Paul J

Yup: Once (assuming it passes memtest in this config) you can then dig up some timings from the overclocker websites and then manually tighten them, Memtesting and monitoring each stage. Let us know how it goes.

Yes - how for you can get before you're prompted to enter the key - I'm sorry 109 - I just don't remember. Someone else will have to jump in. I reckon it will be quicker than all the work involved in pulling the new mobo though. At the same time - you should also disconnect any other drives that you have installed, too. Make it as clean as you can. minimum memory, memtest, add a stick, memtest again - switch slots - memtest again - it's an awful long process.

Maxis is right on concerning the memory not being on the motherboard QVL It is entirely possible this is the cause of all of these memory errors. At the same time - they may be the cause of the issues that scannow is coming up with. However - before RMA'ing the mobo - do you have a spare drive kicking around that you can do a clean OS install on? Then run the MemTests again. This way you can verify that the OS is ok, and that the issues are not caused by problems with the OS, or with MSFS or drivers or anything else. (I am assuming here that you had replaced the mobo and the cpu, but used the original "C:\" OS/disk from the previous CPU/mobo? i.e. you didn't do a fresh install of the OS on a clean drive - right?)

Yeah - you're right, pgde: it's been a long time (sigh) and I immediately associated it with o'clocking the proc. It's what you get for quickly skimming through a post. . . Sorry.. However - all XMP does is set the memory to the on-stick rated speed and timing, so that it should be running at its correct speed, as well as setting up the right voltage for it. That doesn't check the memory for any defects, though - and that might be the case here (after reading 109's post again.) but it might also be the motherboard too. MemTest is best used to check the memory, and run two or three times, swapping the sticks around in between tests as well. https://www.techpowerup.com/memtest64/ pj

I may be wrong here, (someone PLEASE correct me if I am) but your siggy shows an Intel i5-12400 - I don't think it's overclockable (it's a locked chip) and and Intel shows max turbo as 4.4-gig. I might suggest manually setting it, but not XMP. I've always found that will cause "issues". Shoving the memory timing up will be ok. If you really want to clock it - go and get an i7-x. They can be pushed.

Good Morning! I'm a real weather user too: they seem to have it right (this time..) - but to the 170: I think you're right Nismo. I setup at Bowerman with wind at 220, 12.7 kts and did seven full-stop circuits. It seems to need just a tad less than one "bump" of up trim for take off. (There are two bumps at the rear end of the trim-wheel casing, looking to be about 1/2" or so apart, and I used this as a measure). The most successful method for me was :- at the right edge of 24, one notch of flap, holding full back, I smoothly pushed the throttle in, watching the tach and ASI build, expecting a lift-off at around 2000. Passing 1500 and 37/38, accelerating and still holding full up as she went through 38, I began to ease forward. Continuing to add power, but more slowly and applying left aileron as she passed 40, and the nose came closer to level she began a "quick-ish" left swing - correctable, but it was harsher and stronger than I reckon a 20 degree-12kts breeze should cause. This was consistent in each flight. The rudder (pedals) did effectively control the swing, but it did oscillate for most of the short rest of the run in spite of the already-soft, exponential rudder sensitivity setup. Power still going on - at about 1800 she was airborne and 2000 on the way to 2400 she was flying, and responding to rudder as expected to bring the aircraft directly onto the wind, and with good leveling aileron control. None of the take-offs ended badly, however - this was a 20 degree breeze, but the response was barely what I would consider "safe". Some beginnings of a swing are normal for almost every piston-engined tail dragger, but a minimal push and hold of the pedal will ordinarily hold it. As someone earlier said about "seat of the pants" feel in a sim - there isn't any, so it needs to be accounted for in the airfile, or whatever is used now. Considering the Carenado WACO's take-off issues - I would have expected that this issue would be done and gone. Thanks for your indulgence. pj

Waaall . . not to shabby... The only complaint is - the prop continues to spin after shutdown.. and it's much later! Seriously, though - It will do a 'careful' crosswind takeoff.. NismoRR is quite right it's horrible! Especially after flying his Kodiak and me flying the Beech. Anyway - I bought it, did three circuits at Bowerman with 20 knots at 20 degrees port crosswind. The second was better and I was able to get some figures during the third. Following that I did two test batches - both with the wind at 220 degrees - the first at 12kts and the second at 20.2kts. But it's gone bedtime here, so the figures and thoughts will come out tomorrow. pj

I gotta check out this 170, Nismo: it's been on my back-burner for a while, but I can't believe it's that bad, so I have to try it. Old tailwheel aeroplanes are often a b**** but I trained in the Chippie, and a licence in the Auster J1, so this is a bit of a challenge I suppose. . The thing is, since I fiddled with, and set the rudder sensitivity as I posted earlier - I have had no issues with most aircraft in handling most crosswinds - especially now the real weather seems to be working. The aileron/elevator curves are similar, with the Assistance options on Hard i.e. "Off". The upshot is that Howard's thread has prompted me to spend the last half an hour in the 152 and the RY Bonanza at Hoquiam KHQM with 250 deg & 20Kt crosswind and in fact - I had no issues with either a/c on take-off, with only minor bounciness on the approach with the G36. The rudder sensitivity is posted earlier, and it was very possible to push and hold some pressure on the leeward rudder without wandering all over the airfield, and a transition to a decent climbout on the rwy heading. I have to see where the problem lies. I must confess - I don't know the Cessna at all - don't even know if it has a tailwheel lock - which was at least a partial fix for me in the WACO's "learning experience". Back later.

Yep: exactly. That subtle "Seat of the Pants" is missing. StearmanD is right, too, though it's been improved greatly compared to when it was released. I'm ok with it now, actually (either the Arrow or RY's Bonanza) after trying to backtrack too fast, dragging a tip in a groundloop a coupla days ago! I do remember the Waco being released, though - as the tail came up - the nose swung 40 degrees left and full right rudder did nothing at all to correct it.

Naah... that's just getting the neutral centered on the crosshair, Al. I guess it accounts for my heavy left boot, being a limey. That spot will move slightly the instant you plant your foot on the pedals. In my case - they are home-made, without any centering spring, in the manner of the DH Chipmunk. The "secret", if I can call it that, has been through many years of (also) flying R/C aircraft: almost all of the radios used since about 1975 have incorporated the ability to set an exponential curve to the control - the central, horizontal-ish flat part giving small or little control surface movement - which is nice, and needed when on approach for landing, for eg, where you don't want a sensitive elevator, but at the same time, strongly increasing when easing nose up as the speed drops right before the wheels touch. Setting up a stall, or a spin, exponential allows one to smoothly work the elevator up to full - again as the speed falls away. All of this applies to the rudder. In the same light - I also do believe - and am astounded - that Asobo have so many issues when it comes to implementing the hundreds of basic features of aviation that we have all taken for granted in the past simulators., and this take-off unpredictability issue is just one of them.

This is the config that helped me most, Rocky: https://1drv.ms/u/s!AueVg7eVAeXMlUBqJmTobpIfhnyZ?e=ardy4Y Edit: (with Assistance set to Hard -> Off - all the way down) It allows a good amount of boot at taxy while allowing one to find a "hold point" to counter a cross-wind, and then to lessen that pressure as the speed builds. One of the issues I found is that ( I think) - some aircraft appear to have left and right brake pressure applied via the rudder pedals whilst taxying - yet others don't have this. It makes for a confusing appreciation of getting anything setup so that they all behave approximately the way one might expect. The other "pain" is that many airfields don't have a readily-visible windsock. I'm using r/w weather and feel that it works pretty well - also "Weather Preset Pro" on occasion, too. ATB. pj

Don't worry about it Remilton: there are many more - and more serious issues with this sim than TIR. I took a look at the Tobii website a minute ago - and they do support games - and including MSFS - even posting an in-flight video. If it is actually a free software - I shall download and try it. Nothing tried - nothing gained! https://gaming.tobii.com/games/microsoft-flight-simulator/ Uh-oh . . . . $229 US . . . . I think I love my TIR 🤑

You're very right Bob: it does a very good job, doesn't it? I've seen many folks echo that sentiment too, in the recent mess, and this is the second one that I've seen wherein another device was live at the same time..

Phew! Right now there's about 100 other flightsim guys (wives too!) - all breathing a great big sigh of relief!! What a lesson! I can just see the first question for the next person that has a TIR problem . . . 1). Do you have any other head or eye tracking device or software running on your PC? . . . . All the Best, pj

Changed the above slightly, Rem: it should read "If you clean out every camera for the yoke then you (should have) have fixed it." The sim should not have any button specifically assigned to pause a camera. Only TIR itself should have that assignment.

OK. When you configured one of the yoke's buttons - did you check all of the other on-screen yoke settings to see if that button was used elsewhere? The reason I'm asking is - that while F9 is not one of the default simulator keys (and should be ok) - if it is configured anywhere by accident - you have 101 keys (times # of cameras) to go through to check for a duplicate use. If you assign a yoke button - you have only maybe twenty x # of cameras. If you clean out every camera for the yoke then you (should have) have fixed it. The Mode section may be an issue. . https://1drv.ms/u/s!AueVg7eVAeXMlUGQze2OExa-5FyN?e=1xtWhQ

Yup - this is the stock cfg. Identical to mine. What pause key have you got configured ATM?

C:\Users\[your username]\AppData\Local\Packages\Microsoft.FlightSimulator_8wekyb3d8bbwe\LocalCache You may be correct Rem, - it could be some setting in the cfg, but I don't think so - that file doesn't appear to specify any or which specific keys have been configured to control the virtual 'pit camera.

Can you post your Cameras.cfg? Just the top two sections should suffice..

Good Morning! Yes - this is the "normal" way it happens Rem. You also mentioned noticing this on the previous page, but I omitted confirming it: sorry! Our assumption is that (as the screen viewpoint also changes at the same time) - there is another key/button - which is assigned "somewhere" - that causes that change. In my case - I found 2, maybe 3 "D"'s (right-red button, Saito yoke button #3 ) that were also set in one of the Camera (Mode?) settings. After I deleted them - the problem disappeared. Going back maybe five/six days prior to that fix, though - after coming out of the beta, (having 113Gig update), flying a couple of flights and thinking that the problem had been fixed, (because it appeared to be completely normal at that time) - I had selected "TIR OFF" with the in-flight "Arrow" camera, and then hit a Ctrl-something, to toggle an instrument view - a "Ctrl-'0' to '9'" or so, - a fixed, instrument view.. That worked normally, but - on re-enabling TIR in the Arrow screen again - it was broken, and went to center-screen!!! so I got rid of every "Ctrl" camera" assignment.. That fixed the Ctrl- issue, but now I was suddenly back to a broken TIR (again). I didn't know why, and still don't. So I went looking for another assignment of that "D" key in the Yoke's Camera settings - and found 2 or 3 of them. After deleting them - it has behaved perfectly.

Yes - and any momentary-contact switch on any controller will do . There's a small company down in Florida, called Desktop Aviator, and he's been producing small encoder pcb's that can be used for almost any control - or even replace any "professional" control that might be broken. Slider potentiometers: switches, pushbuttons: panels.. not expensive - kinda a 'handyman's heaven' operation. http://www.desktopaviator.com/

Crossed posts, Bob, but thank you! That was my initial thought - a conflicting control assignment - but Remilton says he has assigned three different keys - but the result is always the same. @ark It's the one inside TIR, Ark - which you probably do already: MS doesn't have a key for it, but it knows about the Yoke's keys - and if it has already got one (in this case - F9) - then a conflict exists, innasmuch as (I think) MSFS sees it as if TIR has gone - disappeared, and so it just center's the viewpoint. TIR only shuts off the signal. https://1drv.ms/u/s!AueVg7eVAeXMlTyFVITysy15_V71?e=sM70pz In the pic above - when the pause key is set in TIR, it asks for you to press the key you wish to assign: and assigns it. In choosing the yoke's "Joystick2: button - which MS sees as "D" (I think) - then there are probably no other buttons that are the same as Joystick2. I didn't have this issue until SU5, I guess, and I've seen it brought up in forums all over the place. My issue here, is remembering the process I used in fixing it. - being 77 one's memory gets shorter day by day. . . .(sigh)

Hmmph.. Beaten again! Time for someone smarter - or for you to talk with Zendesk, I'm afraid, Rem. You still have the bug that (I think) Bert Pieke reported and suggested a fix for - which is here below:- Try this. "TIR Workaround for now until Asobo fixes what they broke is to go into controls and set a key for " Toggle Head Tracking" - then when Track IR shuts off, you can turn it back on without having to go into the camera menu. The way it is now is if the Track IR loses signal, because you turn your head to far, walk away from PC , or hit F9 to make the image freeze, MSFS shuts Track IR down. " The 'shutting down' is what yours is doing.

As a test - would you mind going into TIR, and replace the existing (F9) button with one from the yoke - say a red Press-to-Talk button - something like that?

Do you have a yoke, Rem?