Should We Un-Install SP2?

[bkeske 0]

I only have one aircraft effected to the point to where it is 'unflyable', and it is so out of date, it is probably time to retire it anyhow. That aircraft? The Carenado Dakota. All my other Carenado products work just fine.Also, I have found 'ported' FS9 aircraft just do not perform as well as they did in FS9, for the most part, I concentrate on my FSX designed craft...more often than not.

[Guest DigitalNoise]

Some of you have read my jiberish before but here are my answers anyway:1. Yes Keep SP2 and only use add-ons created with it in mind as its time to move forward. we all knew the day would come and its about time etc.... But you have to ask, is this the sim that is worth that sacrifice? I personaly feel that if we had got an all new sim with a really good all around package to start with that would have been worth jumping over to all new etc. But we didn't, Aces delivered in so many areas it is true but this one still has too many ugly parts that are right in your face. Various one step forward and two steps back type of things, just look at the terrain.very promising, 1 meter or less pixel res texture but it is only good for straight down veiwing and now for some reason the near outward forward view is even less detailed then FS9 (Same video card same max HQ settings).Ugly desert/dry grass textures everywhere with every season except summer and fake looking wheather effects plus we couldn't be trusted enough to have an option to fade out the auto gen, no it just pops onto your screen like it is FS5 scenery with bad range settings. Just these few issues alone have killed the fun for me, I can't understand how these made it into final and then to have two whole service packs out on not one of them addresses it. If I had to rank FSX for the asthetics of the terrain it would fall below FS9. Or2. No, just keep SP1, and have many more decent add-on options than SP2 and keep flying untill a better sim comes out that is worth starting over with. In the final, we probably need to move ahead, support those that develop towards the future and hope for FSXI but its a tuff to decide.

[N562Z 4]

DN - I concur with all of your comments. I find the same things true in my install of FSX. Good system, great video card...I continue to mold my install, like clay in the hands of Michaelangelo, perhaps more as an academic step than out of pure enjoyment, though sometimes it surprises me how nice it really flies. Climbing out of the cold, snow-capped peaks surrounding desolate Yelizevo / UHPP in Russia at dawn the other day, the sky was an ominous purple, the clouds puffy and volumetric, and my Overland 777 with it's missing forehead texture swayed and bounced gently in the gusting winds, requiring me to gently coax her into wings level flight. It was truly wonderful. I see the potential, I really do, so I'm inclined to agree with you that it's time to move forward. Let's see what Aces does with it. http://www.my-buddy-icon.com/Icons/objects/red_3d_plane.gifAlex ChristoffN562ZBaltimore, MD

[Guest Shalomar]

The Carenado Stationair works fine with SP2, and with VCrainfix applied it even has raindrops on the windsheild. As does the ATR-72 from F1, the PMDG 1900C, the FSD Seneca V V2 and even the MAAM-Sim DC-3 after their fix was applied. Without SP2 I wouldn't have rain on the windsheild of these and many freeware birds.I consider myself over the hump; having purchased Acceleration and the CS C-130. I would have to give up both to go back. Yes, some aircraft are unflyable; such as the TBM 700 and the Turbo- Beaver amphib. (They would be fixable if I had the expertise. Simple transparency issues.) But if I ever go back to SP1, it will be because I really miss the friends I left behind in multiplayer. I would also then miss the friends who have SP2 and especially Acceleration. It's a quandry...Best regards, Donald T. :-waveFLYing? It's cool. Trillions of birds and insects can't be wrong.

[rhodges 6]

Good Morning Alex:You do not state what your specs are, what operating system you are useing, nor whether you implement the acceleration package along with SP2 or not. If per chance you are useing Vista with DX10 and the acceleration package ignore the following:That being said, my findings with third party aircraft from FS9 or otherwise need the following clarifications:I am operating with XPPro and DX9, the freeware SP2 installation and NO acceleration package. I also primarily fly with multiple monitors in the windowed mode and 2d panel implementation, although I have not noticed any problem relative to VC panels when taking a peek.I do not have any Overland aircraft, but do have the Carenado Beechcraft Bonanza V35b. I see no problems with it. I have quite a number of imported aircraft from FS9 and have noticed only the following problems (with SP2 installed).1. For some prop planes (not all), the prop texture in spot view is an undesirable bold circle. I simply disable that bgl (rename it), copy one from an aircraft with no problems, and rename it to the original. The prop bgl from the Carenado V35b is a good replacement (renamed to the original for the aircraft in question). This really is the only glitch I have noticed unique to SP2 operating under the above defined configuration and IMHO is no biggie to remedy.2. For the FSD Porters, the panel did not work, so I used the Cessna 208 Grand Caravan panel. If I remember correctly this was the case before SP2 as well so is somewhat academic relative to your post. The FSD Cheyenne and Navajo panels work fine with no problems. Note that all of these planes are the early FSD versions. The later versions may or may not have any problems.3. The PSS Dash 8 needs help in establishing the flight path with FMC control of the Autopilot. Once established it follows reasonably well. Only manual ILS approaches seem to be stable as autopilot control is very sloppy. This also may have nothing to do with SP2 and was the case before installing it. All of my PSS Airbus/IFDG liveries and the Concorde work fine (including FMC operation).Happy flying:RTH

[GHarrall 494]

Leave SP2 installed and get used to the idea of losing backwards compatability.FS11 should be doing away with it completely if we have heard correctly......Glenn

[RFields5421 1]

Actually I think it's the "unwilling to be advanced" users who are having greatest difficulty letting go of FS2000,2,4 compatible aircraft trying to force them to work in FSX.But - if someone decides that FSX SP2 is not worthwile - a supposition I disagree with totally - do not uninstall SP2.Uninstall FSX completely and do a fresh install of FSX and SP1 only.I fully understand that somethings don't work right in FSX. That is why I keep FS2004 on my system and use it for those aircraft.I don't try to make the square peg of FS2004 complex aircraft fit into FSX.

[N562Z 4]

RTH - My system specs are the same as yours: I am operating with XPPro and DX9, the freeware SP2 installation and NO acceleration package. We differ in that I run exclusively in VC with multiple monitors via the Matrox Triple Head to Go system. So perhaps some of the transparency issues I'v experienced in the VC's of several planes is not something you've had to address in the 2-D panels. Still, at heart, I am in agreement with all of you here in terms of looking forward and not back, so I will keep SP2 and grow with the changes. I've already learned something in the process - how to edit texture files, change the alpha channel settings and fix some of the transparent texture problems. So it's been a learning experience, and that is definitely a good thing.Cheers,http://www.my-buddy-icon.com/Icons/objects/red_3d_plane.gifAlex ChristoffN562ZBaltimore, MD

[vgbaron 3,482]

With every new version, something else gets chopped. That's the way of the world. Each of us has to decide if the step forward is worth the loss. For me, it's an unqualified yes. To me, the difference between FS9 and FSX are like night and day - I far prefer FSX even with it's idiosyncracies. After all, FS9 had it's glitches too.If you want to go to the next level you will have to part with some of your favcrites, if not now, then FS11 will surely be a killer.VicQ6600 G0 CPU 2.4 o/c 3.65Evga 680i A1 with P31 BIOS 2G XP2-8500 DDR2 1066FSB Mushkin 996535 RAM 5-5-4-12-2T320G 7200 HD partitioned for XP/Vista/Programs 2 - 74G Raptors in RAID0 500G 7200 HD for backup SATA DVD burner Evga 8800GTS 640 PCIx 169.13 betaKandalf LCS case w/ built in liquid cooling 850W Thermaltake power supplyVisit the Virtual Pilot's Centerwww.flightadventures.comhttp://www.hifisim.com/banners/hifi-supporter-sigbanner.jpgRadar Contact Supporter: http://www.jdtllc.com/

[dbw1 443]

Hi, I have sp1 installed and fsx works fine. Got a new gaming machine on order (dx9) and when I install fsx to it I've been wondering about sp2 and "acceleration".....Should I install sp2 and maybe get Acceleration? My addon aircraft include the Cessna 441 conquest, MD80, Feelthere 737, Feelthere Citation X, ATR72.....Will these operate fine with the sp2 etc installed? Is fsx perfornacne (fps) improved with sp2?I appreciate any responses. Many thanks. Dave

[David Vega 348]

AlexClearly you are aware of your choice. "... I almost cannot conceive of flight simulation without Carenado and Overland products... ." These products may be flyable in the latest FS, but not without "laborious" adaptations. But you're also wishing that newer versions of FS continue to support these products so you can enjoy their new stuff together with your old stuff. The solution is clear for you. Given that there's no "we", keep enough versions of FS around to satisfy your desires. Everyone else, individually, will do appropriately. Have fun.Dave Vega

[Mace 1,896]

My thoughts are that you should keep FSX SP2, but also keep your FS9 install too. Fly your Overland and Carenado stuff in FS9. Fly the rest in FSX. Win-win situation for you.We are all most likely going to have to get used this with FS11. It will possibly be like this times ten.RhettAMD 3700+ (@2585 mhz), eVGA 7800GT 256 (Guru3D 93.71), ASUS A8N-E, PC Power 510 SLI, 2gb Corsair XMS 3-3-3-8 (1T), WD 150 gig 10000rpm Raptor, WD 250gig 7200rpm SATA2, Seagate 120gb 5400 rpm external HD, CoolerMaster Praetorian

[aerdt 0]

FS9 aircraft belong in FS9 and we should not expect them to work in FSX.The best approach right now is to keep FS9 around for legacy content and FSX for the cutting-edge, new stuff.I never expected that FS9 aircraft without a FSX patch work in FSX anyway, so I am not too terribly disappointed or surprised that they don't work. My favorite FS9 add-ons have either been ported to be compatible with SP2 (ATR, Level-D, Cheyenne, Eaglesoft planes) or are completely new releases (FT A320).Pat

[bkeske 0]

Really? I don't have any 'bugs' to speak of.

[tf51d 284]

>FS9 aircraft belong in FS9 and we should not expect them to>work in FSX.>>The best approach right now is to keep FS9 around for legacy>content and FSX for the cutting-edge, new stuff.>>I never expected that FS9 aircraft without a FSX patch work in>FSX anyway, so I am not too terribly disappointed or surprised>that they don't work. My favorite FS9 add-ons have either been>ported to be compatible with SP2 (ATR, Level-D, Cheyenne,>Eaglesoft planes) or are completely new releases (FT A320).>>PatThe problem with this argument, is these aircraft did work in FSX prior to SP2. Now I could understand Aces doing this if FSX was going to be further developed, but Phil already stated, this is the end of the line for further FSX development. So why did they pick now to break backward compatibility? Since it's a good bet there will be major changes in FSXI there's a good possibility FSX SP2 aircraft and scenery won't be compatible with it. Was it so they could say they implemented DX10 which was originally promised? If so, I submit, that since it wasn't fully implemented as planned, that it wasn't worth the effort. Aces, should have bit the bullet and backed off of implementing DX10 at this point, unless it could have been done as first envisioned. Breaking backward compatibility intentionally is something you do in a RTM release not a patch. This is going to result in a division in this community. Addons that work in FS2004 and FSX SP1, may not work without problems in SP2, while others building SP2 addons may not work in SP1! This isn't good for either camp your in!! Me I'm lucky to have a dual boot system, so most of my flying is done in SP1 on XP, while I use the acceleration features on Vista.