Anyone figure out how to get the F/A-18 working in RTM?

[Guest]

I can't figure out what supporting files are needed to make it work, and I'm not even sure if its possible to make it work without the acceleration installer making the needed changes to the engine.

[JSkorna 137]

Hi,Stop trying as it cannot be done.Happy Holidays,Jimhttp://www.hifisim.com/banners/hifi-community-sigbanner.jpghttp://www.hifisim.com/

[n4gix 4,947]

As Jim stated, it cannot be done. It - along with the other two models in Acceleration - require access to the new features embedded in the SP2 Dynamic Link Libraries, as well as the SP2 version of fsx.exe itself.

[Bob Familton 14]

Hi Bill. Thanks for the info. I don't want the Accelerator installed but have the planes and helo installed. I have the P-51 Racer and FA-18 flying OK but the MFD in the FA-18 panel does not work as it needs some stuff from the DLL libraries. I cannot get the EH101 to work at all. It just spins around on the ground. Can I just copy the DLL libraries into my Windows System 32 folder? Best regards, Bob.

[Guest]

>I have the>P-51 Racer and FA-18 flying OK but the MFD in the FA-18 panel>does not work as it needs some stuff from the DLL libraries. So you've got the external model showing up correctly on both and the multi stage afterburner working? Can you share how you got these two planes to work?

[Bob Familton 14]

Hi. No I don't have the multi stage afterburner working yet. I have not figured out how to get the MFD gauges working on the FA-18 panel and the EH101 helo is a disaster so far. The P-51 seems to work OK. I hate the fact that there are no 2d panels and that there are no Simicons on the VC panels. If I get a breakthrough I'll post it. Regards, Bob.

[WarpD 824]

Wow, talk about trying to violate several copyrights at once.The EULA you agree to is in effect when the software (Acceleration) is installed. It grants you the use of the software (Acceleration). If you uninstall the software (Acceleration), you are actually now not allowed the use of the software (Acceleration). Since the aircraft you're trying to use are part of the software (Acceleration) that you uninstalled, you are in fact guilty of piracy (theft).Oh, and there's quite a bit that doesn't work correctly without the full Acceleration installed. Some of it's far more subtle than the MFD not showing up. ;)

[Guest weeniemcween]

Get off your high horse. He paid for the software. And he wouldn't be even attempting it if the package didn't muck up his current installation and/or fail to fix the blurries which sp1 caused, or work reasonably well with current graphics drivers, something which is not discussed on the box or in the literature, of course.Seriously, between this and the way you obnoxiously criticized the flight environment cloud shadows development, you need to think more before you speak.

[tf51d 284]

The EULA you agree to is in effect when the software (Acceleration) is installed. It grants you the use of the software (Acceleration). If you uninstall the software (Acceleration), you are actually now not allowed the use of the software (Acceleration). Since the aircraft you're trying to use are part of the software (Acceleration) that you uninstalled, you are in fact guilty of piracy (theft).He may be guilty of violating the Eula in regards to the way it's used, but theft or piracy is a stretch! He didn't steal it, he paid his $29.95. If he uninstalled it, and returned it for a refund, than you would be correct, but as long as he has a paid copy and he's not distributing it, it's not piracy!

[WarpD 824]

>Get off your high horse. He paid for the software. And he>wouldn't be even attempting it if the package didn't muck up>his current installation and/or fail to fix the blurries which>sp1 caused, or work reasonably well with current graphics>drivers, something which is not discussed on the box or in the>literature, of course.>>Seriously, between this and the way you obnoxiously criticized>the flight environment cloud shadows development, you need to>think more before you speak. Please... take your own advice.

[WarpD 824]

>>He may be guilty of violating the Eula in regards to the way>it's used, but theft or piracy is a stretch! He didn't steal>it, he paid his $29.95. If he uninstalled it, and returned it>for a refund, than you would be correct, but as long as he has>a paid copy and he's not distributing it, it's not piracy!The EULA is a license to use the software. If you violate the EULA it is no longer a license... thus any use of the software is piracy. Please take the time to read the EULA. If you violate it... the agreement is null and void and you no longer have an agreement that allows you to use the software.

[Shaka 2]

>>>>He may be guilty of violating the Eula in regards to the way>>it's used, but theft or piracy is a stretch! He didn't steal>>it, he paid his $29.95. If he uninstalled it, and returned>it>>for a refund, than you would be correct, but as long as he>has>>a paid copy and he's not distributing it, it's not piracy!>>The EULA is a license to use the software. If you violate the>EULA it is no longer a license... thus any use of the software>is piracy. Please take the time to read the EULA. If you>violate it... the agreement is null and void and you no longer>have an agreement that allows you to use the software.>Are you being serious? Violating an EULA does not equate to piracy. I think that since he owns a legally purchased copy of the software, I think he should be allowed to install only a portion of the software. Besides, as strict as the FS EULA is, we are still allowed to mod it even when we try to make changes which aren't documented our supported through the SDK. This seems to fall into the same category.Everybody chill.- Martin

[WarpD 824]

>>Are you being serious? >Yes, I am.>Violating an EULA does not equate to piracy. I think that>since he owns a legally purchased copy of the software, I>think he should be allowed to install only a portion of the>software. Besides, as strict as the FS EULA is, we are still>allowed to mod it even when we try to make changes which>aren't documented our supported through the SDK. This seems>to fall into the same category.No... he legally purchased a license to use a single copy on a single PC. He doesn't own the software. Period. The license is the EULA. If you violate the EULA, you have no right to use the copy.I'm intimately familiar with EULAs... having taken major corporations to task for trying to find ways around them. I can assure you, that if you violate the EULA, you no longer are licensed to use the software. No exceptions. I can also assure you... you don't own the software.

[Bob Familton 14]

Hi Ed. I bought the Accelerator the first day it was available at Circuit City. I have the box, the CD and the activation key. I did not pirate it like I am sure others have done. There are all kinds of Torrent sites with it. When I saw all of the posts stating what happened to existing aircraft when it was installed I decided not to install it. I saw nothing on the box that stated "Warning- This product might cause damage to some existing installations". Best regards, Bob.

[Bob Familton 14]

>Get off your high horse. He paid for the software. And he>wouldn't be even attempting it if the package didn't muck up>his current installation and/or fail to fix the blurries which>sp1 caused, or work reasonably well with current graphics>drivers, something which is not discussed on the box or in the>literature, of course.>>Seriously, between this and the way you obnoxiously criticized>the flight environment cloud shadows development, you need to>think more before you speak. Hi. Thanks for your post. You are right 100%. I bought it! SP1 caused me some trouble that I did not have on the stock FSX. I had no blurries prior to SP1. That's why I did not want to install the Accelerator. Best regards, Bob.