awralls

Well, if anyone here has installed Reshade 4.2 into FSX:SE and got it working, I'd sure be interested in knowing what you did. Cheers, Andy

I've no idea. I assume by that you mean selecting the ticked shader options during installation? If so, how would I know the effect and the level of it? I think the issue may be more fundamental. I'm not actually sure that the shaders are being loaded at all. I see no difference with all the presets checked.

Oh well, back to the drawing board. ReShade doesn't load it's overlay for me. Tried DX9, DX10 and OpenGL. No go on any of them.

Oh, I hadn't spotted the advice removal. I'll give it a try. Thanks! Andy

Hi, I'm an FSX:SE user. Having upgraded to a new machine, I'm forced to use W10. I'm also a committed Scenery Fixer and Cloud Shadows customer, running the latest versions. Given that SweetFX doen't function under W10 and Steve councils against employing ReShade with Cloud Shadows, is there any available post-processing tool that provides the same functionality as SweetFX with the following combo: - w10 -nVidia 1080ti - FSX:SE - latest Scenery Fixer and Cloud Shadows? I really miss my SweetFX... thanks Andy

Hi Henrik, Did you ever get together the list of classic-era vessels that we discussed briefly on CalClassic? Andy

Superb! Yeah, I was aware of some of them. I was thinking along the lines of the many passenger types which proliferated before jet travel shrank the planet, as well as the everyday tramp steamers, colliers and early tankers that plied the oceans back then. Still, as you say, what is there is an excellent place to start learning how to build the routes and schedules. Cheers, Andy

Henrik, allow me to join the legion of grateful users who have, with great justification, heaped praise on you and your fellow team members for this outstanding achievement. I've been using your models and routes since your first upload and just never fly without them enabled now. While I imagine that you have zero motivation to work on this any more right now, and just want a break from it, can I make somewhat off-the-wall suggestion for a future project? How about classic steam-era vessels i.e. ships from 1930-1960? These could be used on the existing routes, but would be a welcome alternative for those of us who like to fly classic-era aircraft and routes. I know there are a few in the existing project, but there's scope for many other variations. Andy

I'd find it had to imagine they could work together because VOXATC injects its own AI so that it can control them directly and I would guess that that would cause all sorts of conflicts as the two applications both try to control them. Andy

I have it working across a network more or less as advertised. I found that if you set the network paths in the dialogue using the browse function, it needs a backslash added to the path for it work OK, but with that exception, and one other that I can't fix, it's fine. The other issue is that even though I've used the paths dialogue to copy the wpnavrte.txt file, it still cannot allocate aircraft to jet routes. I've reported it to Roland. I'm using UT2 so I don't know if that's an issue. UT2 has been enabled in the options and the spawn distance adjusted to 70 miles, but still no joy on jet route allocation. All other functions seem fine. A thoroughly brilliant piece of work and deserving of some sort of contribution from the users. Andy

One thing to beware of... I use FSBuild to generate plans and it functions in the same way as FSCommander in that it creates files in .pln format. However, it uses it's own AIRAC which is clearly much more up to date and expansive than the internal MSFS nav data. Even then, I can use an FSBuild-created .pln plan PROVIDING the first waypoint is also in the MSFS nav database. If it isn't, I amend it in the FS9 planner to include an additional point as close to the first one in my FSBuild plan as I can get and resave it. This avoids the Fatal Error on getting the clearance.

...and don't forget that the LDS 763 will soon be enhanced considerably by the release of FS2Crew for the LDS.

Like a lot of expensive, complex add-ons, the F1 MD-80 wasn't really ready for release when it was made available. Unlike a lot of expensive, complex add-ons 2 months after release, it STILL isn't ready for release.I realise that the designer Espen is trying to fix that situation and is extremely flexible and responsive, but the fact remains that only a couple of beta gauge patches have been made available thus far. There have been no improvements to other elements such as the model, the FDE and, critically, the performance, especially in the VC which is wholly unacceptable on my system, which is relatively up to date. Note that these are personal opinions and as such are subjective. Regards,

John,Yeah, I thought you'd not need to contact arrival in MSFS with RC4, but I've found that there are still aircraft pulling onto the active as I'm on final. Contacting MSFS prevents this. I understand that code to hold ground traffic on to the active is present in RC4, it's just my experience that it is not always effective. Hoefully that's something JD can work on some.Rgds

The trick to using MSFS ATC with RC is to ensure that you do NOT file a MSFS flightplan through the Flights/Flight Planner menu. Contact the departure ground on comm2 when you're ready to taxi and request the runway. If it's different to the the RC one, change the RC one to match MSFS. Select prgressive taxi if you want it (pink line ...blecccch) and away you go. Ensure you request t/o from tower (again on comm2) at the hold point. Because MSFS thinks you're flying VFR you don't need to to check in and comply with any MSFS ATC instructions. The only potential snag is that if the departure airfield is IFR you'll be told to sod off by MSFS ATC but that is a fairly rare occurence. If it happens, you're no worse off than if you were relying on RC solely.Within 40 miles of the arrival airfield, select it from the MSFS menu when it's in range and request a full stop landing from the tower. Ensure that you match the RC runway to the one given you by MSFS and then just comply with RC4 all the way down. Contacting MSFS tower is important because they are then expecting you and will hold any ground traffic and take-offs when you're on finals, avoiding lots of potential go-arounds.It's a bit of a fiddle, but it does work and I rarely get any sort of go-around this way.Rgds,