Captain2000

461 - 737NG508 - 747-400/400F134 - MD-111488 - Total in my Logbook (includes PMDG stuff above)When you look back on it like this, its quite a bit!

It does for me on ATI, although not all the time. I can see why HiFi is having such a hard time figuring this out as I have not been able to nail down the conditions at which it happens on my side. If I were to guess I would say it has something to do with the local suppression setting, but not entirely sure of that either!Hopefully they will get it sorted out. I agree with all that it is annoying and detracts from the experience, particularly on approach to have the condiitons suddenly shift. Drives me nuts when expecting low cloud cover and low vis only to get there and find it clear and then POP! it changes again...I have had some success with playing with the visibility smoothing in registered FSUIPC to at least make it not as severe by gaining control of visibility. Clouds still pop, but at least my runway doesn't appear and dissapear in a flash...Good luck in getting this sorted out! Many of us looking forward to the fix.

Priceless. :(

Here's a strange one that I have never seen before is FS9 and didn't find after a search...My ground textures have decided to stop loading. It's like they are frozen in place...the airplane continues but no additional textures are loaded. I fly from the usual detail, to less detail, to the base textures usually only seen at the horizon, and ultimately to no textures...just plain white. Clouds, sky and aircraft are normal...only ground textures have the problem.This has only happened twice, but that's two more times than I have seen in 5 years of FS9...Anyone else run into this before?Thank you!

That second shot is fantastic! Thanks for sharing.

Agreed on XP 64bit. Runs like a champ and OOM errors are a thing of the past.

Excellent suggestion. Thanks! :(

That's a winner! Thank you.

Greetings all!Know that this topic is a bit aged...but does anyone know where to get the patches to help with FlightZone Portland and Ultimate Terrain? The links referenced in their forum are not good anymore.Finally got on the UT-USA bandwagon and have run into a few CTD issues when flying into this airport and a few other 3rd party sceneries (including Imaginesim KATL).Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated!Thank you.

Hooray!! :(

Looks pretty good. See my specs in the sig...similar to what you are looking at. I have my E8500 running at 3.8GHz which is plenty fast for FS9. Quick and fluid in any condition with any add-ons so far. Agree with the post above that recommends a second drive. I have been running FS off a dedicated drive for a long time now. Helps greatly with performance and texture load times. Good luck!

Agreed with all above. It is better on resources than the 747. (And a lot of fun too...)

+15....Hope it helps!

Alex,Thanks for the further suggestions. The lack of a continuous horizon is one of the reasons that I have never quite gotten where I wanted to be. Seems we are up against some FS limitations on that one.On another note, your reorganization of cockpit panels and windows got me thinking on how to better take advantage of screen real estate. Made some changes to the PMDG 747 layout to my liking, but was disappointed to realize that even if you save the flight, any change in aircraft would revert it back. Since I didn't really want to have saved flights for each and every engine and paint variation, I was inspired to play with the panel.cfg to see if I could make those changes universal for that aircraft. After a few hours of trial and error (and some help from the MS Panels SDK), made changes using the "window_pos" and "window_size" parameters and now have a widescreen layout that loads everytime. Now I'm considering going back and working on the 737NG too! (PMDG MD-11 already has native support, and the good old LDS 767 has a mod already done.)Exciting to take advantage of the widescreen! Next steps are to follow your suggestions and start putting the multiple monitors to better use (rather than just keeping the FMC/MCDU...)Thanks again!

Alex,Thanks for the info. Just added a new widescreen to the mix and wanted to play a bit. Always had trouble with getting the forward left/right views to align to my satisfaction. Didn't think of the obvious solution to wrap the monitors around me... Time to try again!I appreciate your insight!

One more vote for O&O!Works like a champ and I have convinced myself I can see a positive difference in texture loading time (read: near instantaneous) when defragging my FS drive by name. :(

Agreed with the group. Built a new system recently and went with WinXP x64 and don't ever want to look back. Drivers are very much available for pretty much everything unless you have some really old hardware you want to continue using. FS loads fast and runs smooth. Buy a copy while it is still available!

Agreed! Would be nice to get another short haul option from them to complement the forthcoming all-new 737.

Cosmo,Just built a new machine similar to what you are looking at. Used the Asus P5Q3 with the E8500 chip and 4GB of DDR3. (Picked the 8500 over the 8600 because there is a big price gap.)Runs like a champ and eats up anything in FS9 that I can throw at it. Wondering now why I ever waited. The other change I made was to go to XP Pro x64 rather than staying with the standard.If it's in the budget, fire away. You will not be disappointed!

How about this one? Great info on NATS, connecting routes and weather.http://www.blackswan.ch/nat

Thanks for the feedback and observation on my FL300 goof. :( Flew some more and had similar results at FL370. Will try to get some shots together tomorrow. Until this gets figured out, I guess I can start carrying extra fuel to ensure that the tanks never get below a certain level. Thankfully we don't have to pay for it in MSFS!

Here are some screen shots for consideration...Please let me know if I am interpreting incorrectly.Image #1 - Crusing at FL310 with lots of fuel. Note where overspeed and protection is at. (Noted the first amber number, M0.861)Image #2 - Same spot with only 21K lbs. of fuel. I assume this is after the outboard to inboard transfer. Note overspeed and protection here. Much lower! It would not be possible to cruise at calculated M0.835 here!These tests wre conducted with no external weather. Please see the temps and wind on the MCDU.This shows me that the Mmo is dropping to well below M0.85. Whether this is the aircraft simulation, or the way that FS9 is calculating I do not know. But it is clearly happening.Open to all comments!EDIT: One more question while we're all chatting...what is the storage capacity of outboard and inboard sections of tanks 1&3?Thanks,

Well, still having this issue. Noticed something strage last time around. I was in another room when I heard the lady yelling "OVERSPEED!" at me so I ran in and hit pause so I could evaluate (and maybe take some screen shots). Missed the screen shots but was surprised to see that when pause was engaged, my IAS was lower than when the simulation was running. Same mach number, different IAS, lower by 6-8 knots. Now why in the world would that be?Certainly seems that calculation of IAS is strange. I don't want to point fingers at the MD-11, but never saw this problem on any other aircraft. Is this an FS9 bug or something in the MD? Sure would like to find out. I'd hate to be stuck at M0.82 in this bird for life...Thanks,