the AI trying to get the killer Frame Rates.Frame Rates outstanding, graphics quality best ever. Performance is flawless.Your mileage may vary, as always, having a rock solid backup image before attempting any major changes in your FSX is always a wise move.(doing a full system image as we speak)Robert

Edited December 30, 201114 yr by rsm

Best I can think of is having a check airman come over, in person or at least via shared screen. Have him look over your shoulder, comment on whether this or that is just a difference, say, between versions of FMC software (I have no idea what does "other" FSX NG simulate, but I am 99% sure it is NOT U10.8A), or things that were plain and simple modelled wrong before, or things that are just what you carried over from other types.Since Skype does have this functionality now, and is quite common, maybe there is an NG matador that would consider this?

I uninstalled the plane, then reinstalled the original download plus only added SP1b. I cleaned out the multiple instances of C++ runtime modules and kept only the x64 bit versions of C++ 2005, 2008 and 2010, and limited each to ONE runtime for each of the three years. This made a huge difference in my performance and frames. Having bunches of C++ runtimes and different flavors (x86 and x64) seemed in my non-scientific mind, to pose potential for conflicts (which one would take precedence)? So by limiting to the 'most current' runtime for each of the 3 years (05, 08 and 10), my perception (which may not be YOUR reality) was things got a LOT better.I have read posts by other Avsim members who do NOT recommend cleaning up (narrowing down) the C++ runtimes, so I am NOT advocating this for anyone else to try. I did it, and I'm happy. You might have different results. I am not afraid to try stuff like this because of my software development background, I have faith that the latest iteration of the runtime modules "SHOULD" be backward compatible with prior versions of the SAME YEAR series runtimes (e.g. 2005 later versions replace earlier 2005 runtime versions). HOnestly, I can't see a benefit to having 2 or 3 runtimes for the same C++ year model, particularly 32-bit AND 64-bit on the SAME system. Makes no sense to me. So this is working ok for ME and no CTD's since I adopted this schema. Again, I remember admonitions by other members and if you're happy with 2 or more copies of a given year runtime, MORE POWER TO YA! Me, not so much!Reinstalled all the applicable PMDG liveries.Reloaded the aircraft from the FMC.Altered some key settings, most notably the actual THROTTLE position to over-ride the A/T. This finally gave me the punch I was looking for for steeper and more aggressive climbs "on demand". Even without Bumping up the Engine rating to 27K. (Flying the 800)JOY.Plane peforming better than EVER, climbing strong, even without pre-configuring the FMC on the ground (just set 3 fixes and entered a route while airborne, flew the route perfectly, landed CAT III at Seattle on the numbers, center of the runway, I hit the reversers and JOY).I re-ran the ******* Bojote FSX config webpage, seemed to help refine things. Is it just me, or is it amazing that MICROSOFT doesn't have an online web-tuner for FSX? (similar to ******* Bojote's site). I find this incredible. One can only hope that whenever "FLIGHT" is released, some kind of online tune-up hangar will be available. It makes so much sense...but I can see from a liability point of view, extreme reluctance on the part of a "major" software vendor if for no other reason than potential heat from users who get less-than-stellar or "unexpected" results.Turned down the AI trying to get the killer Frame Rates.Frame Rates outstanding, graphics quality best ever. Performance is flawless.Your mileage may vary, as always, having a rock solid backup image before attempting any major changes in your FSX is always a wise move.(doing a full system image as we speak)Robert

Well- I'm REVISING my prior post. Apparently the PMDG 737NGX 'needs' both the 32-bit and 64-bit Runtime files. I removed the plane once again from within Windows 7 Control Panel (PROGRAMS & FEATURES, select PMDG 737NGX, click UNINSTALL) then I deleted almost all of the subfolders within the FSXPMDG folder (I kept Routes and a couple of others I felt weren't related to the aircraft performance) _AFTER_ I first uninstalled using Control Panel Programs & Features!Reinstalled the base airplane package (I got when I bought it) then ran SP1 upgrade WITHOUT ever starting up FSX.Following that, I reconfigured my Warthog controls within FSUIPC (See my posts in HARDWARE) and did the "BYPASS CALIBRATION" (or pass the signals from the warthog DIRECTLY to FSX) after first disabling the controllers within FSX itself.THEN the plane 'flew right'.So far... So good.Oh, and disable wind effects within FSUIPC if you use REX 2.0. I don't think the PMDG 737NGX plays well with sudden drastic wind velocity changes and/or 'turbulence'.Robert

ACME NGX Bug Eliminator Only $19.95

Robert,What you're recommending regarding the runtimes is actually quite wrong. MS runtimes don't work on the "You only need 1 latest version for each year" methodology. Every program is compiled using a specific version of Microsoft Visual Studio's runtimes and Microsoft updates it constantly. A program needs the version of the runtimes that it was compiled with, not necessarily the "latest" one. It's perfectly normal to have a ton of different versions of the runtimes because of this - Windows automatically manages it all through something called the "Side by Side" system. (located in the folder C:Windowswinsxs) An application requests a specific version of the runtimes in its manifest and the OS goes and gives it the proper one out of the Side by Side storage.What you've done there will most likely result in applications elsewhere on your machine not working properly or at all. While programs will attempt to fall back to a different version of the runtimes, I assure you this is not how the system is designed by Microsoft. In fact, I'm quite surprised you're not aware of how this works as a developer yourself... There's no guarantee that the one version you do have installed properly supports every application you're running. I've personally seen apps fail or do strange things because of this.

Gents-I'm going to add a bit more stern advice on top of Ryan's.I recommend ignoring all of the advice/discussion in this thread as it violates almost every premise of best-practices and could set you up for a full machine re-image in order to fix the problems you create.We say this many many times- but there are no magical mystery hacks that are going to suddenly improve your performance beyond what you can get by follow maintaining a full, healthy installation that has all of the latest service packs and update from all of your vairous software providers.

Gents-I'm going to add a bit more stern advice on top of Ryan's.I recommend ignoring all of the advice/discussion in this thread as it violates almost every premise of best-practices and could set you up for a full machine re-image in order to fix the problems you create.We say this many many times- but there are no magical mystery hacks that are going to suddenly improve your performance beyond what you can get by follow maintaining a full, healthy installation that has all of the latest service packs and update from all of your vairous software providers.

Hi Mr. Randazzo and Mr. Maziarz,Thanks for setting me straight. I was NOT advocating to others, in fact I think I strongly suggested they NOT do any removals of the additional runtime modules. If I could remove my original post, I would, if only to guarantee that no one else experiment. Unfortunately, once a post has been here for some time, it is not removable by the OP. The Sys admin could delete it, and I would be fine with that, possibly you could suggest it to him/her?I admire your airplane, and obviously you guys have the expertise for what constitutes best practices in the FSX world.Thanks again for taking the time to correct my misunderstanding.Robert McDonald.

Correct me if I am wrong, I haven't coded C++ since high school, but are the C++ runtime modules libraries of C++ "objects"?

I am a VB programmer, so I can't comment specifically on C++ However here is the link to the Microsoft Developers Network which authenticates what Mr. Randazzo was saying about having multiple C++ runtime libraries managed via Microsoft Side-by-Side schema:This link also gives information about what goes "in" to the runtime libraries.Robert.

Edited January 20, 201214 yr by rsm