Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Donations

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

-1 Poor

About ahinterl

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Gender
  1. Fact is you can never stop pirates. Even if you sentence them to death, smuggling and piracy continue to exist (see some counries in real life). It's difficult and expensive to try to prevent reverse engineering. You can make cracker's lives more difficult, but you cannot stop them. Companies like PMDG will always face profit loss due to piracy. Some crackers these days are people with deep knowledge of how to undo protection mechanisms. The higher a program is ranked on a "most wanted" list, the higher the probability it will be cracked. The NGX is such a program, as is Photoshop or the likes. Sad, but true. So, you will always find cracked versions of such programs on the 'net. And, pirates don't need a hint here at this forum where to find what they desire.
  2. When Avsim was dead, I reported this freezes in an e-mail to PMDG and added the files needed to reproduce them. Unfortunately, I didn't get a solution answer, now I hope PMDG can look into this issue a little deeper.What I've seen is that freezes occur when SID and STAR portions of the flight plan are present.Simplest setup: TNCM to TNCM. It's enough to tell the FMC the departure runway and the approach by e.g. VOR to the famous runway with the beach in front of it. Shortly after takeoff, the sim freezes and crashes. This doesn't happen if no SID/STAR pages were filled out.This situation is 100% reproducable for me, and I've tested this on two different PCs with different FSX installations (one is stock-only, the other has GE, UT, mesh and FlyTampa TNCM etc.) and two Vista versions (x86 and x64) as well as different hardware.Even if only TNCM and the destination runway are in the flightplan (i.e. all other waypoints are deleted which were automatically inserted during STAR selection) - the minimum to have V speeds for both T/O and landing available - the MD-11 crashes FSX.IMHO this is clearly a bug. I need to be able to return to the same runway I departed doing a small circle only. The MD-11 crashes FSX (a PMDG dll is reported in the FSX crash dialog) when departure and approach runway data is present.So, I guess there's a bug somewhere in the waypoints sequencing code, the sim crashes only when the plane moves.Andreas
  3. >you don't hand fly these things, you use the autopilot.Needless to say you should always be able to take over manually and do hand flying for any flight phase regardless of the plane you use.I for my part enjoy hand flying all those LDS 767, DF 727, PMDG 737/747, PSS 757, FeelThere Airbuses etc. etc. a lot. As a teaser I suggest a short trip from LPPS to LPMA Rwy 05 in pure hand flying in the Maddog 2006 for instance (following the LPPS SID FUNOR and the LPMA VOR DME 05 approach; use the Aerosoft Madeira add-on)...Andreas
  4. I probably made an error during posting my questions since I cannot find it anymore in the forums, so I repeat my question:I have the impression that the airliners (e.g. PMDG 737NG, Maddog 2006, PSS 757 etc. etc.) have too big a turn radius. So, I have big troubles at e.g. Innsbruck west approach when coming from east and doing that 180 deg turn.Are turn radii correctly modelled and only my impression is wrong?Andreas
  5. Anyone has experience with the new Simcharts? I ordered last Saturday online and only got the confirmation mail, but shouldn't there be a mail with a download for the program as well? Looks like they're on holidays...Happy new year!Andreas
  6. After the "death" of FS Navigator, it looks like FS Commander is the only actively developped product left. Are there any other alternatives (for FSX as well)?Andreas
  7. Sorry, but what's the URL for the site?Andreas
  8. FS doesn't calculate V speeds at all, I don't know exactly what you mean. The flight dynamics of a plane play a role here since the speed variable is part of the dynamics, but V speeds are no "core component" of the FDE nor can you extract them from some file in the first place without doing some computations and have a profound knowledge of aerodynamics.V speeds are determined in real life by computations and test flights and filled in tables.If you haven't got these tables for a specific airplane, you ain't got no V speeds. V speeds aren't taken out of the air, the tables are the one and only documentation for them. FS default planes usually have no V speed tables at all...Andreas
  9. Is choosing Opteron(s) or Xeon(s) over a Core2 Duo 6850/Quad 6600 the better choice?If so, what models/combinations are recommended?I'm pretty unfamiliar with Opterons and Xeons altogether, so I have no knowledge wheter two of them are needed in two sockets or not to not loose any feature.Andreas
  10. The question is only when the necessity to reduce sliders considerably will be obsolete because a powerful enough CPU is available...Though I agree it is possible to get a complex airliner to a flyable state in FSX, I don't think I'd like what price I'd have to pay for it (reduced slider settings, that is).It's clear that airliner operations don't need all that fancy stuff, but frankly, who likes to fly in a badly rendered, empty picture of what the world should be? And here's where I begin to doubt we'll have the CPUs needed for things to work that way during the next year.But, convince me, and I'll be the first to get me a Penryn and fly the MD-11 in a wonderful simulated FSX world...Andrea
  11. >I am tossing up getting the new AMD Phenom quad core chip>because it will fit my motherboard. The chip is no faster but>the 2 extra cores might help. I hope.My observations are that to "feel" and "see" a remarkable difference in processing speed in FS, a huge amount of additional CPU power needs to be available.IMHO the current roadmap of Phenoms and Penryns by far will not provide this.Sure, one will possibly see a 1-8 FPS increase, but what does this help if the lowest _continuous_ FPS rate (to avoid stutters etc.) needs to be well over 20 and you currently have only 8-12 with sliders well reduced (again, 8 FPS more doesn't mean FSX will yield this _all the time_, 8FPS more can mean 0 FPS more at some points).Nice clouds, a little AI (how much is a little? Will 50% prevent my home airport to get filled at all?), high-res mesh, ASX and the PMDG-MD11 on a 1600x1200 screen (maybe with a 2nd monitor in 1280x1024) with 4xAF&AA, and I bet it will still be unflyable even with the fastest Penryn (except you're a fan of slideshows)...Currently, for airliner fans like me, I see no light at the end of the tunnel...Andreas
  12. I'm in a comparable situation. Because of that, FSX is unusable for me (only the LDS gives me "acceptable" frame rates, but the price I need to pay is to reduce all sliders to minimum and switch off any AI and effects etc.; nothing I want to live with).To the best I know, FSX currently won't run fast enough to allow for some eye candy (who wants to fly in a wire frame world?) and complex airliners.The stepping stone are the processors available which don't deliver enough power yet (maybe except the fast Xeons and Opterons consting thousends of Euros). Graphics adapters don't seem to be the big hurdle here, an 8800 GT should do...I guess things will get a little better once higer clocked Penryns come out (Q2 2008?). But to be honest, I doubt even they'll be fast enough to handle FSX. Maybe the next generation after Penryn...So, in the end, I suppose anyone claiming today to be able to run any of the new airliners fluently in FSX together with airport add-ons, AI, hires mesh and a weather engine is either a liar, an overclocker (risky, risky...) or victim of severe compromises in terms of reducing FSX features (FS10 alone eats several FPS).Today, I can only recommend to use FSX if you're a GA pilot. I cannot imagine how anyone with an average but new PC can be happy with let's say the PMDG MD-11 once it comes out...But that's only my opinion...Andreas
  • Create New...