Cee-Jaay

>>No.1 RR engine exhibits vibration level in excess of the expected for a newly delivered engine.You did remove all the bubblewrap on the walkround???

From I recall of my own VC design the problem I found was that the problem wasn't so much the VC itself, rather the limited control of the position of the viewpoint.Taking the 737/757/767 arrangement as an example (and leaving performance and gauge resolution issues aside).A pilots eyeline is straight ahead (out the window, most instruments require a glance-down to bring them out of peripheral vision, something that happens subconscuiously IRL, but requires view movement button-pressing in the sim.If the VC perspective can, in FSX, be angled downward (as 2d views can be in FS9) then with the right viewpoint and zoom settings; a comparable picture 'should' be possible on screen.

From my experience I advise being persistent. If you do not get a reply to an email, after say 5 days, send another asking if they received it and restating your message. Be prepared to repeat things you've already told them since you may not be dealing with the same person each time.I had a similar problem, but in the end by being consistent and providing them with all the information requested Ariane went to much trouble to email me the large zip files that had not completed downloading and eventually posted me a cd at no extra charge.Be advised; it is unfortunate but the assumption is that every customer is a potential fraudster so you will have to explain your circumstance and convince them where possible that you are a genuine customer with id's and passwords etc.As with any customer support team, they are YOUR ambassadors and you want them to acknowledge, own and resolve the problems on your behalf, so get them working for you with a balanced combination of carrot as well as stick. If you refuse to go away, busy support teams are likely to do more just to get rid of you. If you get abusive you'll only succeed in alienating them, which means you're less likely to get them to do what you want.

Given Level-D's constraint on engine types on the 76, I'll wait and see if they only provide the PW version for this one.

Hi there,I agree that AGP support is going to fall away soon, but if you have a card and a system that does the business it shouldn't matter.Last month I switched from AGP to PCI. Reviews I had seen put the 7800gt 'marginally ahead of the ATI equivalent, but those tests weren't FS-specific.I was an ATI fan, having gone from the 8500 to 9800pro.If the next version of FS supports dual graphics cards, you could slot another in alongside.Cheer,C.j.MSI K8N DiamondAMD64 3200+ CPU2*512Mb Corsair xpertXFX GeForce 7800gt GPUHitachi Deskstar+Raptor SATA HDsSamsung 19" 193 LCD

Bert you were right.After a spot of research into other AV programs. I uninstalled Norton and replaced it with a less 'demanding' equivalent.And instantly - no freezes or pauses.Thanks for the help and advice.Cheers,Chris

Thanks for the suggestions guys.I do have Norton running in the background - as I (would) usually use the 'download weather function', disabling the AV and Firewall would be a risky step security-wise.I'll try-out a few of the earlier ATI drivers.Chipset-wise, I've so far kept with the Mobo drivers provided by MSI, but would be interested if there were alternatives on NVidia.The only other item I forgot to mention in my first post is that I was running with the onboard (Realtek) sound chip. But I disabled this in the Bios and the pausing remained.Cheers,Chris

Pleading for help from anyone here...The new system is now up and running and FS9 performance is miles better (was 15-20FPS, usually around 30-40FPS)But every three-or-four seconds there is a split-second pause (the dreaded stutters - Even on the 'select a flight' page, the stock cessna - pauses it's pirouet every few seconds).and it's driving me utterly spare!- I have FS in it's own partition, freshly formatted and rebooted- I have the latest Catalyst ATI drivers (5.4) and DirectX- I deleted the FS9.cfg to ensure it created a default one.How come the system is able to push-out around 70 frames a second (panning round the cessna on the threshold at KSEA) and then every couple of seconds - freezes of a fraction of a second?If it were performance-related (i.e. XP services) I'd have figured the basic frame rate would be affected?Cheers,Chris.K8N Neo2 Platinum - Athlon64 3200Dual (2*)512Mb Corsair 3200XLWD Raptor 74GBSapphire Atlantis 9800Pro (Catalyst 5.4)DirectX 9.0c

Cheers for the replys.My existing system suffered a hard disk crash last week, which forced the issue of an upgrade. Having to fork-out for a new disk effectively rules out mass re-engineering to PCI this time around. So the bits i've gone for are:MSI K8N Neo2 PlatinumAMD Athlon 64 3200Corsair TWINX1024-3200XL XPERT TwinX (2x512) 1GB Dual Channel KitWestern Digital Raptor 10000RPM 74GB 8MB SATA(and slotting in my trusty Sapphire 9800Pro Atlantis).Ta,Chris.

Hi folks,This weekend I completed a 'mid-range' trip: Denver to Anchorage (2,000nm) which with approx. 70% load, required full fuel.The thing is, I notice Alaska operate Miami to Anchorage (3,500nm) and wondered whether this is possible with PMDG?Using the loadmaster tool I pulled the loads for the mixed class -700 down to 4/71, plus baggage, giving a payload of 24,000lbs.However, this was with no 'minimum landing fuel'.So is there a standard figure for 'minimum landing fuel'?And are trips of this length possible? I read a couple of threads from a year or two ago that made me wonder if not.Cheers,Chris.

Ok folks here's the deal.I'm planning on getting a new mobo/CPU and have been thinking of the MSI K8N Neo2 Platinum/AMD Athlon 64 3200. The thing is my current Graphics card is a Sapphire (Radeon) 9800Pro Atlantis (which I've had for about a year).But I'm wondering if spending 400 quid on pursuing the AGP route will be wasted, if Dual PCI is the way to go now, especially with WinXP 64 on the horizon?Any advice would be appreciated.Rgds,Chris.

So all this hyperbole about precision and accuracy counts for so much - call me a traditionalist but I fly from 'inside' the cockpit.Yet again the PIC mafiosi get shirty when anyone dares to resist total submission before the shrine.DShutt you were funny once, although I forget exactly when.

I'm afraid the decision to limit the scope to GE only means I'll be giving this product a miss.pity, but there ya go.

On my system Paro has been incorrectly sunk into a shoebox, probably due to inadeqate mesh data vs airfield elevation. As can be seen in the photos only MSFS has 500' sheer cliffs off one end of the airfield.The straight in chart is a non-precision approach. It gets you over the field and hopefully in sight of the runway. From there you'll be most likely doing teardrops onto the opposite end (or you would be if Microsoft hadn't messed up the surrounding terrain).

It's actually spelt 'Cheque Captain', because he's the one with the biggest pension.Chris J.

Don't say that, Surely It's more likely to be the F/O wrapping up the remains of the cheesetray and cramming as much as possible into his briefcase - while the skipper has his hands full.Chris.

Hi folks, just check I'm not going mad. Are the Pitch limit indicators on the PFD, only I saw a photo from Airliners.net, showing an Alsakan 700 series, with those little yellow eyebrow markers on the artificial horizon.I believe they are used on takeoff (appearring when flaps extended) to indicate max pitch.BTW I have the 737NG and 800/900 expansion pack.

Aha, this one caught me when I first took it for a quick circuit.Did you switch on the generators? I think that the A/T needs to feed off the (Engine or APU) generators. That's what worked for me.I guess the NG isn't a 'kick the tyres/light the fires' kinda plane.Cheers,Chris J.

I didn't realise the 'old-godgers' view (as shown below) was an optional extra on the real 737NG. I thought it was part of the standard fit (to help crews converting from classics).http://forums.avsim.net/user_files/86191.jpg

Southwest-style?Is that the old-fashion steam driven dial look?(As a brit 'Southwest-style' sounds like it has something to with Cornish Pasties or surfing in freezing cold water!)cheers for that guys.

Hi guys, One question that does seem to be clearly stated here, so perhaps someone could let me know?I have the base 600/700 package and would like to know, if I buy the 800/900 add-on are the 2d panel enhancements applied to the 600/700 types, as I'd hope to be able to get continuity with things like the new EADI/EHSI modes, etc across the range and not have two variants of the 2d panel depending on which model I was flying.Cheers,C.J.

>I think you are wrong. If I remember correctly, some time ago>there was a product released for FS2000 without any previews.>It was called '767 Pilot in Command'Erm, unfortunately you do not remember corrrectly my friend. '767 Pilot in Command' is/was the payware incarnation of a project led by Eric Ernst. The two preceeding versions (6.4 and 7.0) were HEAVILY previewed by Eric on his website, such was his style. The team working on the current development take a different approach.

Part of the problem a number of members here are having with the frequency of updates may be due to the approach taken by Eric Ernst with respect to earlier incarnations.Version 6.4 was previewed gauge by gauge as Eric/Wade designed and completed individual portions of the work. However, with PIC becoming more integrated, the work will be proportionately more back-office coding and less snazzy graphics than it used to be. Plus a strong element in Eric's personal approach was the posting of updates (almost as a form of marking project milestones).The team involved in this latest development take a different view, my personal judgement would favour little and often, even if it's simply a short paragraph. This gives the public a feeling of involvement and enables the team to manage expectations (A key feature in every software development project).

If you're using DXTBMP there is a menu item called 'Include MIPS' under 'Prefs', uncheck this and resave.All should be fine and dandy.CJ.

I know FS9 has been out for nearly a year now, but I can't help thinking there were a few loose-ends in FS2002 that could have been tidied-up and provided a few additional features:1. Intelligent pushbacksGiven that FS holds taxiway data (as we can see from AFCAD), and having been issued with a taxi clearance route to the active runway, it ought to be possible to enable a more intelligent pushback that reverses the plane from it's gate on to the taxiway and turns it towards the route just cleared (from a single shift-P click).2. Integration with AIGiven that for each aircraft, FS9 stores 'atc_airline', atc_type and atc_model, the program has all the data neccessary to enable the user to select an Aircraft, Airline and Departure point; and then offer the user a selection of AI flights that the user could fly personally (in his super-detailed Posky/Ifdg plane of choice) as a substitute for the AI equivalent, say departing within the next hour.This could then be further extended to permit turnrounds and multiple segments. Potentially with a performance evaluation on punctuality at the end (anyone remember Sublogic ATP?)The groundwork for both these things were in place in FS2002, so IMHO it's a shame not to have seen FS9 make the most of them.ta,CJ.