pipper

Thanks Jim for the usual FAST reply (this is why I will forever buy AS applications)I guess what I am not understanding is the need for multiple snapshots. If I understand you correctly, I load up FE, and submit my usual textures. I tend to use one or two sets as I really enjoy these particular ones. Assuming I use set A, I then submit the 8 textures to FS. Then, I take a snapshot of them in ASA. So far so good. But you said take multiple snapshots. If I only use set A, then why the need for multiple snappers? Must I load set A snapshot every time I want to use ASA? It sounds like you said I didn't need to but I want to get this right. Kind thanks again.......Jswier

Hi Jim and the Hi Fi Team:I have owned every version of active sky, even the free one years back and have recently purchased the ASA for FS9 version. I only use FS9. I am completely bewildered by the ASA setup as regards use of add on scenery enhancing products. I am seeking blow by blow instructions on exactly HOW to add the following-1. GE Pro2. FE From the instructions I have read so far, it seems this is done via snapshots. Is this correct? Does ASA keep the settings for every flight we do as in AS6.5? Why do we need multiple snapshots at all if it does keep the settings? I look forward to using ASA and I know it will only improve as time goes on. I just want to get started!Kind thanks.......Jswier

OK guys,once again THANKS for all the help! I ran through most of the suggestions and still had the same issue. I think I found the problem and it seemed to test OK on two brief flights. I still need to check it on a long flight just to be sure. In an effort to be very thorough, I thought to re check the SOUND settings within FS9. Specifically, I looked at the Environment tab which was pre set to 34. This was exactly the same as on my previous PC and I guess it was the default. (not sure exactly but I think so)On a hunch, I turned it down to 21 and sure enough, the distorting was basically gone. For whatever reason, on my PC this simple setting was messing things up. Reducing the wind noise apparently reduced the problem. I have no idea why my PC distored the sound, but when I thought about how the distortion never occured on the ground or during takeoff, the solution made sense. I may still have to tweak it a bit, but I do think that was the prob. It's simply amazing to me what can go wrong with this sim. At any rate, I think the case is closed and I hope the "solution" helps somebody some day. Kind thanks to one and all-this is a GREAT COMMUNITY!Cheers and here's to all that helped!Pipper

Well, I checked the driver mfg in Device mgr for the audigy card, and Creative was the source. I have to try now the ASIO option and hope for the best. I flew again last night and it seemed that the busier the ground scenery, the worse the fluttering. It also fluttered when the 2D cockpit view was changed. I even switched to the new ATI 8.9 driver with no change, so this is gonna be a tough fix. Pipper

Thanks guys for the input-Originally I had onboard sound as I don't do much with the PC except FS9 and I thought who cares about super high fidelity jet noise! But when the PC was first built up and I installed FS9, I immediately noticed the fluttering sound-you can't miss it. I thought the on board sound must be the culprit and I uninstalled it in the BIOS and installed the Audigy. Unfortunately,the on board audio was not the issue and I did mess around with reducing the audio acceleration with the same negative result. Same with sound quality within FS9. I will take your suggestions about checking the sound card drivers and just update them.Thats a great suggestion and I will try it!Kind thanks again to all....Pipper

Thanks Hugo, I will go fetch it and give it a go. The problem really is a strange one. I noticed tonight that if I moved the PMDG 737 FMC around the cockpit via drop and drag, it also made that stuttering noise. I can't help thinking it may be a video issue-I am simply not sure what it could be. I downloaded the latest ATI 8.9 drivers, so with your suggestion I hope to be on the right road. Thanks and Cheers mate....Pipper

G'day guys:I have recently encountered a very strange problem with FS9 following build up of a new PC. The problem is that the engine noise of the PMDG 737 starts to flutter and become distorted. This occurs primarily during climb to cruise, never on takeoff. I used the stock 737-400 as a lab constant, and the fluttering noises are still present but much less noticeable. The fluttering seems periodic even when FS9 is the only main program running.( no active sky, VATSIM, etc) The engine noises sound OK for awhile but then every 90 seconds or so start to flutter and distort. Even when I change views the sound is somewhat distorted. I never had this problem in the 3 years previous with use of a different PC. My system specs are: Asus P5q deluxe, 4 GIGS Corsair dominator 8500, Intel E8500, HIS ATI 4870 w 8.8 drivers, Creative Audigy sound card. Win XP with SP3. I first noticed the fluttering following the build up of the new PC with the onboard sound I was using. I figured this was the prob and swapped it out for the Audigy card following shutting down on board sound in the BIOS. No luck. I then re installed the PMDG 737 with the same negative result. I then tried to use DXDIAG to reduce the direct X sound acceleration, and even turned down the problem persisted, as it did when I turned down sound quality in FS9. No joy again. The problem is not apparent with any other flight sim such as LOMAC or with an audio CD or movie-it appears FS9 specific. I am stumped and I hope somebody can help as it took me a week to rebuild FS9 and I don't want to have to do that unless necessary. Any ideas?Thanks....Pipper

Thanks ThrottleUP for your kind assistance. I followed the link but it didn't help as the problems I have are with the stock FS9 scenery and not add ons. I did further research based on your post and I found that the autogen only places incorrect objects with airports in the New York area. I tried KEWR,KISP,KLGA,KFOK,KJFK,and KPVD and for all these airports the trees and buildings appeared out of place. However, I tried KDCA, KBOS, KCLE, and the scenery was perfect. To further rule out my theory, I tried KSAN, KLAX, KSFO, KDTW, and KMDW and there were NO problems with the autogen. So it seems the problem is somewhere in the NY scenery. Now I just have to figure out where to go from here. Thanks for the help, it is greatly appreciated!Cheers......Pipper

Regards to the flight sim community.....I have just installed FS9 with a clean installation following a WinXP reformat. Upon landing at KLGA the other night, I was stunned to see that some of the taxiways and aprons were covered with trees and buildings that should not have been there. No runways were affected though. I checked other airports, and sure enough, the autogen has seen fit to place odd buildings and trees on taxiways and aprons. I have tried these fixes:new FS9 cfg, turned off autogen xml via retitling, uninstalling any texture mods I made since install. All were no joy. I am running GE Pro, AS, and FE. I can't pin point any program I installed that may have caused the problem.The only thing I do know is that if I turn OFF autogen in FS9 that the problem ceases. Anybody have any ideas so I don't have to re install? (please, not that!!!)System specs:WinXP, AMD64 3200, ATI9800 pro 128mb, 1.5 gig RAM, Gigabyte GA9n pro Mobo, CH USB fighterstick and throttle. Kind thanks in advance.......Pipper

Thanks Dave.......I am totally familiar with the angles needed to intercept the loc, so I was careful to set up my original flight on about a 40 degree intercept. Following your post, I tried once again to intercept the 31R loc, but although the loc illuminated on the HSI, I flew right through it again despite having activated the LOC selector on the panel. Strange thing was the LOC for 31L worked just fine following my switching frequencies and course selector. The AP easily picked up, intercepted, and followed the localizer. I guess whatever the issue is is related to runway 31R. I would appreciate it if you could let me know how your test flight goes. I am curious if this is maybe an FS9 glitch and not a navdata issue. Cheeers and thanks again.......Joe Swier

Hi guys.......The other night I was practicing a low viz approach into the KJFK ILS31R, and to my astonishment I flew right through the localizer in my PMDG 737-700. I made sure I set 111.5 and 314 degrees, flew about a 45 degree angle intercept, and had LOC set in the panel. Yet the airplane did NOT intercept the loc at all. I re flew the intercept twice more and still no intercept. Even on APP, I flew right through. I ensured that the FMC had the correct approach set too, although it was not done via LNAV. A few weeks ago I updated the PMDG procedures to the 0603 currency. I have to assume there is a nav data glitch somewhere. I keep getting confused as to the right sequence to update my nav data folder and I was hoping some kind soul out there could tell me sequentially how to update the nav data. I get confused between AIRACS, PMDG SIDSTARS MOST CURRENT, AIOs, and PMDG procedure files. UGH! I have noticed there are no nav files on the PMDG site lately too. Very confusing!Any help would be appreciated! Thanks in advance.......Joe Swier

Damian.......I tried the 1024X768 and I was able to access the save tab. Not sure why when I tried 1600X1200 it didn't work but who cares at this point! Although I run an 800X600 desktop, its no big deal to set a 1024X768 when I need to for Active Sky. At least I know how to fix it!Problem is solved!Thanks again for help.........Pipper

Thank you Hans, HTH, and Jim:Unfortunately, none of the fixes worked. I had already tried to stretch the window without success. The font size did not fix the problem either. Jim, I am running 800X600 as my usual desktop. Even with the toolbar dragged DOWN and out of sight, the SAVE tab is cut off. I have tried raising the screen rez too without success. The screen is cut off at about the level of the "Autoset FS time on archive DL" I have also not changed my vid drivers in the past three months. All was well prior to this new build. Thanks for the help and I welcome further suggestions!Cheers.....Pipper

Hi Damian and Jim.....This may seem like a very silly question, but I seem to have a problem with the new build. The problem is that the options page is cut off on the bottom of the screen so that the SAVE option is unavailable. I have tried varying the screen res but to no avail. The lower part of the options page is simply cut off. I really am stumped......how can I get back the SAVE tab?Thanks in advance......Pipper

Thanks Chris for your feedback-Since you are the "Cloud Master", I can only hope that some day you will design up some really good dark Cumumlonimbus clouds and nimbus clouds. That would really elevate Active Sky!I shall try your "polluted sky" technique in the mean time and once again, thank you for your help!Cheers......Pipper

Thanks Jim......I realize that some clouds like cumulonimbus type may appear to be bright white from a distance, when you fly through them or even near them they are very dark on the inside. (Yes I know you shouldn't fly through them but sometimes you fly through developing cells). My main point was that flying through rain heavy clouds in real life results in very diminished light, hence they are a dark grey. The AS clouds would really be improved if they were appropriately darker. Thanks again .........Pipper

Hello to Damian, Chris and Jim:Having happily used the Active Sky product for years now, I was flying into KPHX last night into some rather nasty weather. There were Thunderstorms all throughout the Phoenix approach with heavy rain. I was flying during the afternoon when these storms were occuring, and it made me think there was "something wrong with this picture". I am running the Active Sky cloud series, and what I perceived as wrong was that the "bad weather" clouds are always so white! When bad weather such as T storms approaches where I live, the horizon becomes dark. Last summer I flew on a commercial A320 into the KJFK area when a line of T storms was coming into the area. Believe me, the clouds we flew through were very dark, unlike the Active Sky clouds. Even heavy rain storms are bright and cheerful with the Active Sky and Fs9 stock clouds. It doesn't matter if I run wx influenced or a specific set. Always too bright!I remember a sim called EF2000 around 8 years ago and one of the best things was the rain scenes-it really looked dreary but very realistic. Can anything be done to make the bad weather clouds darker?Thanks in advance.......Pipper

Thanks Damian......I thought I was pretty up on my meteorology, but I guess you learn something every day! I have made the changes Jim suggested and am going to watch for how they all play out. I will also choose the "force cumulus over stratus" option as you suggested. I had this checked due to some forum feedback about selecting stratus over cumulus for increased fog effects, so I will also be checking that effect out too. Thanks again for the great support!Cheers....Jswier

OK Jim, I will make that modification in FSUIPC. Regarding the update level of 20000 ft, I usually fly a PMDG 737 on 500+ mile legs. What alt would you recommend instead? Thanks again!Jswier

Hi Jim and thanks for the response. Yes, I do have add light cirrus layer checked ON in FSUIPC. I neglected to mention that I always run VATSIM wx if that makes a difference. Here is the INI file: //ASv6 configuration file Build 470[General]WindowPosX = 495WindowPosY = 495DefaultWeatherFolder = C:Program FilesMicrosoft GamesFlight Simulator 9ModulesASv6SuppressionCeiling = 20000SurfaceWindLimit = 10FS9Path = C:Program FilesMicrosoft GamesFlight Simulator 9PersonalAppDataFolder = C:Documents and SettingsJoeApplication DataCloudLayerLimit = 4LocalSuppressionRange = 100MinimumVisibility = 0MaximumVisibility = 60AutoVasFrequency = 50AutoVasStrength = 30TurbulenceFrequency = DefaultStartupLocation = KISPDefaultGraphicsFullTheme = Evolution Puffy 1DefaultGraphicsCirrusTheme = CirriusAutoSubmitGraphicsTheme = TrueIncreasedWake = TrueDisableWindsAloft = FalseForcePrimaryServer = FalseForceSecondaryServer = FalseFavorCumulus = FalseForceRoutePressure = FalseForceLowestCeiling = FalseUnpauseOnReadyStatus = TrueForceTstormsWithCB = TrueAutoSetFSTime = TrueIgnoreFSLocationUntilReady = TrueAutoConvertPlanFiles = TrueAutoRefreshAI = TrueDisableVisGraduation = FalseForceRouteAloftTemp = FalseOfflinePlayback = FalseEnableVAS = TrueAutoGenVAS = FalseForceDestinationWeatherZone = FalsePreventIcing = FalseOnlineUpdates = TrueExtendedDestinationWindsForce = FalseDisableAllGroundUpdates = TrueGlobalWrites = FalseDepictFS9HazeLayer = FalseExtendTstormLayers = TrueDisableDirectWindControl = FalseVoicePlayback = TrueLocalSuppression = TrueStartupSound = FalseDisableGroundUpdates = FalseUseProxyServer = FalseFogLayerGeneration = TrueUpdateSuppression = TrueOvercastEnhancement = TrueIgnoreFSReadyStatus = TrueFSUIPCWindSmoothing = TrueLimitSurfaceWinds = FalseLimitCloudLayers = TrueAutoGlobalWriteToggle = TrueRainWithTS = TrueDisableUpperLayerGeneration = FalseVisibilitySmoothing = TrueDisableMessages = TrueAutoTimeZoneDetection = TrueUpdateInterval = 15VATSIMData = TrueZuluConversion = -5AloftPredictability = 100WindDriftRate = 0MaxCloudThickness = 10000MinStratusSeparation = 7000TAFProcessing = FalseEnforceVisibilityLimits = TrueWakeTurb = TrueStartPaused = TrueUseSystemTime = TrueDisableCAVOKClouds = FalseProxyAddress = NONELastPlanFolder = C:Documents and SettingsJoeMy DocumentsFlight Simulator FilesI also thought that maybe the setting "favor cirrus over cumulus" is a factor-I have that option selected too.Cheers and thanks........Jswier

Hello to the Active Sky Crew.....For the past few weeks I have been noticing a strange tendency for AS6 to place cirrus layers UNDER mid level Cumulus clouds. In real life I don't believe this occurs, and this seems very unrealistic to me. To be honest, I don't know when this started because I haven't changed anything with AS since build 470. I am running Build 470 with an Athlon 3200/1.5 gig RAM/ATI 9800 pro dual Seagate Barracuda HDs in RAID 0 config.Anybody else seeing this and can this be fixed?Thanks........J Swier

Thanks Chris for your response.......I guess we can make things overly complicated indeed. Apparently sometimes common sense is all it takes! I just wanted to make sure I was more or less doing things the way the real boys do. The forum really helps you do that and for that I am very grateful!Cheers again.......Joe

Thanks to Nick and Tim....apologies for not responding as fast as you did to me because my cable modem died! Ugh!Anyways, I do have a copy of the Geezer guide which I agree is a very good read. But it didn't answer in a more specific way the reasoning for using 30 flaps V 40 flaps. I saw the procedure where two weights were subtracted on the progress page and then further subtracted from the GW on the INIT REF page, but the reason WHY a specific flap setting was chosen was not mentioned at all. I do most of my landings at flaps 30 unless I am landing at a very short runway like KSNA which I think is under 6000 feet and in that case I fly flaps 40. I guess the pros have company manuals which specify how to do this. Cheers and again my thanks for your time!Joe Swier

Hello to the community......I am having difficulty finding out how Vrefs and flap settings are chosen for my 737-700. I know how to select them in the FMC but I do not understand how one is chosen over another. For instance, when do I choose landing at 40 flaps vs. 30 flaps vs. 25 flaps?Where does gross weight fit into the picture? Obviously a flaps 40 landing and Vref is slower than a flaps 25 but I am unclear as to when I should choose a flaps 25, etc. I can guess that shorter runways would dictate a slower approach so that a shorter landing roll would occur, but I am not sure about other factors. Are there any guidelines for visual type approaches where alot of maneuvering is involved ie- the KJFK VOR 13R/L? Many kind thanks in advance, Joe Swier

This is an easy one!The most challenging I have flown are: 1. The Expressway Visual rwy 31 at KLGA-simply the hardest approach I have tried in the US. You have to turn right 085 at 2500 feet at the outer marker, then descend to 1000 feet passing Shea Stadium then turn left to final heading 310 degrees while descending the whole time! Wow Wow Wow-its hard to do but satisfying when you get it down. 2. The VOR 13L OR 13R at KJFK. Although FS9 lacks the real world two sets of lead in lights along the belt parkway, descending past ASALT at 3000 then descending to 1500 feet crossing the CRI VOR, then turning 041 outbound over CRI, then a descending right hand turn to the 13L or 13R will challenge you. Great fun and difficult to get right. 3. Next comes the River visual rwy 13 at KLGA. You fly near or over the Verrazano bridge, overfly the statue of liberty at 4000 feet and fly up the hudson river. You descend to 3000 feet prior to a 90 degree right turn to final for rwy 13. Manhattan at night is awesome and hand flying past the bridge makes this great fun. 4. The aforementioned Rwy 19 river visual or LDA 19 at KDCA is one of the most challenging to fly, period. You intercept the rwy 19 localizer and fly the 147 inbound to 4 DME, then turn left while descending and fly a snaky route along the Potomac river, while turning a hard right turn at 300 feet to final. AT least the patched FS9 has all the bridges. Very tough! 5. Any of the non precision approaches to KRNO. These still are very hard for me to try because the mountains are so close and so high! Throw in a back course DME approach at night and it gets very hard to do. What I am amazed at is that so few pilots on VATSIM will try any of these approaches. If given the opportunity, they will, 99% of the time request an ILS for the same runway if they offer one. I don't think I have ever heard another guy on VATSIM try the expressway visual 31 at KLGA. These things are really challenging and you really feel GREAT when you get them down. I just wish more guys would give em a go!Cheers...........Joe Swier