FSX version of QotS II looks like it isn't loading some of the textures or something. This is with the latest version installed. Once loading the flight it looks fine.

Molly Norris

As long as it looks as it should when it loads then you are okay.  I assume you have a FSX-default aircraft assigned as the default and it is the first to appear in the window before you select the PMDG aircraft.  I it is important and discussed in Introduction to not assign any PMDG aircraft as the default.

Thanks for the reply. My default flight is just the default Maule with the engine off. I know the preview window isn't critical but it still bugs me. I'm OCD when it comes to my flight sim. :p

1 hour ago, molleh said:

Thanks for the reply. My default flight is just the default Maule with the engine off. I know the preview window isn't critical but it still bugs me. I'm OCD when it comes to my flight sim. :p

Please ensure that you read the Intro Manual. It specifically addresses this.

Thanks, I'll admit to not reading it all but I did try a couple of ctrl-F searches unsuccessfully. I turned off the DisablePreload cfg tweak and it loads properly now.

6 minutes ago, molleh said:

Thanks, I'll admit to not reading it all but I did try a couple of ctrl-F searches unsuccessfully. I turned off the DisablePreload cfg tweak and it loads properly now.

That's the one. Glad you got it.

Also: don't forget to sign your posts here.

7 hours ago, molleh said:

I turned off the DisablePreload cfg tweak and it loads properly now.

Oddly enough, I've always had that tweak in my FSX.cfg and mine still loads like that for some reason. Doesn't really bother me as it displays fine one the flight is loaded.

 

Sean Campbell

On 8/13/2017 at 1:49 AM, cmpbellsjc said:

Oddly enough, I've always had that tweak in my FSX.cfg and mine still loads like that for some reason. Doesn't really bother me as it displays fine one the flight is loaded.

Careful. Take careful note of what was written (here and in the Intro). The presence of the tweak causes it; it is not that the presence of the tweak will resolve it.

Either way, the momentary oddity should quickly clear, unless your system is on the slower side.

7 hours ago, scandinavian13 said:

Careful. Take careful note of what was written (here and in the Intro). The presence of the tweak causes it; it is not that the presence of the tweak will resolve it.

Either way, the momentary oddity should quickly clear, unless your system is on the slower side.

Yep, my fault for reading too quickly and not comprehending, lol.

Thanks for brining that to my attention. I'll probably leave it alone as it doesn't really bother me, but am glad you mentioned that it was the opposite of what I was reading.

 

Sean Campbell

5 hours ago, cmpbellsjc said:

Yep, my fault for reading too quickly and not comprehending, lol.

Thanks for brining that to my attention. I'll probably leave it alone as it doesn't really bother me, but am glad you mentioned that it was the opposite of what I was reading.

All good - just making sure you and others didn't think changes were necessary on your end.

Discussing the tweak isn't easy, as the line is referenced in the negative ("disable"), so the presence of the 1 turns a function off instead of on (when the 1 boolean usually is the 'on' side of the switch), and then we're talking about the presence, or lack of presence of the line that removes a function when it is present.