PropPro

Update- I ran into a topic in the FS2004 forum which explained my issue. Apparently its a driver issue that many are having with Nvidia drivers 320.18 and up. I installed version 314.22 and all is well again. Im just going to have to figure out which settings to use in the Nvidia control panel as I have no idea what they were previously. Anyone have any suggestions based on the profile I listed in the first post?

Im having this same issue. Searched high and low about this and could find nothing on it, even posted a topic in the video card section as it was after a video card replacement that this happened. For me, its happening with the 335.28 drivers (latest from nvidia). I'll have to search for older drivers and see what works and what doesnt.

Hello all, I have an older system. I put it together in 2008 to run FS9 "good" on a scale of "poor" to "great". I really havent done much to it since then. I was always using hand me down CRT monitors until I got a tiny Dell LCD that someone was throwing out. Then I came across a really nice Samsung SyncMaster LED monitor, got rid of the VGA cable, plugged in the DVI cable and life was good for a few weeks. Then the video card blew, too old and used too much for such a strain I suppose. It was an EVGA 8400GS 512mb card. I replaced it with a brand new EVGA 8400GS card only this one has a gig of memory. $32 for this new card versus the almost $200 I paid for the old one at the time, great deal. Everything works fine, but I am having some odd displays of airplane textures in FS9. I looked in the Nvidia control panel and during the installation of the new card and drivers (version 335.28) all my previous settings were back to default, apparently. I would imagine my issues lie somewhere in there. My current values are as follows- Anistropic filtering - Application controlled Antialiasing/FXAA - Off Antialiasing/Gamma correction - On Antialiasing/mode - Application controlled Antialiasing/setting - Application controlled Antialiasing/transparency - Off CUDA/GPUs - All Extension limit - Off Maximum pre rendered frames - Use the 3D application setting Multi display/mixed GPU acceleration - Multiple display performance mode Texture filtering/anistropic sample optimization - Off Texture filtering/Negative LOD bias - Allow Texture filtering/Quality - Quality Texture filtering/Trilinear optimization - On Threaded optimization - Auto Triple buffering - Off Vertical sync - Use the 3D application setting As you can see in this screenshot, the default Cessna is dark and the door is oddly illuminated. And in this one from the default PMDG MD-11F FedEx livery, the main cargo door and "something in the back" is displaying weird, including the engine cowling textures. All my in-sim display settings are the same since before I changed the card. I havent noticed any scenery textures displaying oddly, but I havent spent a whole lot of time looking. I am kind of stuck with the system I have at the moment indefinitely, and I really would like to have FS9 run at least as good as it did before I had to make the switch. Any help would be much appreciated. Thanks!

It's been a few years since my last FS9 reinstall, but I recall at some point somewhere in the internets finding modified "ground contact points" that allowed all aircraft to have a more realistic relationship with the ground. This was not an individual contact point fix for any specific aircraft, if I recall correctly it was more related to weight and friction. I rememember something in the description saying that the "fix" changed the way FS handled aircraft handling on the ground. I do remember that after installing the fix, I had better ground handling, braking action and idle thrust seemed to be where it should be when before it wasnt really there at all. I recall that supposedly on the ground, FS treats aircraft as though they were much heavier than they actually are and this fix made the ground relationship more realistic, which it definitely did seem to do. All I can find when I try to search for this are things relating to aircraft specific contact points which this thing I am referring to definitely was not. Does this sound remotely familiar to anyone?

I'm having a similar issue as well. I have purchased several products at simmarket, always very happy and never had an issue with my email address until now. I have been trying for 2 weeks to reset my password, I get a page that tells me a new one is being sent to my email address and I never recieve anything. My ISP is Optimum Online and it's not going in the spam folder, I have no spam filters enabled. Without my correct email and password it seems impossible to contact them any other way as they wont accept emails, only support tickets (which requires email and password) so back into the endless loop I go. I am trying to make some purchases which I could make elsewhere, but I want to do it thru simmarket and dont want to change my email address as I have previously purchased products attatched to that address and really dont need to juggle yet another email address. Any suggestions?

This looks fantastic! Right up my alley too. When I'm not flying PMDG heavies, I regularly fly old, rattling props. These classics give you a whole different side to the sim that even the greatest PMDG heavy really cant, and I think if some of you "not my cup of tea"ers really give it a good shot, you too will bounce back and forth as I do. For as many hours I spend in the MD-11, I start to crave exactly this type of flying. Last bout took me on a several week cross country tour on a Lockheed Constellation, and when I finally landed in Long Beach, back to JFK on the MD-11. It's like the perfect bite of the greatest meal! As far as I'm concerned PMDG can throw in as many rotary piston AVGAS suckers as they like. Hopefully a tail dragger or two are coming down the road. Keep it up and keep it diverse, doing just fine the way you are. And as always, THANKS!

I dont know if it applies to FSX, but with FS9 I just open up imagetool and remove the mip maps on any blurry textures I find. Some have them, some dont, some need conversion to DXT3, some dont, everyone's system is different. But it's a quick fix and all is well. I really like the new B-25, it's great having the VC functionality and I think the props and engines look better. In any case, it's a great airplane and the money is going to a great cause. Anything I can do to get that P-61 in the air is not enough (as well as all the other projects too). My dad was a radio/radar operator in P-61's, and I believe he was in the squadron that the MAAM P-61 was from. He would have LOVED all of this. BTW, if anyone starts noticing a problem with Active Camera and the VC (as I have), go in the panel.cfg and put a // in front of anywhere it says "zorder". Same issue as was with the Avenger and that fix works fine, I tested it and everything works great.Thanks again for the new version!

@wrenchca- Didnt know you were married to my wife. Maybe someday we will meet at the refrigerator.

Absolutely right. I dont know jack squat about the relationship either, but it can just be naturally assumed that it would play some part. We sit in our livingrooms (bathtubs, trailers, whatever) and enjoy flying the planes, but in the backdrop of that there are 2 businesses involved here. PMDG and Boeing, a MAJOR global enterprise that dosent slap "Official Licensed Product" on just anything. Obviously the quality is one issue, and the business end is another. Personally I have no problem with this. Sure, I would love to see a PMDG grade Airbus too, but as someone already said, there are alot of Boeings that havent been "PMDG'd" yet either.

For me, its the MD-11. 2nd runner up is the 747-400 in Malaysia blue hibiscus livery, and lastly, the DC-2.

What version are you running? I believe the current version is 1.20.0055. I am having no problems in LFPG at all.

I would say you most likely hit the nail on the head about Windows XP. Personally, I think the FS9 version of the MD-11 coupled with XP is the most stable combination. I would think it a windows 7 "thing", but I will defer to someone else who actually has windows 7.

It's neither a game or a hobby... it's REAL :(

When this problem occurs with IE you have to clear your cache and everything should work fine. I had this problem too.

Possibly, but PMDG has said that all of their projects are being worked on by different teams and that intensity towards one project dosent mean abandonment of another.

I think they are all really nice. They would KILL my system which is built around FS9 and runs FSX barely good enough, but still the one question I would have is if these paints are ok with PMDG themselves. Has anyone actually heard an answer about that? They would have to have an agreement with them specifically I suppose. Not trying to be a buzzkill, but it IS a valid question.

As for the APU, as mentioned in automatic mode it will operate "automatically" after its running, but you have to make sure the N2 is at 100 percent on the engine page before you could use it for engine starting. Also, make sure you put the air system on "Auto" by manually pressing the Auto/Manual button. I believe that switch is in "manual" mode by default on. You might not be able to get the engines to start either if you are in the middle of an air system self test (not SURE, but I would assume you may not be able to). If you are running an annunciator test prior to engine start this could be an issue. Remember, holding the annunciator test button will trigger an air system self test so dont do it right before engine start. As far as the overspeed warnings in flight, this could be rapid changes in your weather. If you are using a weather add on make sure to smooth out all changes to weather. Im not totally sure of real world procedures, but as far as the QNH goes I would assume that the settings are more locally important around mountains/higher elevations than just at the destination in those instances where you are flying in elevated terrain, especially on approach.

What about your wind speed and direction?

If they were out there then I must have. But I fell asleep at the computer Not far past St. Johns and diddnt wake up until I was already over the UK at around 200NM out from AMS. I did notice the cloud cover was particularly high though, was barely skimming the top at FL340.

Parked at my beautiful new Aerosoft Mega Airport Amsterdam scenery after coming in from JFK as KLM644 :(

I totally agree, Dan. ALL the waypoints are THERE, it should be much easier for you to find them and use them in a flightplan from within FS itself without having to resort to multiple websites and having to edit things and such. But, like with anything else the hunt and the ability to overcome and fix it does broaden one's horizons :(

As for the flightaware part, the "flight planning" section of flightaware is NOT for flightsim. The way to use flightaware in flightsim is basically to copy and paste the actual route used on any particular flight into a flightplan generator such as simroutes. For overseas flights or flights that dont show a route on flightaware, this is what I do (everyone does it a different way, THIS works for me)-I go to RouteFinders website free access area which will include updated AIRAC or legacy AIRAC if that's what you need, plus NAT's Pacific tracks, etc here - http://rfinder.asalink.net/free/At the bottom of the page that is generated by routefinders, I simply copy the route given and paste it into SimRoutes, generate the finalized flightplan and export it to flightsim and PMDG formats. You just have to make sure the route dosent have any holes in it that flightsim wont understand or it wont load in FS. Do this by opening the route up in notepad and make sure all the waypoints are listed in NUMERIC ORDER. if there are any that are NOT, then simply re-number them all so they ARE in numeric order and save.Like I said, everyone does it differently. I can have any route figured out and generated into 2 different formats and in their respective folders within a minute or two. Once you get the hang of it, it's REAL easy.EDIT: If you look at the 3rd image in BIG SKY's post, the first waypoint in the finalized flightplan is listed as "V3". If you look, you will notice that next to this waypoint, there is a "dash" where a heading should be. This would be a "hole" that FS will not recognize and must be either removed from the flightplan or the flightplan must be edited afterwards. Any "good" waypoint will have a heading listed, and any "bad" one will have a dash. FS will not load the plan unless this is addressed either before exporting it to a file or after the file has been generated by using notepad. The only waypoint which will NOT have a heading listed is the place or origin, in this case "VHHH".

We always want updated stuff and more complexity, but one great thing about the 747 as it stands is its current state and its stability. As a tri-holer fanatic, I still go back to the 747 on a regular basis. As complex as the MD-11 is in comparison, the 747 IMO is still a cutting edge flightsim model and a real pleasure.

Really any international flight that takes you over or near the Arctic Circle will give you a look at the lights. As mentioned about not being able to see them as well from lower altitudes I cant say for with certainty as I am usually at 35000+ on those flights. If you want to set up a simple flight, try Iqaluit, CA (Airbus cold weather testing area) to Anchorage AK at dusk. I'm sure you will see them. Even if you dont finish the flight you should see something, and the northern lights at DUSK are really nice to see out your window!Edit: If you take off from Iqaluit in the middle of winter you also get the added bonus of seeing engine contrails while still on the runway :(

This is a good thread, I have been struggling with panning around the VC in FSX comfortably since I installed it. Alot of good suggestions. As a long time VC user and an avid Active Camera fan I find myself getting alot more out of FS9 sometimes just because I'm SO used to Active Camera. I installed Walk and follow but it really isnt the same and it messes with the eyepoint in the MD-11 horribly. Every flight starts on the ground next to the nosegear and I have to move up thru the floor and position myself where I'm supposed to be on every flight. Horrible!