Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Donations

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About TRauppius

Profile Information

  • Gender

Flight Sim Profile

  • Commercial Member
  • Online Flight Organization Membership
  • Virtual Airlines

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Check for Android 5.0 or later, some tablets use proprietary mods of generic Android and then stopped updating at V 4.5.xx. This prevents some new apps from installing/updating and does not support the latest encyrption standard that some servers require.
  2. Folks, PMDG has updated the OC again today. The change log indicates the OC fix was to address the livery installation that several forum members have reported. I have inctalled the OC update and can report that the livery loading problem appears to have been successfully fixed. I have loaded a bunch of 777 liveries. Todd
  3. Yeah, I submitted a ticket to PMDG Product Support and they responded with a registry fix that leads up to a full/new installation of the new installers. This all worked fine, but now I am facing a livery install problem... the new "Livery not found in aircraft.cfg after it should have been added." message that is generated after attempting to either the download or .ptp (add) method of livery installation. I wonder if this is related to the the new OC update that occured early today? Todd R.
  4. Ditto, exactly the same message. Early today the OC was updated and then indicated a new mini-update for the DC-6. This appeared to go OK but the former DC-6 liveries were ignored and I was forced to download them anew and choose to accept the existing .ini/.cfg files. This worked OK, but my 777-200 and 300 liveries are totally messed-up and will not allow new downloaded or add .ptp method to update to work (ie. no actual texture folder is installed in aircraft folder, nor is the aircraft.cfg update. All you get is the error message "Livery not found in aircraft.cfg after is should have been added." Waiting to hear any suggestions, Thank Todd R.
  5. Thanks for your suggestion, but I have already tried to uninstall the base package using both the control panel and new installer. They both fail with identical WER messages. I was able to use the control panel to uninstall the 300 expansion pack though. The upgrade for the 737 and 747 worked fine, but the 777 is now messed up and I don't know how to get a clean delete and reinstall done. Any more suggestions? Todd Rauppius
  6. Encountered installation problem with recent/latest 777 update. Previos update of 777-200/LR plus 300 expansion was 7/18/17 with version 1.10,0395 without any problems. This time I uninstalled the 300 expansion as using the Win 7 Control Panel to uninstall without any problem. I then forgot to uninstall the 777-200 Base Package prior to using the new/updated Base installer. Upon running the new installer with the "repair" button preselected the installation appeared normal until the progress bar reached about the 90% complete point. The installation failed at that point and generated a pop-up window stating "Feature Transfer Error". The box listed "Feature: FSX Version Original Microsoft Distribution" and "Error: The parameter is incorrect." I then unsuccessfully tried to uninstall the 777-200 Base Package using the "remove" option on the new installer and get the same failure to complete the process and an error message; also Windows outputs a WER as shpwn below: Faulting application name: setup.exe_PMDG 777-200LR/F Base Package FSX, version: 1.10.8414.0, time stamp: 0x589ea215 Faulting module name: ISSetup.dll, version:, time stamp: 0x589ea13c Exception code: 0xc0000005 Fault offset: 0x0000a70c Faulting process id: 0xc38 Faulting application start time: 0x01d3085697e3a011 Faulting application path: C:\Users\TODDRA~1\AppData\Local\Temp\{435ED4C2-D001-4474-B1D5-86427021CE96}\setup.exe Faulting module path: C:\Users\TODDRA~1\AppData\Local\Temp\{435ED4C2-D001-4474-B1D5-86427021CE96}\ISSetup.dll Report Id: 4ea70ea4-744a-11e7-a244-002421b43a31 Any help will be very much appreciated, I will stand down and try and not make this mess any worse than it is. Thanks, Todd Rauppius
  7. Everything is working again. IE11, Firefox, GetRight all OK. Thanks for the fix.
  8. Firefox 42.0 works in both normal and private modes. Internet Explore 11 fails with "Page Can't be Displayed" message. GetRight fails and reports filez.avsim.net server connected... but continuously busy and not responding..
  9. I too have tried all of the suggestions noted in prior postings and the earlier instances of extended outages of the library download function. I have tried IE 11, MSN Explorer 11, Mozilla, cache clearing, log out/on to no avail. I consistently get the "This page can't be displayed" message. Also, when I try and use GetRight to download via manually pasting in the URL I receive a response showing the filez.avsim.net server status as always "Server busy, waiting to retry...". GetRight shows a good connection to the server, but no server response, and so is further unable to search for mirror/alternative servers as it lacks a valid file size and time/date stamp to search with. I will continue to monitor this thread. Does the AVSIM moderator for this forum know of this current instance of library download problems? Good luck to all, Todd
  10. This is a great product and it just keeps getting better with each timely update. I can now easily manage my ORBX universe + FSDT airports + T7 + (GSX, UTX, UT2, ENB, SHADE, etc.) with adequate FPS and improved awareness and management of OOM issues. I really like the addition of the realtime FSX memory in use gauge and the "video override" showing the max texture buffer being adjusted to met FSPS goals... very nice. Ditto the AGL switching. I would like to hear a little more of an explanation of the "Efficiency" metric; how is it derived, what does it mean, and how can you use the info provided. Also, had you considered alternate/multiple FSPS strategy/profiles? The current strategy seems focued on obtaining improved FPS. But for me I am a bit more concerned with obtaining the best visuals, emphasizing prompt texture loading and timely scenery autogen appearance, as long as smoothness and a MINIMUM FPS threshold is maintained. I can't wait to see what you can do with OOM issue... best wishes for continued success with this very worthwhile utility.
  11. I have been using FEX for several weeks on my older 3GHz/P4/2GB/XP with 256MB 7600GT and FSGenesis Mesh and Landclass rig and have experienced a significant improvement in appearance while also getting a slight boost in FPS versus the default textures; no problem with FEX....well done!However, as with many folks with rigs like mine I am always fighting the constant FSP and blurry tradeoff/battle with FSX and have achieved a (just) acceptable compromise by using many of the tweaks from the RTM/SP1 era; especially the texture tweaks to reduce the size of the textures for trees, buildings, misc. objects, and the scenery global ground textures. This worked very well and I was finally able to get nlt 15FPS with Acceleration and complex planes (LVLD-767, for exanple) over the big towns like Seattle and NY.Then GEX arrived. I love the improved look and realism, and indeed it does look spectacular at 0.6m and dense autogen. The problem is that the texture load has gone way over the limited capability of my rig....again! It is fine in rural areas, or when flying low and slow, but +200 knots with the "adjusted" autogen and new textures over complex scenery areas leads quickly to mass blurries, menu fuzz/fade, some vertical spike visual artifacts, too low FPS and the inevitable lock-up.I am going to ask the GEX guys if it is possible to use nconvert and imagetool to resize their textures prior to overloading them into the FSX teture directories. Perhaps the resulting sacrifice of detail would not be too high a price to pay. If possible, I could finally "rest in peace" and enjoy flying if I can just find a way to use GEX without overburdening my system.Todd
  12. I tried these out at the Avsim conference last week and was impressed with the POTENTIAL of this type of device.I wear glasses with different presrcriptions in each lens, yet the Vuzix gizmos worked perfectly when placed over my regular progressive tri-focals. Well done.The image only covers about 32 degrees FOV, but because it automaticaly tracks your head movement you don't mind the reduced FOV. The limited FOV and resolution is a price/performance compromise necessary for commercial retail user products. I recall the guy pitching from Vuzix saying their military tactical goggles with larger FOV are something like $5k per set.The VR920 is all analog with a hefty driver for calibration and converting the motion sensors info into FS usable signals. There is a significant lag between head motion (not matter how smoothly applied) and the corresponding slewing of the view in the goggles. It is sort of slow and frustrating like running FSX can often be. The Vuzix guy said the digital model of the VR920 is much faster, too bad they were not on sale yet.The demos were using an older nVidia card and special stereoscopic driver that has not been updated for several years; it only supports 640x480 VGA or remapping of 1024x768 downto 640x480. The stero image looks very good and make some tasks like the last few feet coming down in a FS helicopter much, much easier. The downside is it cannot use higher resolution or any other brand of cards (ATI, etc.) and still get the stereo vision effect. The resolution of 640x480 when presented less than an inch from your eye looks far sharper and more detailed than when viewed on a LCT or CTR at 10-20", but more resolution (for details sake) would make this gizmo fabulous. Also, the built-in sound is just adequate and lacks low-end punch.Final thoughts: amazing and immersive, and a great way to the do the full VR cockpit thing. Great for portable laptop use. Just wait for a little more FOV and better stereo support for newer video cards.Todd
  13. I have had this happen a couple of times to me; usually after I have been installing some new video driver or FSX application (for example the recent ASX SP1 update). It is really a pain in the #### because the suggested "remedies" of repair (does not work), or reinstall FSX (much, too much work).Fortunately has been alsways able to get around this be using the XP Restore registry to an earlier date feature. It seems that if I go back to just prior to the onset/notice of the problem, I can always get FSX to come-up without complaints.I suggest you give this a try. It is completely reverseable as Restore makes a new backup recovery point just prior to the restore operation.I hope this works for you.Todd
  14. :) Thanks a bunch Mitch,I had all but surrendered to the supposedly inevitable blurries in FSX. Nothing seemed to be able to get my 3G/P4, Radeon XL1650/512 rig to give me 15 FPS + scenery without blurries. Well, this little program you suggested has made a world of difference for me.All have run all of my own saved benchmark flights and I am certain that the blurries have been almost completely eliminated. I don't know why or how, but I don't really care; now I can back to some flying again.I run Active Sky X, Graphics X, Ultimate Traffic X (set at 10%), Ultimate Terrain USA (mostly disabled, though), LVLD-767 or CLS DC-10, and all of the FS Genesis Mesh and landclass products.Just completed flight from IAD to MCO (Cloud 9 scenery) with multi-layer clouds, rain, lightning and the textures were loading and appearing crisp; frame rate was 7-12 fps, but smooth without stutters.I am going to try it out on FS9 later today.Thanks again,Todd
  • Create New...