TorbenJA

Hello EdI'm only guessing it is a gdi+ issue, as the manual describes the not-loading of the gauge as a gdi+ issue. But if someone has a better explanation (and even better - a solution) I would like to know about it.yoursTorben

I've got a new computer running VISTA x64 and FS9. The great pushback gauge by Etienne Martin wont load. According to the manual the problem lies in the gdi+ modules. I've places the msVRC71.dll in the system32 folder of vista, but no luck. Any suggestions. (I like this gauge as I stear by my rudder pedals, so I do not have to guesstimate how far back I should push or for how many minutes. Also any angle applies - even a full circle if need be).Torben Andersen

I would really like PMDG to finish the projects they are doing so very well, for example add a weatherradar to the planes. Allthough RealityX makes a good radar, it would be great to see a radar integrated on the ND.As for a new plane - there are lot of interesting planes other than the B772:DASH 7, Il-96, An-124, C-17, BAe ATPTorben

heyI haven't relocated FS9, so it is a puzzle what has happend. However a reinstall did the trick. So now AS2004 works again.ThanksTorben Andersen

Check your ini file! Now I just wonder - how can I find an error in that one? Attached is my ini-file.And what does "Main Thread Process Error..." mean, I haven't got a clue. This happend AFTER updateting to FS9.1Any help appreciatedTorben AndersenSAS693, ESA156, UPS618Vatsim 861112

Sorry to hear that SBRelay and SB2 doesn't work on your computer - but this has nothing to do with the point here. Letting other people run software on your network is not a thing your do with your eyes closed - I take it you don't let anyone install programs, which you don't know anything about, on your personal computer? Well, this is just the same. So it is very approbiate for VATSIM/IVAO etc. to ask for the code (naturally in confidence). The Sunteam doesn't trust VATSIM to look at their code - why should Vatsim then trust the Sunteam? I would hate to have my online experience ruined by software, which might close down the VATSIM servers due to faults in the code. So I totally accept the Vatsim/IVAO and other organizations, which provide the network, must make sure the programs work correctly before allowing it to be run on their servers. Luckily you are not the one to give permission to run SquawkWin on the Vatsim servers, because I very strongly believe, that if anyone, who made a "nice" program to help doing your online fs experience a little better, got access to the servers, then you would in no time have no network. Not because the people making these program are "evil" guys, but simply because most programs contain errors (face it - when do you get an errorfree program from eg. Microsoft?) or small deviations from the way "your" networkprotcol are put together - this will sqrew thing up, maybe not now, but when user number 1204 logged on ...I hope Squawbox 3 will be released soon, but untill then - yoursTorben AndersenVatsim861112

Hello FrankDoesn't know if this helps you, but I have the same problem as many others have with engine failure at V1. I only reloaded the plane into FS9 and the second time I took off without prob. I have installed the new 800/900, but my enginefailure happend in the 600 for the first time just after installing the 800/900.Torben

Well - perhaps you have seen a problem like this:Working with AFCAD2 and FS9 open to see planeposition etc. I find that FS9 after a while (10-15-20 min) runs out of memory and closes down. I have 1GB ram so I am a bit surprised over this. Any ideas?Torben AndersenDenmark

Now the B1900D is released, I try once again:Does anyone had any experience when the B1900D and Goflights MCP module?Torben

Have anyone had any experience with the B1990 and Goflight MCP module?Torben Andersen

Could help if the Goflight MCP module had keymapping routines like the other GF modules, but right now it has not. Maybe when GF updates their driver we will have. Cross my fingers.Torben Andersen

Could not have putted it better my self - thank you.Torben Andersen

Hello mr. KalamarasThank you for your response - thou I don't think it will do much good. You are not adressing my point, which is, that no software- and hardwaredeveloper is able to ensure that their product can work together with other addons unless you stick to the "normal" way to use and make inputs to FS.I have tested GF-MCP with other 3rd party panels and only found problems with yours, PSS B747, Olegs DHC8 and to a minor extend Dreamfleets B737, PSS DHC8 and Bill Grabowskys ERJ-145. Seems to me we have problems whenever we want a bit more than the default panels can provide (espescially in regard to the ALT setting).To have Goflight make special drivers for these products or have you to make "drivers" to all kinds of inputdevices is in my mind the wrong attitude - this MUST go wrong - naturally you can't (and Goflight can't).So this is why I ask you to "go back to basics" to ensure compability with the rest of the industry. If this is not an option then we have problems. You have given a very small hope to us, telling about your SDK and naturally I hope GF will buy it - on the other hand - GF has given a SDK about their product for free(!). I don't know wether or not it includes the new GF-MCP, but at least it's free.This said - thou I still hope for a solution - I think it is too late regarding the B737TNG. You have (more or less) finished the development and are concentrating on new products (like the B1900). I don't know if the B1900 works with the GF-MCP, as the autopilot on this kind of aircraft normally isn't as elaborate as on the FMC equipped B737, but if you don't consider the ways you implement your panels in FS, I think this is not the last time, we, the consumers and your costumers(!), will have invested in products, which do not "talk" to each other. And this tends to lead to unhappy costumers, which noone can live with in the long term.And selling a SDK to hardwarecompanies is not the "road to happiness" - I don't think many will buy it and then we're back at square one. Torben

Well - it doesn't as if PMDG is eager to adress this issue. PMDG has given some reply here and there, but they tend to blame Goflight for the incompability. This is a little disturbing as Goflight modules seems to work with most panels, not only the default ones - and where they do not, it's ussually (to my experience) minor thing as autobrake and decision height, which cannot be set by the RP48.I'am wondering, if PMDG in their persue of the finest panel with maximum "as real as it gets" are doing some tricks that essentially is "not MSFS compatible" thus straying away from the FS SDK - I could be afraid that this may lead to even more incompabilities in the future. In posts regarding this issue, PMDG states that Goflight hasn't contacted PMDG so they could find a solution to the problems - this (in my mind) is the wrong approach. Obliously it seems unlikely, that Goflight should be compatible with 3rd party products - they should be compatible with FS (and so should PMDG). And its up to the 3rd party producers to make sure, that their product are compliant with FS. If they all are, then the products should work together.Now as I see it, the producer, who is "most" uncompatible in this case is PMDG, as GF modules seems to work with FS, so I urge PMDG to try and find a solution to this matter.If a solution cannot be found, I regrettably most decline in buying more PMDG products, as they are not compatible with FS. If you only use a mouse, keyboard (and perhaps yoke/joystick) then I trust you can use PMDG products without noticing any problems, but more and more people are using different hardware - and these people will have problems.Please PMDG please find a solution!!!!!Torben AndersenDenmark