FalconAF

>When I build my flight plan with Fsbuild2.3 and export it into>FS2004 format I then load it into the FS9 planner but also>import it into Active Sky 6.5 for winds and then load the>weather into FS9 With Activesky, I then load the Fsbuild saved>plan into RC and start the flight. If I'm reading the above correctly, you are loading two different "versions" of your flightplan...one with winds and one without.I believe FSBuild will create a flightplan taking winds into account, but you have to run Active Sky FIRST to update the weather. Then FSBuild will use that weather in creating the flightplan. It sounds like you are creating the flightplan first in FSBuild with no winds. Then you are loading it into FS9 and THEN into ActiveSky. ActiveSky then adds winds to it. But then you say you load the "original" FSBuild flightplan into RC. Your "original" FSBuild flightplan WON'T have winds incorporated into it, because you created it prior to ActiveSky furnishing the winds info for it.Check out the FSBuild documentation to see how to make it use the active weather from ActiveSky while building a flightplan. Then the flightplan you load into ALL your addons will be the same.

>Falcon, if you are required to use a Star during appoach, at>about what point will ATC start vectoring you to the FAF?>>Dave F.There is no definite answer to that. Also, it is important to realize that you may NEVER receive a vector from ATC if the STAR connects to a FAF for the runway ATC is using at the time. See this link for the TYSSN ONE arrival to KLAS (Las Vegas McCarran):http://204.108.4.16/d-tpp/0713/00662TYSSN.PDFNote there are 4 "transitions" for the arrival (DRAKE, KINGMAN, LRAIN, and PEACH SPRINGS). Whichever transition you arrive on, they all will eventually take you to TYSSN. Thus the narrative says, "From TYSSN WP via 324 track to SUZSI WP, thence as depicted to PRINO WP. Rwy 25L, intercept the Rwy 25L localizer." PRINO is a FAF for Rwy 25L, so in this case, you would never receive an ATC vector to a FAF. Many STARS are flown this way. The CIVET 5 arrival to KLAX runway 25L is another example.If Rwy 25L is not the landing runway, then the narrative says, "All other runways, expect radar vectors to final approach course." In this case, ATC would give you vectors to a different runway so you could join the ILS, etc, outside of a FAF for that runway. Note this vector could start ANYWHERE along the STAR route to help ATC get the traffic sequenced correctly. The vector could easily occur before TYSSN WP if needed to maintain good traffic flows.In any case, "WHEN" ATC decides to start vectoring you depends on many factors...traffic loads, runway configurations, weather (thunderstorms, etc)...the list can go on and on. There is no "definite" time frame. Hope this helps.FalconAF

Phil,Hi. In another post concerning OOM's with WinXP, FSX, and SP2, you wrote the below:"Out of Memory in FSX is almost always running out of process address space. There are 2 fixes:1)reduce settings ( including complexity of the aircraft you are flying ) 2)using the /3G switch by modifying your OS boot to give the process more address space to work within.Note, even if TaskMan shows the process is not using over 2G there can be a problem, in 2 ways:1)when that close to the limit it can be hard to get contiguous ( all in 1 piece ) blocks of the size FSX needs. If the block size isnt available, the app "sees" that as out of memory.2)any system can act strange close to the limits. dont run right at the limits because that is asking for trouble."I've run across something interesting by accident after I recently installed SP2. I don't know if it applies or applied to SP1. And I don't know the "why" it is working, but it has eliminated all my previous OOMs with FSX (which were few and far between to begin with, but they would occasionally happen). I'm curious what your thoughts are about it.I was running FSX and decided to load Task Manager to watch the memory usage. FSX gradually climbed up to over 1,000,000K in usage. I have 4GB memory, and have never applied the /3G switch (I know XP can't really use the 4GB, but I got it for the future when I go to Vista). I would usually get an OOM about the time FSX.EXE hit around the 1,300,000k reading in the past.But I did something "accidentally" that really surprised me by the results. I was running in Windowed Mode on my 3-wide TH2G setup because I also run FSX Commander on a 4th monitor (have to run FSX Windowed to do that). I "minimized" FSX on my "main" monitor...and Task Manager immediately showed the FSX usage DROP from 1,000,000k to around 86,000k usage. When I "un-minimized" FSX back to the monitor, it STAYED at 86,000k, then gradually began climbing back up again. It took over 30 minutes for it to reach anything near 1,000,000k again. So I minimized it again, and got the same results.This got me thinking. I tried the same thing just PRIOR to approaching a major airport with 100% AI traffic loaded. I had absolutely no problem completing the landing, taxiing all over the airport, etc. Not even a hint of an OOM. All of my previous OOMs were like most of the ones posted here in the forums...at the end of a long flight while approaching a major airport.I have no idea why this "works" for me. But it appears that minimizing FSX, then maximizing it again is "releasing" (?) some sort of memory that may be being "hogged" by FSX during a long period of time. Or maybe it is releasing video memory somehow.Do you have any ideas why this is happening? All I know is that it works for me, and I haven't had an OOM by doing it since I "discovered" it. And I'm running just about every darn addon you can think of with FSX...UTX, GEX, FEX, ASX, Radar Contact, etc.Looking forward to your thoughts on this.FalconAFEDIT: I'm also curious if this works for anybody else who may be experiencing OOMs. If anybody else tries this, please post your experience here.

David,Up until now, I've been hesitant to do the SP2 upgrade also. But based on the responses to your original post, I'm ready to give it a try. My computer system should definitely be able to handle it (won't bore you with the specs, but it's "bigger" than some posted here).I do have one question before doing it.When you do the FSX SP2 portion of it, can that be either the "stand alone" SP2 upgrade OR the Acceleration Pack? I haven't purchased the Acceleration Pack, but am interested in doing so. So after installing SP1, will your instructions work for the SP2 portion by installing Acceleration Pack, then pressing on from there?Thanks for any guidance.

I've used the TrackIR with the "big jets" for over a year now. Wouldn't ever fly the "big jets" without it again. Depending on your monitor setup (I have a 3-wide TripleHead2Go system) there are two very important HotKeys from the TrackIR you will want to program to you joystick or yoke that will make your life much easier in the "big jets".Program both the "Pause" and the "Center" TrackIR HotKeys to your controller. Set the "Pause" one up for "toggle" mode (check the "Toggle" box in the HotKeys tab for it), so alternate presses of it turn the TrackIR On and Off. The "Center" HotKey will just recenter the view each time you press the controller button (there is no "toggle" box for it).What the above allows you to do are these things:1. Any time you need to recenter the view of your cockpit (and you will have to do this once in a while), you don't have to "reach" or "lean" towards your keyboard (which moves your head from your normal position when flying). This allows you to recenter the view based on your "normal" sitting position while flying the aircraft.2. If you need to use the radio panels, FMC, or whatever is located anywhere in the cockpit, you can turn your head to them, move your head forward or backward, or left to right also, until the item you want to use is easily visible on your monitor (note this eliminates any need to "zoom" anything). Then press the "Pause" button on your controller. This will "freeze" that view, and you can easily use your mouse then on the "hot spots" on your screen to change frequencies, transponder codes, FMC inputs, etc, without having to try and hold your head rock-steady so your screen won't move around on you. Once you make your changes, just hit the "Pause" button again, and you are back in business with the TrackIR working. Another benefit is when you are making an approach to landing. In many of the "big jets", it is hard to see over the panel on final unless you move the panel down. It is very easy to make a "sight adjustment" for approaches with the above setup. Just "raise your head" a little to see over the panel, then hit the "Pause" key to freeze the TrackIR. You can now sit back again in your comfortable position and land with a good sight picture of the runway. After touchdown, hit "Pause" button again, and taxiing is a dream (and you can look around at all the pretty scenery then...which you shouldn't have been doing on Final Approach anyhow!). ;-)The above two keys mapped to your controller will make your life much easier with complex cockpits and the TrackIR.EDIT: The above assumes you are using the Virtual Cockpit, of course. But it will also work with the 2-D cockpit if you make the FS configuration file change that allows you to "Pan in Cockpit View" for the 2-D panels.FalconAF

When you created the FS9 configuration in nHancer, did you DELETE the default one first? Then create a whole new one for FS9? If you DON'T do this, the new settings will not be in effect and you won't get rid of the "jaggies". You can't just "edit" the original default configuration. You have to delete the original one to clear the Windows Registry for that one, then create a complete new one using the nHancer settings found in several posts here on AVSIM. That is the way to get the new AA and AF settings to work for your video card and FS9.FalconAF

Agreed. But the reply made it sound like nVidia cards don't do FS Anti-Aliasing well. That's not true, and I just wanted to clarify that portion for any "newbie" FS enthusiasts.

Or if you have FS Navigator, just run the FSNavDBC utility and "add" the new scenery folder/location there. Use the "Save to FS" button, then compile the database. Scenery is ready to go next time you start FS9.

>>Download this utility, http://www.nhancer.com/ once you've>>installed it, search the forum for the proper setup info and>>say goodbye to the jaggies.>>>>Dave F.>>>DO NOT do this! Nhancer does not work with ATI cards -- it is>for nVidia cards only, which do not play well with Flight>Simulator Anti-Aliasing.>>ChuckNot sure what you mean by the above. I agree nHancer is for nVidia cards only. But nVidia cards work quite well with Flight Simulator Anti-Aliasing when you get them set up correctly. And nHancer allows you to do that, especially with the nVidia 8800 series cards.

>My point, and I backed it up by the developers quote, is that>you are paying for a fantasy setup.Relax, Fred. In case you haven't realized it yet, ALL flight simulation is a "fantasy setup". I've been a real-world pilot for over 30 years. But I've never flown an actual B747 in real life. So every time I fly one in FSX, it's a "fantasy". And I darn well would never fly my real-world C172 under the Golden Gate Bridge in real life, but I've done it numerous times in FS. Another fantasy fulfilled.And as for your analogy that "anybody could make this scenery themselves in FSX so paying for it should be wrong..." (not your exact words, but a paraphrase), I am quite capable of making my own cup of coffee every day. But I still spend good money to buy one or two of them from an industrious "coffee developer" on my way to work each day. So it's all relative.If you don't want to spend the money on something, don't buy it. It's as simple as that.

Absolutely. And that's why the section you quoted above contained the part that said, "...barring any extenuating circumstances." ;-)

William,One BIG thing that wasn't clarified here for you, and I think you have a misunderstanding about it yet.The chart you referenced is NOT an "Approach" chart. An "Approach" chart is a different chart for a specific RUNWAY approach, like "ILS Runway 25L" or "VOR/DME Runway 9".The chart you referenced is a STAR ("Standard Instrument Arrival") chart. Note the word "Arrival" instead of "Approach" for this type of chart. These charts (routes) are used to transition an aircraft from an en-route segment of their flight (like a J-Route...a Jet Airway) and get the airplane closer to the airport...in this case, Phoenix Sky Harbor airport. THEN is when the pilot will be issued an "approach" to the airport, and the approach is for a specific runway at the airport. Look at the bottom of the chart you referenced. The aircraft will fly either the San Simon or Tucson "Transition". Which one depends on where the aircraft is coming from. The chart lists how the pilot should fly both of those. But at the end of each of them is the word, "Thence..." Now you read the very bottom line, and it says, "...from over SUNSS via PXR R-127 to PXR VORTAC, expect radar vectors after HOOPS." This means that ATC will have to provide radar vectors to the pilot to get him to an APPROACH to a RUNWAY at the airport. ATC may vector the pilot for any one of several different approaches to different runways from HOOPS...an ILS approach, a Visual Approach, etc. That is when the pilot needs the appropriate "Approach Chart" for that runway/approach. Like if after HOOPS, ATC vectored the pilot for the ILS Runway 25L approach at Sky Harbor, the pilot would then need THIS Approach Chart to fly the "ILS Runway 25L Approach".http://204.108.4.16/d-tpp/0712/00322I25L.PDF

William,You stated the following questions in your original post:"In the real world which approach is most common?""I am using the default B 737-800.""I want to use the app that real world 737 pilots would use."What I think may be confusing you is WHO DECIDES what approach the pilot will end up using. When you are talking about a B 737 pilot (as you did above), it isn't normally the pilot who makes the decision. A pilot flying a B737 is going to be in contact with ATC during the entire flight, including the approach and landing to an airport. This is the way it is also done in Radar Contact.ATC will decide which approach to use depending on many circumstances. If the weather is IFR, then ATC is going to issue an Instrument Approach, like an ILS, Localizer, etc. If the weather is relatively clear and the pilot is able to see the airport and runway from a reasonable distance, ATC may issue a Visual Approach instead (the pilot must FIRST say he either has the airport in sight, or another aircraft that has already been cleared for the SAME Visual Approach which the pilot will agree to follow to the SAME runway). The key to all of this is a pilot may REQUEST any approach that is available, but ATC can DENY it and issue a different approach that the pilot then MUST follow, barring any extenuating circumstances. ATC is the final authority on what type of approach the pilot will make. Of course, ATC cannot force a non-instrument rated pilot to fly an Instrument Approach like an ILS...that would be illegal for both ATC and the pilot. But ATC will in almost all cases of commercial aircraft be the final say on which type of approach the pilot will end up flying.In Radar Contact, most flights are assumed to be IFR flights, like a B737 flight would be. Thus, ATC is going to issue the pilot an approach to do. Radar Contact *allows* the pilot to request a different approach, and I have never encountered a time in Radar Contact where this request was denied. So there is a "realism" factor that is being fudged in Radar Contact in this regard. For instance, if the Radar Contact ATC issues you an ILS approach, then you request a Visual Approach instead, ATC will simply authorize the visual approach with no further questions asked.In the real world, many busy commercial airports use Instrument ILS approaches even when the weather is VFR. This permits a regulated traffic flow and assists ATC in maintaining aircraft separations. Visual Approaches can be and are also used for the same reasons. But the key to remember is ATC makes the FINAL call on what type approach the pilot will fly. And unless the pilot has a very good reason for NOT wanting to fly that approach issued by ATC, the pilot is expected to fly it.After saying all of the above, from a real-world perspective, the two most common types of approaches you would encounter in a B737 would be an Instrument ILS Approach, or a Visual Approach. But the Visual Approach would only be issued once the aircraft was no longer in IFR conditions...in other words, the pilot had descended below any clouds and could see the airport from a distance far enough away to conduct the Visual Approach safely (or had agreed to follow another aircraft that had already been cleared for the same Visual Approach...in this case, the pilot does NOT have to have the airport in sight...he just follows the preceding aircraft, who already reported having the airport in sight, to the airport/runway.Hope the above helps.

I had same problem after installing a bunch of addons. It seems there was a conflict with either my fscopilot.dll or xguage.dll files. If during startup, I chose "Run" in the screen below for either file, FSX would quit loading and take me back to desktop. When I selected "Don't Run" FSX continued to load fine. Note that if you already (in the past) told FSX to "Always trust these files" (during a previous loading of FSX) you may have to edit your FSX.cfg file and remove those entries, or just delete the cfg file and let FSX build a new one. If you don't do this, you will never get the screen below asking you to "Don't Run"" the file...FSX will just try to do it and then end, taking you back to your desktop like you say it does. By deleting the FSX.cfg file, or removing the "trusted entries" in it already, the next time you start FSX you will get a screen for each of the files that aren't "trusted" yet, like below. You can trouble-shoot and isolate which file may be causing FSX to quit loading on you then.

Instead of paying for this, just download the freeware sim Orbiter 2006.http://orbit.medphys.ucl.ac.uk/It's been around for years now and has freeware developers who have created addons that will fill your hard drives. Many of them work in places like NASA and the Jet Propulsion Laboratory. The current Shuttle addons for it (and the associated scenery, missions, satellites, payloaads, etc) will simulate real world, real time (or accelerated time) missions until you drop dead from lack of sleep.You can check out their forum from the main link page above to get an idea of what is available for it. No need to pay for a Shuttle sim.

I had this happen once when I installed an addon that kept "real world time" for FS9. I already had another one installed. My first one was set to my GMT location (-7 hours), but I accidentally set the 2nd one to +7 GMT (was half-asleep when I did it). The second one was also set to "auto load on FS start-up". So when I started FS, it would go to my "real" time (-7 GMT), then after a couple seconds it would "reload" and go to the "bad" +7 GMT. and do exactly what you are describing.Check to make sure you don't have one (or more) "real world time" addons for FS installed and/or set with the wrong time (addons like FS Real Time, or FSInn for VATSIM that has it's own "real world time settings" in it).FalconAF

Well (and here's where I will probably get "flamed" by some people, but I don't care 'cos I know better), I use the one that is included in my Norton System Works installation. Yeah...I use Norton on my 'puter. If you know how to use it correctly, it is not the "system hog" that so many people claim it to be. You can configure it so it will not have an adverse effect on your FS session (or anything else). Of course, knowing how to do that for me comes from being a IT Superintendent/Systems Administrator in the Air Force for over 25 years.As for freeware Registry cleaners, there are several on the 'net that work just as well. I'd suggest doing a GOOGLE search, then go to someplace like CNET and see which ones are the more popular downloads. I won't recommend any one particular one. You can figure out the "good" ones from the "bad" ones usually by the number of downloads at places like CNET and other "major" freeware download sites.

Jure,Glad it helped. Let me know how it works out for you.Also, just to be fair to the "top of the heap payware stuff" developers, it may not be their fault if some of their products end up that way after installation. Flight Simulator is so immense in scope, with so many ways a user can "change" it with addons, etc, that no developer could EVER be sure that something already in FS might not "hose" their own product. That is why using those tools I recommended is essential. It can identify things that may have "gone wrong" with your FS installation, and allow you to fix them.I view it the same way as the need to keep your Windows Registry clean by running a registry cleaner at least once a week. The Registry can get hosed by adding, deleting, installing stuff. Or just by simply "using" the computer. That can severely effect your computer's performance. Same thing with FS...run those programs I listed every once in a while just to make sure your FS installation hasn't "gone south" on you with invalid entries, links, missing files, etc. It's the nature of the beast with programs like FS as they get more and more complex with every release.FalconAF

Well, I'm not sure about that aspect of it, but it might be possible.What I was getting at was this:There seems to be a lot of OOM's occuring when people upgraded from their "old" computers to new, faster, more capable ones. That is what happened to me too. In rerospect, what I did when I got my new 'puter was load the default FS9 installation, then run it. Everything worked great and my frame rates sky-rocketed. So what did I do? I loaded EVERY darn addon I had for FS9, plus a few "extras" (freeware, etc) that I couldn't run on my old system because it was too slow. That's when I started getting the OOM's.I narrowed it down to that one AI aircraft file that I had downloaded. It was part of an "AI package" (I won't say which one, but it was a freeware download and not from a major payware developer). There was only ONE file in it that was "corrupted" (a bad texture file). Once I removed that one AI aircraft altogether, my OOM's completely disappeared.I'm betting that a lot of people who upgraded to more capable computers have experienced the same thing. Now that they *can*, they have added all kinds of stuff to their FS9 installations. It may not be that they have TOO MUCH running, but they may actually have a "bad file" from all the addons. By using the 3 tools I mentioned in my previous post above, they can identify if this might actually be their OOM problem and allow them to correct it without jumping through all the other solution-hoops that may not be necessary.

Hi all,I rarely post here, but this thread caught my attention after I also upgraded my computer and began experiencing the OOM messages in FS9 (something I NEVER experienced with my old P4 2.0Ghz system while running FS9 for almost 4 years).I'm going to offer a few more "possibilities" that you may want to check if you are experiencing the OOM errors in FS9. My background is I'm retired Air Force with a degree in Information Systems Technology, and have extensive experience in IM trouble-shooting, and all versions of Flight Simulator.I upgraded to a Core2Duo E6850 @ 3.00GHz, 4Mb memory, nVidia 8800 GTX 768Mb, 2 - 500Gb hard drives in Raid 0. Naturally, with this system, I installed just about every addon you could imagine for FS9 that I had collected over the past few years. UTUSA, UT Canada/Alaska, AS 6.5, GE Pro, Flight Environment, Radar Contact 4.3, and numerous other commercial and freeware scenery addons. FS9 would always run at a rock-solid 60 FPS with all sliders maxed out. But I too began getting the OOM messages about 2 hours into any flight I made.I finally diagnosed the problem. It was the result of ONE AI aircraft file, a freeware download, that was causing the problem. After deleting that ONE AI aircraft, FS9 runs with no OOM crashes whatsoever.My point is this: You need the TOOLS to diagnose what is actually happening on your system both PRIOR TO and DURING your FS9 sessions. In that regard, I'm going to list the tools I use which I consider ESSENTIAL to diagnosing any FS9 OOM problems you may be encountering. Try 'em if you want...don't if you don't want...but they can identify and solve many of your problems.1. Process Monitor - If you are using WinXP and SP2, get rid of Filemon and download Process Monitor from the Microsoft website. It does so much more than Filemon does, and was specifically developed for use with XP after the SP2 release. I won't go into details about it, suffice to say that you can set parameters in it that will do so much more than Filemon allows you to do. 'Nuff said here.2. ScanAFD - Essential freeware program that scans your entire FS9 installation for any duplicate AFCAD files. Worth it's weight in gold. Run it...get rid of any duplicate AFCAD files you have.3. FlightSim Manager - An old(er) freeware program that will identify any problems with any aspect of your FS9 installation...aircraft files, scenery files, you name it. It is no longer supported by the author, and there is a problem with it now that requires a small patch to make it work if your computer system time is "newer" than last year, but it is still a must have diagnostic tool. This is the program I used that identified the one single cause of my OOM problem...the ONE AI aircraft that had a corrupted file in it. Every time I approached this AI aircraft in FS9, Process Monitor (above) showed that FS9 just kept trying to load it time and time again. It would fail, but the memory would not get released from previous attempts. The reason I made this post is simply to offer some alternative options for you to help you try to diagnose any OOM problems you may be having. FS9 can go OOM on you if you have only ONE file that is causing problems. The above 3 utilities can help you find those files, and maybe solve your problem for you.Hope any of the above may help someone here.FalconAF

Thanks for the info. I'm just going to stay with the Audigy for now then, in as much as I am also going to stay with WinXP for now. I've got too much invested in my FS9 setup and addons now to make the plunge to FSX. Will probably do the Vista and FSX plunge sometime next year when everything in those two areas "settles down" a bit and I see what type of addons, patches, etc develop over the next 6 - 9 months. My new computer will be able to handle it all then...I just don't want to go down that path yet.Nice to know about the USB to gameport adapter. Strange thing is I swear I did a GOOGLE search using something like "gameport to USB adapter" and it came up blank. Oh well....Thanks for the info!FalconAF

This may make some folks laugh here, but it's an honest question I don't know the answer to. After almost 5 years, I've reached the upgrade limit on my trusty ol' P4 3.2GHz system. With various tweaking and such, it has served me well. But it's time to move on. But....My old system has the SB Audigy card in it. It has a gameport connection. All my flightsim controllers (CH Yoke, FighterStick USB, Pro Throttle, etc) are USB and that is not a problem. But my over $500 TSW wheel/pedal combo for my racing sims (which still works fine) has a gameport connector on it.I was a little shocked to discover that all the newer sound cards, mobo's, etc don't have gameport connectors anymore. USB is the standard it seems now. I really don't want (or need) to toss out my TSW (or pay to have it upgraded to USB) as it works fine. So I'm wondering what other options I may have.1. Would I really be losing anything by just putting the SB Audigy into my new system and having the gameport connection available with it?2. Is there anything like a gameport adapter or USB-to-gameport adapter I could use? Searching the 'net I haven't seen anything like this.

If this has been addressed before, my apologies. Just point me to the thread for the answer.I've had the 737NG (all series) for some time now and they are great. Yesterday I purchased the B1900D and ran the install routine for it. It seems to have completely over-written the PMDG folder in my FS9 directory. I no longer had any of the 737NG folders under the PMDG directory. Only the B1900D Express, PMDG Express, and an ICON folder. All my flightplans (and the folder) disappeared, the SIDSTARS folder was gone, and the main PMDG folder is missing a bunch of INI files from before. I manually created a new 737NG folder and can re-add the manuals that were there. I also manually created a SIDSTARS folder and updated it with the current 0410 SID/STAR download. Same with the Flightplans folder, but I'll have to re-create all those for the 737NG it looks like. I ran FS9 and all the 737's are still there and they seem to work OK (I can pull up the FMC and get the 0410 Navdata and the SIDs/STARs) but when I exited FS9 the only INI file that now shows in the main PMDG folder is the "737guages.ini" one. A friend of mine says he has several other INI files (737Airlines, 737Kbd, ACS, LoadManager) and also the LoadManager.exe file (which I can't find anywhere right now), along with a couple other ReadMe files I no longer have there.I have no idea what happened when I installed the B1900D. Anybody got any ideas, or how I might be able to fix it, short of a complete re-install of the 737NG?Thanks for any advice.FalconAF

Below link has the same type of displays for many US airports, including the LAX area.http://www.passur.com/For SOCAL "real world" procedures, you can try our VATSIM ZLA website. We have all charts for all airports, plus the TEC Routes used for real world flights between SOCAL airports handled by SOCAL only (no handoffs to the Center controllers). http://www.laartcc.org/index.php

Hmmm...if I select "Ignore Real World Weather" and set "clear skies" in FS9, then I have clear skies on VATSIM even if the local real world weather is IFR. I do that often when flying for a new controller during an OTS session and want to throw some VFR traffic at him.This seems to contradict an earlier recommendation to only select "Ignore Real World Weather" if I am using a third-party weather add-on, which I don't.Is there a reason NOT to do this on VATSIM?