NBouc

You won't loose anything. Acceleration has its own version of FSX SP2 which is slightly different from the downloaded FSX SP2. That is why it asks for the removal of SP2 before proceeding with the install. Once acceleration is installed, any addons you have that require FSX SP2 will continue to work as before.So, uninstall SP2, install Acceleration, and fire up FSX. You will be asked to activate your copy of Acceleration, but you only have to do it once.Best regards.

Bonjour Franck, j'avais pourtant pris soin de désinstaller la version 101 avant d'installer la version 400. À court d'idée, je viens de désinstaller le Cheyenne V400 (en supprimant tout répertoire résiduel) et ré-installé à neuf. Cette fois-ci, la ligne "UseTrimble=1" est présent dans le PA31.CFG. Je l'ai modifié pour =0, modifié à nouveau le "panel.cfg" pour y insérer le GPS 500 de FSX, mais mon problème persiste. L'autopilote ne suit pas les indications du GPS.Dois-je comprendre que chez toi, l'association de l'autopilote avec le GPS de FS pour la navigation fonctionne ?Merci quand même pour ta suggestion.

Jean-Paul, je n'avais aucune ligne "UseTrimble=x" initialement dans mon PA31.CFG. Ne sachant pas où elle devait être placée, je l'ai ajoutée manuellement dans la section "radio" en premier, et déplacée ensuite sous "config" car ca ne fonctionnait pas dans "radio". De là ma remarque, croyant que certains utilisateurs ont peut-être eu à faire comme moi.Si cette ligne est normalement présente dans le CFG après l'installation, il est alors possible qu'il se soit passé quelque chose d'anormale lors de mon installation. Je vais désinstaller et refaire l'installation propre du Cheyenne pour voir.Merci.

Merci Jean-Paul pour le mot de bienvenue.J'ai bien activé la navigation par GPS (confirmé par le témoin bleu sur le tableau de bord), mais l'autopilote n'intercepte pas la route du GPS. Je me place sur une trajectoire d'interception de 20 à 30 degrés de la route prévue avec la configuration suivante:- Flight Director, Autopilote + yaw damper activés.- Navigation GPS activée (témoin bleu)- Bouton NAV de l'autopilote activé.L'avion garde sa trajectoire et traverse la route prévue sans l'intercepter. J'ai noté aussi que la ligne "UseTrimble=0" doit être sous la section [Config] et non pas [Radios] du fichier PA31.CFG pour que le bouton gênant du Trimble disparaisse.Je cherche toujours comment faire intercepter la route en utilisant le GPS 500 par défaut de FSX. Quelqu'un sur ce forum a-t-il réussi cela sur le Cheyenne ?

Pour ma part, j'ai désinstallé la version 101, puis installé ensuite la version 400 du Cheyenne et aucun problème avec la version 400 sur FSX/Acceleration. Mon OS est XP Professionnel SP3 (version anglaise).Par contre, malgré la présence de la ligne "UseTrimble=0" dans le fichier PA31.CFG, je n'arrive pas à faire réagir l'autopilote du Cheyenne avec le GPS de FSX (GPS500 par défaut) que j'ai ajouté au cockpit virtuel (sans retirer le Trimble). Le fichier PA31.CFG n'apparait qu'à un seul endroit sur le disque dur, dans "C:\Documents and Settings\All Users\Application Data\Digital Aviation\PA31 Cheyenne".Je me serais attendu à le voir également sous mon nom d'utilisateur, mais ce n'est pas le cas. Quelqu'un a-t-il réussi à naviguer avec un GPS autre que le Trimble ?

In your camera.cfg file, for each camera view you want to modify the pan rate, modify/add the following lines to fit your need:PitchPanRate=30HeadingPanRate=75Those values are the one I use for virtual cockpit. For locked spot view, I use 75 for Both.In Windows XP, the file is located in C:\Documents and Settings\YOURUSERNAME\Application Data\Microsoft\FSXBest regards,

I recently replaced my analog TH2Go with a digital one and I don't regret it. The digital picture is sharper than the analog one (specially when displayimg small fonts in gauges) and the bezel management is a great plus when flying in virtual cockpit.My experience is with 3 LCD 19 inch monitors, I don't know if a TFT will show as much a difference between digital and analog image.

Thank you Tim, it would be logical indeed for MS to allow installing a second instance of a software (specially theirs) for proper testing without having to buy a second copy of the software.NBouc

Thank you Dean and Remind,I'll install FSX on my W7 drive and activate.NBouc

Hi everyone,I recently installed Windows 7 Beta on a separate hard drive (dual boot XP SP3/W7) and I would like to know the best way to install FSX to run on W7. I already have FSX instaled under XP, on it's own dedicated hard drive.If I re-install FSX on the W7 drive (to keep it separate from the installation made under XP), I will have to activate FSX again. Will that damage or invalid my current activation under XP ?Those of you using dual boot, how did you proceed to install your same copy of FSX on both OS ?Thank's for any advice you can provide.NBouc

Same problem here for the last few days.WinXP Pro and IE7

Hello Missionguy,Thank you for your input. There has been no change to the accounts and the OS (XP Pro SP3) is very stable. I am the only user on the computer, beside the default "Administrator" account that I never use to login. My FSX config files are in C:Documents and Settings"My Name"Application DataMicrosoftFSXFSX is installed on D:FSXHere's the VC section of my camera.cfg file:(CameraDefinition.002)Title = Virtual CockpitGuid = {C95EAB58-9E4A-4E2A-A34C-D8D9D948F078}Description = This is the description of the virtual cockpit view.Origin = Virtual CockpitMomentumEffect = FALSESnapPbhAdjust = SwivelSnapPbhReturn = FalsePanPbhAdjust = SwivelPanPbhReturn = FalseTrack = NoneShowAxis = YESAllowZoom = TRUEInitialZoom = 0.80SmoothZoomTime = 0.0ZoomPanScalar = 2.0ShowWeather = YesXyzAdjust = TRUEShowLensFlare=FALSECategory = CockpitPitchPanRate=30HeadingPanRate=60PanAcceleratorTime=0HotKeySelect=1Those have been my settings for years and worked just fine until recently. What a puzzle ...

In FSX, the head movement induced by acceleration/deceleration and turns is simulated. The momentum effect is the force that is applied to your head, which results in a change in your view reference point.For example, when you brake, the dashboard seems to get closer (your head is pushed forward). Conversely, when you accelerate (take-off run), the dashboard moves further way (your head is pushed backward).It can be disabled in the camera.cfg file. Not easy to explain, I hope you understand what it is.

Thank you for the info, but I tried it with no change. I'm still puzzled.

Hello everyone,I require your help in solving this puzzling problem I've been having for the last few days in FSX Acceleration under Windows XP Pro SP3.I've been flying for months with the MomentumEffect = False in FSX but since recently, FSX is applying the MomemtumEffect even though the camera.cfg under my profile, as well as the one inside the main FSX folder, AND the camera entry sections of all the aircraft.cfg files say MomentumEffect = False.To try and solve the conflict, I deleted the camera.cfg file under my username (I am the only user on this computer, and have administrator privileges), letting FSX rebuild it, and confirmed the presence of MomentumEffect = FALSE in the file. It was there. I start FSX and fly and bingo, no momentum effect. But on every subsequent start of FSX, BAM ! Momentum effect is back even though the files still say FALSE. This affects all aicrafts (default and addon). I tried 3 times deleting the file and got the same result. OK on the first use, but problem is back on every subsequent use of FSX.I cannot understand what is going on. The last change I made to FSX was to install the PMDG B747-400 for FSX, on which I edited the aircraft.cfg file to state MomentumEffect = FALSE. FSX ran without the momentum effect problem for 3 or 4 days before the problem showed up, so I don't think it is related. I tried both FALSE and NO values, just in case, even though I know they both work the same, but with the same result. I can't stand that momentum effect, I want to get rid of it for good.Does anyone have a clue ?

It all depends on what improvement your are looking for. If you simply wish to be able to fly at 20+ FPS, then I would recommand a CPU upgrade. If you are looking at putting all settings at max and maintaining 20+ FPS then you'll be wasting your money.I upgraded my previous P4 for a C2D and I am very happy I did.My previous system was a Pentium 4 3.6 GHz / 3GB DDR2-800 / 8800GTX 768MB PCI-E, TH2G 3840x1024x32:- FPS was 5-15 most of the time.- Displaying many clouds reduced the FPS below 10.- Had to set scenery complexity to normal or less.- Had to set autogen to sparse (or normal with tweaks).- Had to apply many of the improvement tweaks to get acceptable FPS.- No bloom, mesh 38m, texture 1m, water Low 2X.- AA 4x, AF 8x.- Blurry textures all over the ground.My new system is a C2D8500 3.0GHz, 4GB DDR2-800 with the same 8800GTX, TH2G 3840x1024x32:- No tweak is needed.- I am now running at FPS locked at 24 and it stays there most of the time (unlocked, FPS varies from 20 to 100).- the sim is very fluid.- Running scenery complexity at very dense.- Running autogen at normal to dense.- No bloom, mesh 10m, texture 1m, water High 2X.- AA 8xQ, AF 16x- No blurry texture at all.It required a new motherboard though. The success key seems to be a fast CPU, that's why I went for a fast 2 cores instead of a slower 4 cores (based on what was available at the time vs cost).If you have the money, go for it.

>The (Single core based) FPS that FSX provides>will be Indistinguishable between any Single Core operating at>3.6 vs 3.8. However, the extra cores the quad brings on board>will get you better texture loading. >Hum ... I beg to differ on that. I recently upgraded from a single core P4 3.6 GHz to a Dual core E8400 3.0 GHz and I see a big difference in both FPS and texture loading. Both systems running XP Pro 32-bit with a NVidia 8800 GTX.I would agree though that a Q66xx overclocked at 3.8 would beat a E8400/8500 running at stock speed.Just my 2 cents.

Thank you Jaap for the links.It contains very good info and tutorial worth bookmarking, which I did. I might not need a working floppy afterall :-)Best regards,

Your level of discussion is way past my competence, but one statement got my attention. When you said;"Usually the 'experts' are dumbfounded after they are proven wrong and then after the fact, go figure out where their statement was in error or needed to be 'adjusted" for the application being run and in that they say.. 'well, I was not wrong.. I just did not understand the application".Have you been working with my ex-wife ?LoL

Hi Jaap,I am indeed running the drivers from the INF. I tried to switch to the F6 AHCI drivers but guess what ... my floppy controller also seems to be malfunctioning. Unable to read/write floppy disk.I replaced the floppy drive with another but same result, thus my suspicion towards the floppy controller. Faulty SATA port #1 plus faulty floppy controller, this definitely calls for a Mobo replacement.BTW, I did once a driver update from IDE to AHCI on my previous system after Windows was installed. Not too complicated under Windows XP 32-bit, but I don't know about other OSs. In short:- update the driver via Device manager pointing it to the F6 disk.- select the correct controller.- reboot and enter BIOS.- set SATA as AHCI, save change and exit.- boot into Windows.Intel Matrix Storage manager can then be installed if one whishes to confirm NCQ is active.Take care, I must pay a visit to my Motherboard vendor ;-)

Hi Jaap,There is no ACH mention in Device Manager. The controllers are listed under "IDE ATA/ATAPI controllers" as:Intel® ICH9 2 port Serial ATA Storage Controller 2- 2620Intel® ICH9 4 port Serial ATA Storage Controller 1- 2626Since it is an X38 chipset, I was expecting to see "82801IR" somewhere in the name, even though I have not set AHCI nor RAID.The drivers for the controllers are identified as:- device provider: Intel- driver Date: 05/02/2007- driver version: 9.3.0.1011- digital signer: Microsoft WHCPThe drivers details show them from Microsoft:- atapi.sys Microsoft V5.1.2600.2180 (xpsp_sp2_rtm ...)- pciide.sys Microsoft V5.1.2600.0 (XPClient ...)- pciidex.sys Microsoft V5.1.2600.2180 (xpsp_sp2_rtm ...)Would I have better performance updating them with the Intel's F6 disk drivers, considering I am not using AHCI nor RAID ?

Hi David,You are so right. I've seen quite a few posts missing the end story or simply stating "solved" without any description of the solution, and I find that disrespectful to those trying to help. Furthermore, other people's solution has sometimes helped me fix my own problem, saving me the trouble of posting for help. So, if I can do the same for others, why not ;-)Take care.

Hey, good advice. That's one thing I haven't thought of checking. They're all using UDMA-5 (ATA100), which looks OK to me since I am running the SATA drives in IDE mode.

They must be quite a team indeed. Most driver release involve fixes, but it does not mean that it will benefit your system specifically. You must read the release notes to know if they are beneficial to your own system or not.One thing I like about NVidia is the detailed description of what's in that release that they put in their release notes. Usually, a new release involve several fixes, but once in a while, it could simply fix a problem with a specific card for a specific game on a specific platform. If your video card is different, or you don't have that game, or are not running on that platform (Win XP vs Vista, 32 vs 64-bit, etc...), then there is no benefit for you to install those updated drivers.In the past, I've skipped quite a few updated drivers simply because they brought nothing new for my system. It's all in the release notes.Take care !

I don't think so. When the 8800 series cards first came out, NVidia released the R95 Forceware drivers that only supported the 8800 cards (no support for previous GF6 or GF7 cards).NVidia kept on providing updated drivers for previous models of video cards (FX, GF6, GF7) under the R90 Forceware drivers until they were all unified under the R162 drivers.I expect the GF9 drivers to evolve on their own for a little while and eventually be unified with GF6-7-8 under a future driver release from NVidia. In the meantime, I expect each group of video card to be provided with updated drivers under it specific Release number.R169 for the GF6-7-8R174 for the GF9Future R??? that will unified the GF9 with previous models until NVidia comes up with a new GPU and the cycle start all over again.I own a 8800GTX and I don't worry.Best regards,