Jump to content

Gnominator

Members
  • Content Count

    83
  • Donations

    $0.00 
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Gnominator

  1. Project update:Due to an unexpected availability of reference material for a Grumman GA7 or a Piper Warrior II (depending on the availability of the aircraft). I will change my plans to model a Learjet 35.Therefore the following project details change:- The given eMail address and website link will be modified to fit the new projects needs.- I do not look for beta testers with Learjet 35 piloting experience anymore (beta testers for the GA7/PWII are still welcome, of course)Thank you for your attention,Robert Lechner
  2. Official Announcement:Starting from today I will work on a Learjet 35 model including a panel.The recent planning process for version 1 resulted in the following to be created:- accurate exterior model (Gmax)- accurate flight dynamics- base/blank texture set- photorealistic panelIt is part of my universities final year project and therefore (funny enough) I already know a quite precise release date for version 1: January 25th 2004 (+ one or two weeks)I am still seeking the following reference materials:- detailed photos of the aircraft's exterior, interior, panel, undercarriage, blueprints, etc.- performance specifications- technical specifications (dimensions, weights, etc.)I know that I can find a lot of this information on the web, but if anyone of you has access to reference material like operation handbooks from the original aircraft or any information that might be relevent for the creation of the aircraft I would be thankful if you could contact me. You'll find the contact details at the bottom of this post.Furthermore I am looking for beta testers willing to test the model and flight dynamics. Piloting experience in a real Learjet 35 would be appreciated very much.You will be able to monitor the project's progress on http://learjet35.websurfers.de in a few weeks time (when it is fully set up).Thanks a lot for your attention and feedback!Robert LechnerContact details:Robert Lechneremail: mail@learjet35.websurfers.deweb: http://learjet35.websurfers.de
  3. I found out that the problem originated from the VIA AGP Drivers. Replacing them with the "Standard PCI-to-PCI bridge" drivers solved the problem for me.
  4. hi,i've got the same problem with my radeon mobility 9700 in my laptop. seems to have appeared after some time of heavy load on the graphics card. might have been gotten to warm.please tell me about a solution, if you found one.robert
  5. I observed a similar increase in framerate on my laptop (ACER 1356LCi with Radeon Mobility 9700) after increasing the quality settings to maximum values in the ATI Controlpanel.I run the simulator with most of the sliders at medium, but before that I could not reach more than 20 fps and this was never a stable value.Now I get 25 fps locked with full 3d clouds at a 60 miles cloud drwaing range, full traffic (by Project AI), which is quite a lot for my system configuration.Robert
  6. >Windows XP was built off the foundation of Windows 2000. Its>basically the same but more user friendly.*LOL*
  7. you can select the panel layout through PMDG's style menu. There is a dropdown list from which you can choose your airline's configuration. A lot of Operators are included (not all, though - but Southwest is there, i believe)
  8. i saw some screenshots today at virtual.planepictures.net that were obviously taken while replaying the movie (the authors of the pictures gave that information in the description of their pictures).here is a link: http://virtual.planepictures.net/show.cgi?26573now my problem is, i did not see the usual red "replay" message in the bottom left corner of those pictures.ok, one might say "the picture has been cropped", but i know the pmdg and this picture does not look cropped.is there a way to disable that (rather annoying) "replay" message. there is a way to remove the "brake" message i know of, so if i have to manipulate the fs9.cfg, what entry do i have to change?
  9. I agree upon creating a turboprop that has not been done as payware by someone else.On the one hand Fokker F27 or F50 would be nice, I have seen KLM's Cityhopper at EDDK several times and I would like to have a proper rendition of those turboprops - maybe even as part of the EXPRESS line (although the I like to have all the complex systems modelled)On the other hand Fokker 70/100 would be nice also. There exists a freeware version, of course, but we might wait for an update for a long time. This one would not fit into the EXPRESS line, of course.Let's wait for the 747 first; I guess PMDG has got enough to do with that beast...
  10. you can uncheck the option to hear the ambient sounds and callouts from any other view than 2d panel in the pmdg-styles menu in the sound subcategory.btw - it's all written in the manual ;)
  11. according to moore's law computing power doubles each 18 months. that means, we should see computers able to add so much more realism to our hobby in about 8 years (speed would then be comparable to a 28 Ghz cpu, of course development could use other means to reach a similar amount of power (i.e. multiple pipelines in the cpu, like apple does today already, etc.)
  12. same with me, but not all aircraft, only boeing 737s
  13. >Question is, is FFG still alive?>>Billyes, they are.in their discussion board on fsnordic.net they announced the saab340.after the loss of a hard disk all the files seemed to be destroyed, but fortunately they were able to reconstruct some and will publish the saab 340 as freeware sometime in the future (if i understood them correctly)
  14. they are still alive!!!found their answer in the abyss of my email-account's junk folder.obviously it was a bit to agressive :)thank you project fokker!
  15. Hi,i tried to contact Project Fokker via their contact form on their homepage.I did not receive any answer (maybe my spam-filters are to aggressive and deleted it before i had a chance to find and read it).I just wanted to know whether the group still exists and whether I can expect an answer eventually.Robert Lechner
  16. it does work with windows 2000 pro, definetly !!!!i am running win2000 pro with SP4 and i did not observe any flaws yet, even the 600/700 seem to work more smoothly now (even though the models haven't been updated yet).must be a side effect of the new panel that seems to use less memory.
  17. hi,while trying to merge the kittyhawk 737-700 model with pmdg's panel i observed something strange:the flap movement of the kittyhawk model with the default 737-400 panel is absolutely smooth.as soon as i change the panel to pmdg the flap movement is not smooth anymore.obviously the panel.cfg or the gauges influence the smoothness of flap movement.will there be any change to this with the new panel?regards,robert lechner
  18. the fascinating thing about this is, that the kittyhawk model does not move the flaps stepwise if used with any other panel, only the pmdg panel creates the step effect.that made me think the panel.cfg could be the culprit.
  19. maybe i should ask kin a different way?if the panel is obviously causing the flap movement not to be smooth on the kittyhawk model, maybe it does so with the pmdg model, too.because the flap movement is the only thing i have to complain about concerning the otherwise excellent pmdg model.(although this is not an "emergency" matter for me ;) )i could guess that the flap movement of the pmdg model is meant to be smooth to, but i observe that it moves in small steps.one could say this is not a question concerning the modification to make it fit to the kittyhawk model but a question regarding the original product.secondly: i don't want pmdg to modify any part of their panel to make it work with a different model.but maybe one of the customers tried something like this before and could help me.the question was not necessarily addressed to pmdg only but to everyone visiting this forum,
  20. hi,has anyone tried to merge the kittyhawk 737-700 model with pmdg's panel?i tried to, but i had only little success with it yet.the plane does not sit on the ground properly anymore, i might have to adjust the contact points to fit with the kittyhawk model, but i do not know yet how to do this.changing the model definetely led to an increased framerate (at least 6 fps on my system)i don't know whether this contradicts the EULA of PMDG, if it does not i'd like to publish the changes i made to the aircraft.cfg / panel.cfg as soon as i have a nice result.robert lechner- - - - - - - - - - - - -my system:AMD Athlon XP 2100+512 MB RAMSapphire Radeon 9600XT 256 MBWindows 2000 Pro
  21. I observed a similar problem and realized that my FS9 does definetely corrupt the fs9.cfg.Sometimes while shutting down the simulator Windows does regard the FS9 session as a "non-responding" process, automatically initializing the automatic "kill" procedures of Windows2000/XP leading to an immediate shutdown of the process without further notice (there might be a log-file somewhere, but I switched off the error-logging for performance reasons).It seems to depend on the time the simulator needs to shut down completely, unload all the loaded files from memory and write any changes of the *.cfg files down on the harddisk.If it takes to much time to shutdown the simulator the process might be killed an the fs9.cfg is incomplete (I looked at it, there are complete sections missing or it is correct up to a certain part an from there on I could only find corrupted characters (for example small rectangles, etc.)).The incomplete fs9.cfg causes the FS9 to stop the loading process.In Windows' taskmanager I could obeserve that - depending on how much of the fs9.cfg was corrupted beforehand - only 15 - 35 megabytes were loaded into memory.I guess the easiest solution is to keep a copy of your fs9.cfg, as Ed already stated.
  22. I have asked this question before, too (link: http://forums.avsim.net/dcboard.php?az=sho...d=44530&page=3), but as far as I can think the 800/900 should run well with Windows2000 Pro.They write the same WinXP info below the base product (600/700) (why on earth am I calling it "base product" already??? ;) )I don't see any reason why it should not work, as the 600/700 does work with my system (also Win2000 Pro)
  23. Hi,On the product preview page you tell us, that the 738/9 will be available only for FS2004 (I can understand that) and Windows XP (that's what I cannot understand).Why should the use of the 738/9 be limited to Windows XP users? Is there some need for special technology (other than gdi-plus) that can be provided by WinXP only?Thanks for a quick answer,Robert Lechneredit:By the way: I just saw, that you mention the 737 NG base product would also be limited to Windows XP. I am using it with Windows 2000 without any problems. Maybe the information given on your product page is a bit misleading.
  24. Hi,can you tell me where to find a proper approach chart for SPZO. FS2004 vectored me to the airport but did clear me to descend to FL180 only. This made me arrive at the airport 7000ft to high.
  25. Hi,I saw some screenies of aircraft touching down, and their tire smoke effect was definetly smaller than the one I can observe on my aircraft.I thought there must be a new effects file that decreases the size of this effect, as my aircraft produce an amount of smoke on touchdown that I would regard as explosion ratger than a bit of burned rubber.If someone knows about a new effect file, please tell me. Thanks.Robert
×
×
  • Create New...