• Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About kjb

  • Rank

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
  • ICQ

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Prescott, AZ

Recent Profile Visitors

632 profile views
  1. I had some initial OOM problems with FSX:SE on Win10 32 bit. I need 32 bit to run some legacy hardware (an early edition TRC472 panel). After tweaking the OS and FSX:SE settings, it's running flawlessly with excellent frame rates. I had to give up a little on my preferred settings, but found a happy medium where it looks good and runs great on a system that was high end about five years ago.
  2. I'm trying to figure out the differences. I have a new computer running Win10 64 bit that runs FSX flawlessly at max settings including scenery LOD at 9.5 and high frame rates. I run it with a UHD TV for a monitor and FSX set to match. It looks great. This is my work computer. My old work computer is now my primary FSX system, running Win10 32 bit, which I need to run my TRC472 panel. Both have relatively cutting edge processors and comparable memory. The system running the 32 bit OS is plagued with OOM (out of memory) problems. If I run very low settings, it seems to be okay, but turning the settings up to something in the medium-high range means it will crash in under 20 minutes. I can torture test the 64 bit system all I want, for hours, and it's fine. The 32 bit system can't seem to handle much at all, which makes no sense to me. FSX is 32 bit, so the 64 bit OS shouldn't matter, but it does. I installed P3d v1.4 on the 32 bit system and it crashes even sooner than FSX. If I slew or fly at 160 kts or less with reduced settings, it crashes in a minute or so with the OOM error. I had the TRC472 panel hooked up to an old Windows Vista system, which was serviceable, but slow. It didn't seem to crash at all. I didn't expect these problems with the more recent computer. I've tried eliminating the background apps in Win10, increasing the page file, etc and I'm only making a little progress. FSX will run a bit longer, but it's going to crash before I can complete a two hour flight. Any ideas?
  3. kjb

    Photoreal scenery

    I've stuck with the USGS public domain photography because the others can't be bothered to reply to requests. I bought a subscription to GlobeXplorer and gathered small images to form a large one, and asked about permission to distribute for FS9. There was no response. I tried another source and again, they didn't respond to emails. At that point, I decided to stop sending them money and stick to areas that USGS covered. I haven't been impressed with the sales people at GlobeXplorer/AirPhotoUSA. They can't be bothered to respond, so I figure they don't want my money.
  4. I tried re-installing the SDK SP1 and the default.xml file was not in the Autogen SDK folder. When I copy it over, it doesn't load. If I load it manually I get an Open Error message "AceXML Parser Error: Autogen - line 2, col 0. HRESULT=0x83600fb7".GRRRRRRR!!! They don't make this easy.
  5. Luis, thank you! I really needed that information. Thanks for taking the time to put the tutorial together.I do have a question. I don't see anything about loading libraries and the annotator on my system has the button for libraries grayed out. The box below says 'MSXML error'. Any ideas?
  6. kjb

    Instant Scenery

    The generic T hangars aren't models contained in a scenery library. They're generic xml buildings. They get made and placed with a few lines of code. Most of the other non-autogen buildings you see are models that Instant Scenery can access.
  7. This one sure is easy to use for photo sceneries!
  8. kjb

    Does the tail wag the FS Dog?

    I would guess it's a business decision, expecting people to move on to the newer version. Sometimes things don't go as expected. I've tried FSX a few times, but spend 99% of my time with FS9. I also do freeware photo sceneries as a hobby and don't have any plans to do FSX development. I'm not trying to make money at it and don't see any reason to spend time on something I'm not going to fly. My 'market' is me and anyone else who happens to want the sceneries. If I was trying to make a living at it, the decision would be tougher.
  9. A flatten will just make the elevation flat, not eliminate autogen. Try using Sbuilder and putting in a grass land class polygon, with no autogen. That will get rid of the buildings and trees.
  10. Under the taxiway properties, select 'link type' and pick closed.
  11. It seemed to work when I tried it. The elevation appears to have stayed at the airport elevation even though I placed it lower.http://www.users.qwest.net/~burnskevin/laketest.JPGI placed two small lakes here. The airport flatten took precedent over the lake elevation.
  12. kjb

    Why is it so ugly?

  13. kjb

    high altitude takeoff

    A C172 at gross and 7000' is going to struggle. Density altitude could put the Cessna near its ceiling before it leaves the ground. You might try a lighter load or something turbocharged. Something like the default Mooney won't have any trouble climbing out of Flagstaff. Having said that, FS9 is a bit conservative on the C172 climb rate under those conditions. It's a dog at those altitudes, but not quite that bad.
  14. There is a Georender FS2002 version.See http://www.lagosim.com/default.asp?act=sch...100005〈=eng