Aerodynamic

Sorry for leaving anyone hanging that had questions for me in this older thread. The holidays were busy and I missed the replies during that span. Some additional tidbits I have discovered since the initial post-1) To see the correct engine gauges on the panel for the engine type in use, use the following structure in your aircraft.cfg. Change only what is indicated in parenthesis for your aircraft. Something with PSS's coding associates the gauges and FMC IDENT page with one of the aircraft cfg entries, probably the "title=" and "description=" lines.[fltsim.x]title=757-200 PW overwing exits (Airline goes here)sim=PSSB752_PWmodel=PWLpanel=sound=pwtexture=(Texture folder)atc_id=(Registration number here)atc_airline=(Airline name)atc_flight_number=1123atc_heavy=0ui_manufacturer=Captain Simui_type="757-200 PW overwing exits"ui_variation=(Airline name)description= "B757_200 with Pratt & Whitney 2040 Engines." atc_id_color=0x00000000atc_id_font=Verdana,-11,1,600,0visual_damage=1atc_parking_types=GATE,RAMP[fltsim.x]title=PSS 757-200 RR overwing exits (Airline goes here)sim=PSSB752_RRmodel=RRLpanel=sound=rrtexture=(Texture folder)atc_id=(Registration number here)atc_airline=(Airline name)atc_flight_number=1123atc_heavy=0ui_manufacturer=Captain Simui_type="757-200 RR overwing exits"ui_variation=(Airline name)description="757-200 with RollsRoyce RB211-535E4B" atc_id_color=0x00000000atc_id_font=Verdana,-11,1,600,0visual_damage=1atc_parking_types=GATE,RAMP2) I recently found this minor issue. You cannot do a flight in, say a Cessna, and then swap over to the 757. If you do so, the radio and FMC panels will display behind the main panel. I do not know how to correct that problem at this time.3) I received one report of flaps that completely retract without command. This issue was something I never experienced, but was resolved by the person encountering the problem. Their fix was to edit the "model=" line and choose the non-vc model of the 757. I never had the vc model in my cfg, so I never had the problem. The above info already contains the the non-vc models, so this should not be an issue if you follow it.I should mention the original merge core credit goes to Junior Puente (THANKS!) and that I have just trial and errored these updates to use other variants with the merge with greater accuracy.Thanks,ScottKPNS

>I agree, and I believe the word "con artist" refers to Capt.>empty promises in regards to fixes and upgrades that have>never be developed, even though they have been promised many,>many, many, many months ago.Mike, that's exactly what I was referring to. I am glad you were able to gather that from my post.>The entire community needs a wake up call, so at the very>least, one or two things happen.>>1. Drive this company out of business>>or>>2. Make him fix everything that was promised.I also want to add that Captain Sim has to be aware of the number of people who are completely discontent with them. I'm not really sure how they can operate day to day with all this on their conscience.If Captain Sim is driven out of business, I can see it now - they would probably say that they are closing due to the "negativity surrounding this hobby" and yada yada yada. It would be one final way to slap us in the face. I hope they are capable of understanding that people generally admire and respect their craftsmanship, and the only negativity is about the way they do business and fail on their commitments.If they started doing one complete project at a time, without any misinformation, and offered some form of support, I would probably own a lot more then just their 757 "shell" product right now.I wonder if we will ever get even an apology from them? I mean, that would at least be something that they could actually complete.

>Hello,>>With all due respect, why in the world should I or anyone else>have to purchase two aircraft and then alter various>areas/sections of these aircraft to make one work correctly?,>especially when Capt. empty promises blocked off his B757 with>promises that it will be a complete B-757 aircraft (including>systems / sub systems).>>Oh, I agree with you completely. I am simply tired of waiting. Even when and if Block F comes out, I probably couldn't consciously give Captain Sim more money after the way we have been treated. It would be a serious decision struggle, but I am just fed up.The PSS model leaves a bit to be desired, but I have always liked their panels going back to the older days. At least I can fly a pretty robust 757 this way. If anything, we live and learn. I learned not to buy anything on impulse without waiting for a thorough review of the product and the customer support. It's a shame that there are people out there completely after our money and not for the benefit of the hobby. Those scales have shifted with a handful of these developers....

After reading the number of vents in the Captain Sim B-52 thread, I thought I would share this with those of you who are waiting for the finished Captain Sim 757. First of all, a little bit of info for you about me and why the B-52 thread contained some abrasive comments on my behalf. (I apologize if I went a bit too far, I was just a little on edge when I read about yet another product they have in development.)The 757 has long been my favorite airliner, and I have waited Lord knows how long for a complete 757 with all the bells and whistles. To this day, there are none available for any of Microsoft's recent FS versions. I bought FSX and heard about the Level-D 757 and was very excited. However, I miss the payware-quality sceneries of FS2004. I am back to using FS2004 with all the goodies I have and will not go back to FSX until at least Level-D has their 757 done and/or there are some nice payware sceneries for U.S. airports.I bought into the Captain Sim 757 "block" thing simply because I had never had a bad experience with a payware developer. Every time I upgraded my system or needed to reinstall something, folks like Carenado and Level-D were always on their game. They were quick to respond to emails and forum posts and that is something I greatly appreciate when I paid for their product. Captain Sim makes some stellar exterior models. Let me be clear on that. My venting in the B-52 thread is not because I want to take away the fact that they put effort into something that we can enjoy and marvel at. My beef is that in 2 years, there has been a complete failure by Captain Sim to communicate to its paying customers as to why there is/has been a 2-year delay on the 757. Furthermore, they begin other projects (like the B-52 and the F-18 for FSX) and leave things incomplete that were initially promised to have numerous other features. The Captain Sim 757 is the only product I bought into and I am mad enough about that. When I read people complaining about the 707 and C-130, it makes me glad that I didn't buy into more of their products and associated promises. When I get so upset about the 757, I try to think of others who have multiple Captain Sim packages with incomplete and quirky features that will only be dodged if you ask Captain Sim about it in their forum.So on to what I would like to share. If you would like (what I consider to be) a quality 757 package for FS2004, I have some recommendations. I have been using the following, and it gets your money's worth out of two products that are outstanding in their own areas. I should also mention that I am picky in a lot of respects and want the best 757 currently possible. You can combine the Captain Sim 757 exterior model with the PSS 757 panel! I have flown three recent flights and really enjoy it. Do the following if you want your 757 now and not when and if Captain Sim finishes the 757 Block F:***Obviously, you need to own the CS 757 Block B and the PSS 757. I would say if you don't own the PSS 757, go ahead and buy it solely for the panel and systems and just assume that it would be part of the money you spent on Block F for the Captain Sim FMC, flight dynamics, and many bug fixes it will allegedly include.***1) Go to the *other* site and download the PSS 757 panel merge. If you search for it, you will easily find it. You will not find it here at Avsim. Avsim probably didn't get the submission or they chose to not house the file due to the merge contents. If that's the case we should understand and respect that. Follow the merge instructions. It's very easy and you will even get to retain the Captain Sim model animations that are pretty nifty!2) Download the FSX 757 Block B package from the CS site. It's free to upgrade the 757 shell to FSX. When I had FSX installed, I noticed the FSX 757 model contains much more accurate wing flex. You don't have to pull 7 G's to see wing flex in the FSX model. The model works fine in FS2004, and all repaints will not be affected.3) Download Dax Sweetman's aa_300_pw.zip package here at Avsim. Yes, this is a fictional repaint, but it contains 2 texture repaints that you can use on each and every Captain Sim 757. Many haven't noticed, but Captain Sim left every single repaint with incomplete under-wing textures. The darker "spar" gray always stops halfway down the wing. Dax's two textures, 75_R_7_T and 75_L_7_T, contain completely painted textures that will correct each and every 757 you have that does not have under-wing registrations. (Sorry, Europe simmers. I am not a painter and every repaint that comes out for European airlines on the CS model alway uses the incomplete textures. Painters always affix the correct registration to the incomplete wing textures. It's like no one has ever noticed the flaw!) Easily fixable if you know how to paint, unlike me!4) Adjust the aircraft.cfg per the repaints you have and use. I also modified mine to reflect the appropriate engine type. The merge uses the RR freighter .air file, but you can use the correct ones if you adjust your aircraft.cfg to reflect that change.The goofy appearance of the horizontal stabilizers works much better in this merge. The stabilizers always looked way too trimmed up in the standard Captain Sim Block B package. It bahaves and looks a lot more realistic in this merge.I have only done 3 flights so far on this, but it is quite satisfactory, even for my standards. You get an FMC with an overhead and clickable "hot spots" on the 2D panel. If you love virtual cockpits, then you might be disappointed since you will have to fly with the 2D panel. But also you get a 757 that feels much more like a 757 and not a default 737. And you get all this while utilizing your beautiful Captain Sim 757 "shell."I am wondering if anyone else has tried what I am using and is enjoying it as much as I am. I don't feel quite as "ripped off" since I'm able to fly more realistically!If you have any questions, I will be glad to answer them and provide the limited help I am capable of. Don't count on Level-D type customer support, but you can count on a level much higher than Captain Sim's! :-lolhttp://forums.avsim.net/user_files/181688.jpghttp://forums.avsim.net/user_files/181689.jpgBest Regards,Scott

>I've seen this written quite a few times now, but I thought>the F/A-18 in Acceleration was done by "Virtuali" who>previously produced stuff for Cloud9. In fact if you check out>the Virtuali website they have an unofficial support forum for>the Acceleration F/A-18.>>I may be wrong?Captain Sim is practically boasting about making content for Microsoft's Acceleration pack on their web site. Below is what appears on the main page:"We create content for Microsoft!The Flight Simulator X Acceleration Expansion Pack was released by Microsoft in October '07. We are proud to be part of it, and announce that the F/A-18A model in the Pack has been developed by Captain Sim!"....So they can finish projects for Microsoft, huh?

>Why wouldnt you just download it from Phoenix simulations? if>you want it that bad.Phoenix's online store is currently closed and has been closed for quite some time. I wonder what is going on with them? I guess they want people to purchase now through Just Flight....

>Being realistic; in Flightsim land, there have been many>suppose- able "broken promises", and commitments. While so>many developers start with a bundle of enthusiasm, it doesn't>always pan out.Well, "always panning out" isn't good enough for those of us who have bought blocks of a 2 year old product line that was planned to have full systems, but currently does not. We should be refunded or some other form of compensation is in order if this 757 is never completed. This type of thing would be reported to the Better Business Bureau if this occurred in any legitimate organization in the United States.The fact that they have released a poll about development for FS9 over FSX is just a slap in our face. Why even post a poll? Uh, hello?! Yeah, we want the FS9 version. Maybe that is what people have been buying the blocks for! I mean, it's only been 2 years....:-roll>Still --- the visual quality of C/S stands on it's own. That>may not interest you, but it does me.I will give credit where credit is due. Yes, they produce outstanding visual models. But I think the only thing currently standing on its own with Captain Sim is their level of B.S. That may not interest you with your C-130, but it interests me with my 757.And I digress, but I also find it a little inappropriate that Avsim advertises Captain Sim products on these forums. If this 757 is never released, I would appreciate it vastly if they no longer display links of payware developers who do not stay true to their word. I'm sure I'm not alone in my feelings on this 757 product. Someone needs to say something at some point. I value my time and I value my money just like other people do.I have been visiting Avsim for years and appreciate it for the resource that it is and the results it provides. However, it is quite bothersome that a Captain Sim B-52 is in development, AFTER the F-18 for FSX Acceleration, while 2 years has passed waiting for the Block F 757....and there is a banner on top of the page where people can buy this very incomplete product.I think anyone with any decent reasoning would see that this type of approach by Captain Sim is nothing short of abominable.

It's not about full systems and visual models. It's about broken promises.I make $15/hour. I work 2-3 hours to pay for most flight sim payware packages, while supporting myself. When Captain Sim doesn't own up to their commitments, I take offense to that. My time is priceless. Too bad I can't get that point across to the makers of these "well-crafted visual models."

Amen, Steve!Craptain Sim is a classic con artist. Plain and Simple. I've been waiting for a finalized 757 for years. I gave up on it and merged it with the PSS 757 panel and am pretty happy with that. I miss the VC view from time to time, but I at least get to enjoy an expensive visual model with an expensive 2D panel that has systems. Funny after all these years of flight simming, NO ONE has EVER released a complete 757 package with a nice visual model and robust systems like PMDG and Level-D. People say, "Level-D is releasing a 757" and all that jazz, but guess what? It's only for FSX, and FSX seems to have a noticeable lack in third-party development. I went back to FS9 solely for the quality add-ons it offers. Ground Environment and Flight Environment are only so good if there are quality packages to fly with. For whatever reason, FSX seems to be dead more than it is alive. I decided to go back to the past, even after purchasing GEX!So back to Captain Sim. They are forcing all of us who are waiting for a 757 to be finished....to WAIT MORE, after purchasing packages through their pointless "block system"....for 2 years....while they develop new models like this B-52 and the F-18 for FSX? Sounds like someone is bowing down to the money god. This is TERRIBLE customer service. It's really a sad situation. They have such terrific modeling, but yet they deserve no merit.They should only sell models and let other developers handle the rest. Or maybe an alliance should be proposed. I feel completely taken advantage of and hope no one ever shells out money to feel like I feel. Don't buy this B-52 or any of their products. I feel robbed, like this is a crime. It almost makes me feel like people pirating a Captain Sim model are actually doing something good, and that's not something I am proud of!Further Angered by Craptain Sim,Scott

I installed photorealvegetationgroundtextureset.zip last night. I didn't even know about the other file until I read your post, so I will add that one later this evening when I get home. I was very impressed with what I saw. I am using Ground Environment, so whatever files that were replaced are working with GE textures. They seemed to mix well and also seemed to reduce FS9 "blurries." I am not sure why that's the case, but it seems like that on my rig. I definitely recommend them and I am going to be looking for any upcoming textures he releases.Scott

Well said, BKircher. I think it's ridiculous that more updates are required for add-ons already updated for FSX. I don't think many developers are going to step up to that plate ready to swing.So now we have to use already existing technology (DX 9) with Service Pack 2, with no performance increase, so we can use payware we spent good money on. Additionally, DX 10 currently offers nothing special with FSX - not that I noticed when flying around in the few aircraft (default) that would actually work properly. I have seen DX 10 benefits in other games that run like butter off a hot biscuit on my system. And as far as Acceleration goes, I'll pass on the "challenging" carrier landings and "exciting" air racing.I seriously think we've reached a peak in flight sim programming, and someone needs to come up with something revolutionary to help this franchise. It's out of hand now. DX 10 is about as sharp as Dan Fouts in a commentating booth.

I'd like to know if all these reported problems are encountered with the "DirectX 10 Preview" checked under display settings. I didn't notice any major issues if I left that unchecked.I am assuming this is the problem causing a lot of the reports in this thread. Of course, I bought Acceleration to check that option, but then I had all these problems with my add-ons....:-roll

Yes, Glenn. I purchased all of my rig's hardware prior to Phil's articles. I purchased it with the idea that I would be safe for all DX 9 stuff and I'd be good for the upcoming DX 10. It is disappointing now, I can assure you.And yes, I was under the impression that there shouldn't be a problem with add-on aircraft working within the same sim, ragardless of the DX version. Seems a bit pointless to even offer DX 10 for FSX after seeing it for myself, especially considering it affects certain aspects of payware add-ons.My personal opinion is that all this DX 10 mess is just a complete disaster. My rig runs the heck out of everything and even runs FSX decently with DX 9. But having all this add-on headache is just no fun. I'm just gonna forget DX 10 until I am given a reason to use it.

Yes, they work with SP2 DirectX 9. But I got Acceleration to take advantage of 10. They touted DirectX 10 as better in a number of ways. I read where people had tested some add-ons in DirectX 10 and noted no incompatibility. Obviously, they can't test everything. That was some form of encouragement, though. The bottom line is that running SP2 in DirectX 9 provides nothing more (to me) that is worth the installation to begin with....at least not until payware developers update products for DirectX 10.DirectX 10 doesn't even look much better to me with the default aircraft. I'm not accusing Aces of anything wrong or complaining. Essentially: 1) Yes, Acceleration allows default aircraft to work flawlessly in DirectX 10 with a slight performance increase and improved rendering. 2) Yes, my own personal add-ons seem to work in DirectX 9 SP2 with no performance increase.3) Yes, Acceleration does not merit installation if you are hoping to run FSX using DirectX 10 while flying add-on aircraft at this time.I'm just voicing my observations to those who might be weighing out their options and considering purchasing Acceleration. I had DirectX 9 before and had zero problems without Acceleration, so I'm choosing to remove Acceleration and all the content that I won't use that came with it.If you don't want the content, you need to wait for developer fixes and the free Microsoft FSX DirectX 10 patch in December. Period.

Glenn,I never had performance problems, nor did I notice any bugs that bothered me in SP1. But I certainly notice when I cannot use add-on aircraft in DirectX 10 with Acceleration. I could care less about the new content. I'd rather not have my hangar cluttered up with aircraft I will never use. (F-18, the Augusta, the P-51, etc.) I never fly ANY default aircraft. Maybe the Baron on rare occasion. There is no benefit for me to have Acceleration right now when I was perfect with SP1. Serves me right for buying and trying something new (DirectX 10 support) in hopes of improvement!Scott

Hopefully some designers will issue fixes to update their products to FSX SP2. I also get the same opaque windows, bland VC, and solid white exteriors on many of my aircraft. This only occurs when DirectX 10 Preview is active. If I uncheck and restart the sim, all aircraft seem fine.Personally, I don't think developers should have to issue yet another fix to get their products to work in this sim....AGAIN. It's getting a little ridiculous. There is already a noticeable lack of add-ons that will work in FSX. I'm thankful to those who have issued updates. It's taken a lot of patience on my part to wait for things that seem so far down the pipe. Now we have another service pack that means extra work for existing stuff, not to mention things that might currently be in development.Maybe now that this service pack is out, we will start to see more and more scenery and aircraft released since all the framework is now in place. I can only hope. For now, I have to weigh it out: Do I want quality add-ons that only work in DirectX 9, or do I want to fly the simplistic, default aircraft in DirectX 10? I really don't see any positives with Acceleration right now, unless you like the new content. I bought Acceleration for DirectX 10, and it's a bust currently with add-ons. I'm uninstalling and going back to SP1 so I can use everything I have again. I've noticed no performance increase like I did in SP1, because I'm unable to use DirectX 10. I don't think Aces lied to us, but they aren't responsible for add-on compatibility of the aircraft I have purchased elsewhere. I understand that. But it is very frustrating. Thank goodness I'm only out $17. I advise people to wait for some update info if you like your add-on aircraft.And perhaps I am the only one - but I think the F-18 is terrible. Back to SP1 I go,Scott

I have the Carenado 182 and experience the same symptoms when using DX 10 Preview. Works fine if I leave that option unchecked.______________________________________________________________System Specs:Gigabyte 965P-DS3 MotherboardIntel Core 2 Duo E6420 2.13ghz OC'd @ 3.04ghzZalman 7700 CPU CoolingEVGA e-GeForce 320mb 8800GTS2 X 1gb G.Skill Memory, Dual ChannelSeagate Barracuda 320gb Hard Drive, Perpendicular RecordingCorsair HX520W Modular Power SupplyWindows Vista Home Premium 32 Bit

Just picked up mine at Circuit City here in Pensacola. $19.34! They had a problem with it not being recognized in their system yet as of 5:00 today. The guy was able to ring me up somehow at the advertised price so I could leave with it. Apparently their system is not showing it yet for all stores across this area.Installing it right now! :-scatter

I, like many, have become quite discontent waiting for Captain Sim to follow up on their claims. Developing the F-18 for FSXAcc shows that they have priorities, and I don't think they have theirs in order. They can meet a deadline for Aces, but they can't meet any for their paying customers of the general public? Please.:-rollI beg to differ from Manny. As far as exterior models, I think the Captain Sim 757 is the best available, except the annoying stabilizer that seems too "pitched up." It's a matter of preference, I suppose. Putting the Captain Sim 757 next to the Project Opensky 757 is not even a close contest. Yes - the Opensky is good, FREE, and flexible to use. But it's an old design that could use an update to fix the "chubby" leading edge of the vertical stab, the nose being "off" from certain angles, and the flexless wings. The Captain Sim has none of those symptoms, but I'm fighting to find a panel with an FMC for it. We need to get the Level-D working with her instead of waiting for Captain Sim!I'm no exterior designer, but I will give credit where credit is due. I think the their 757 ranks right up there on the outside with the rest of the products I have seen from them. (If you want to see shotty work from Captain Sim, look at the FSXAcc F-18. I find it hard to believe they actually did that!)My couple pennies there.Scott______________________________________________________________System Specs:Gigabyte 965P-DS3 MotherboardIntel Core 2 Duo E6420 2.13ghz OC'd @ 3.04ghzZalman 7700 CPU CoolingEVGA e-GeForce 320mb 8800GTS2 X 1gb G.Skill Memory, Dual ChannelSeagate Barracuda 320gb Hard Drive, Perpendicular RecordingCorsair HX520W Modular Power SupplyWindows Vista Home Premium 32 Bit

I miss many FS9 add-ons as well. I believe a lot of publishers are awaiting the DirectX 10 patch before they really start doing any new developing or any patching of FS9 products. Unfortunately, when the DirectX 10 patch is finally released, half of FSX's shelf life will be over. To be honest, I've been a little disappointed in FSX so far. If it weren't for the Level-D guys and their 767, I would hardly have any reason to use FSX at this point in time. I keep hope alive with the DirectX 10 patch coming soon, but we've all pretty much been told to temper our expectations from the folks in the know.Regards,Scott

Jim, thanks for the reply. I'm with you on the UAC Vista thing. Turning mine off was the first thing I did when I built this machine and loaded Vista. The font thing was never a problem for me. I never got error messages or had to add folders and relocate fonts. But that's what I was thinking had to be the case.At any rate, I'm glad to report the issue is fixed. I rebooted and that was the magical touch. I can't believe that fixed it, but it was either that or the Flight1 registry fixer that I utilized.Thanks for all who brainstormed on this with me!______________________________________________________________System Specs:Gigabyte 965P-DS3 MotherboardIntel Core 2 Duo E6420 2.13ghz OC'd @ 3.04ghzZalman 7700 CPU CoolingEVGA e-GeForce 320mb 8800GTS2 X 1gb G.Skill Memory, Dual ChannelSeagate Barracuda 320gb Hard Drive, Perpendicular RecordingCorsair HX520W Modular Power SupplyWindows Vista Home Premium 32 Bit

I am a new user of FSX and have recently come across a problem that I hope someone can help with. I have not read anything else about someone having this issue! I became aware of it after purchasing the Level-D 767, my first add on for this sim. I thought it was a Level-D problem, but then I realized I have the same symptom with the default 737.Basically, my autopilot readings are not displaying. Whatever makes them viewable is not working for me. I have attached 2 screenshots to show what I mean.I have done a complete reinstallation of FSX and the service pack 1 and the problem persists. Unfortunately, this is sort of a big problem if you want to use the autopilot! I don't get any font error messages or seem to have any other abnormalities aside from this right now.http://usera.imagecave.com/scotteduncan/737Issue.jpghttp://usera.imagecave.com/scotteduncan/767issue.jpgThanks for any assistance. Please, anyone?!______________________________________________________________System Specs:Gigabyte 965P-DS3 MotherboardIntel Core 2 Duo E6420 2.13ghz OC'd @ 3.04ghzZalman 7700 CPU CoolingEVGA e-GeForce 320mb 8800GTS2 X 1gb G.Skill Memory, Dual ChannelSeagate Barracuda 320gb Hard Drive, Perpendicular RecordingCorsair HX520W Modular Power SupplyWindows Vista Home Premium 32 Bit

It is definitely strange, Scott. That file must have a composition of something important, because as a test I found a grass texture on the net, resized it, and named it "detail1.bmp." The effect worked, but it basically overtook the sim world by making everything that color and effect. Weird. I hope someone, somehow, figures out how to release something that will enhance grass textures at airports.______________________________________________________________System Specs:Gigabyte 965P-DS3 MotherboardIntel Core 2 Duo E6420 2.13ghz OC'd @ 3.04ghzZalman 7700 CPU CoolingEVGA e-GeForce 320mb 8800GTS2 X 1gb G.Skill Memory, Dual ChannelSeagate Barracuda 320gb Hard Drive, Perpendicular RecordingCorsair HX520W Modular Power SupplyWindows Vista Home Premium 32 Bit

Hi folks,This seems about the most appropriate forum for this inquiry. I am hoping to find information about how I can change the default grass textures for airports in FSX. Specifically, 3D grass like that in the FS2004 FlightScenery Portland release is preferred. Is this a particular texture file or a group of texture files? I have downloaded a "detail1.bmp" upgrade here at Avsim, but this just doesn't have the appearance I was hoping for. Whatever the third party developers are doing with scenery these days is quite amazing, and I would like to think that this can be incorporated into default FSX airports. (I hope!) If there is a payware product out there that accomplishes this, I am willing to shell out money for it. Thanks for any info.Scott______________________________________________________________System Specs:Gigabyte 965P-DS3 MotherboardIntel Core 2 Duo E6420 2.13ghz OC'd @ 3.04ghzZalman 7700 CPU CoolingEVGA e-GeForce 320mb 8800GTS2 X 1gb G.Skill Memory, Dual ChannelSeagate Barracuda 320gb Hard Drive, Perpendicular RecordingCorsair HX520W Modular Power SupplyWindows Vista Home Premium 32 Bit

>Actually, it