Gottedammerung

Haven't had time to read all the other posts, so forgive me if I'm covering old ground.Personally, I've found it's a mixed bag. I've found that RW aircraft are surprisingly difficult to throw around. I suppose it's a bit like driving without power assist when you're used to it. So that's the first thing. Then there's the sense of movement, obviously. I suppose you'd say FS aircraft are much easier, but I'll tell you one thing I was surprised by - how much easier in real life landing is. I suspect it's becasue your field of view is so much better, and your spacial awareness so much keener. I find FS quite a very poor substitute in that respect. But I do think flying FS made flying for real much easier. You just know what to do instinctively, and in that respect, I think they are similar.

They do sound good. I'll look forward to spending a fortune on them, like I've spent a fortune on all the rest.:)

THose SSDs look really interesting. I'm assuming they will just go into any modern board.I had a lot of problems with my machine yesterday, and, after various failed attempts to get vista onto my machine, ended up removing the RAID) setup and fdisking all three drives. I put FSX on and tried it out, and was disappointed to find I was getting even less framerates than before, but then I remembered I'd not put SP1 or 2 on (SP2 being the crucial one, as it allows FSX to see more than 1 gig of RAM - from memory). ANyway, after I'd put them on, I was getting framerates in the mid to top 20s. Success.Seems to me it's right what I've read about RAID being no good for FSX.Of course, I then got an out of memory fail after about ten minutes of flying, so I'm off persuing that one. Isn;t that just life? Or FSX life, at any rate...All the bestPhil

I've had it pretty well tuned with all the things you mention. I have animations turned off, as with bloom and DX10 preview I have autogen set midway, and traffic prettywell none existance. Clouds are about midway. Everything else is full.I'm also running UTX and Flight Enviroment X, and other than a few airfields and AC, that's it for addons.I'm wondering now about RAID. I have RAID 0, but I'm just reinstalling Vista now after a non FSX problem, and am thinking of turning it off. I'm about to search for some RAID info.All the best.

Thanks for that. I have a quad core Intel Q6600 at 2.40 Ghtz (from memory), 4 gigs Ram and a Geforce 9800 GT. I should also have stated that while I get a low frame rate, the thing that makes FSX a frustrating experience is the stutters, which seem to me related to disk activity. Framerates can drop as low as 6 at times, but tend to settle around 12. Though sometimes, like yesterday, I just lose faith with it. I was coming in to land, and just before touchdown got a series of stutters which threw me off, and I ended up dumped on the tarmac with smashed undercarriage. Again, many thanks

I've got an Asus P5N-E SLI board, with two HDDs precofigured with Nvidia fastraid (Raid 0, I assume). The performance in all my games is stunning, except for FSX where, maxed out except for autogen (medium) and traffic (almost non-existant) I'm getting about 10-15 FPS in not very populated areas. I've tried dropping the sliders right back, and get no noticable difference in FPS. I heard that RAID is no good for FSX, though I can't bear the thought of remastering the PC, possibly taking the raid controller out and going to simple SCSI drives. I bought a new HDD, though, and am installing it as I write. What I want to know is, should I install FSX again on the new drive (which I think will not be part of the RAID setup - if disk manager is anything to go by)? Will this make a difference, as I read a few post that suggest FSX on its own drive is better? Or is the fact that there's a raid setup make no difference?Thanks in advance

I'd really like to get the unreal aviation autogyro to work in FSX, and it does except for the VC cockpit, which lacks texture and gagues. I seem to remember there was a way of getting FS9 gagues to show up in FSX (which I can no longer find), but is there a way of importing a texture?Help on both issues would be greatly appreciated.All the best

From what I understand, though, the problem is that the VC's have glass and cockpit features, and an alpha layer. I believe it it the way the alpha layer is saved which affects the opacity of the cockpit. But, with a VC, you have to first find the correct texture bitmap (quite often they are not obviously named, nor will display as a thumbnail, then edit the alpha layer of that bitmap, then save it as a certain format (which off the top of my head, I cannot remember).And do it for side windows and back windows as well. All a lot of work, and unecessary, really, when you think, the majority of them used to work before SP2 or acceleration.All very frustrating.

Yes, I came to the same conclusion.It's a shame, but I've gone back to SP1. I'm good with photoshop, but the amount of time it will take me just to find out what I need to specifically do with the alpha textures, how to save then etc, puts me off embraking on it. So like I said, I just reverted to SP1.What's going on with the developers? Who in their right minds would affect this chance from sp1 to sp2, making a whole host of AC unflyable? Ridiculous, if you ask me.But thanks for the input, all.Oh, BTW, I haven;t noticed any FPS change since reverting to SP1. If anything, it seems to make it a whole lot better in that I can fly more AC. One thing I did notice, though, was that the AC images in the menu were jumbled up, which is slightly annoying.

My word. That's great. Many thanks.All the bestPhil

I'm getting mighty ticked off that half my addon aircraft, enen those that say they are Aceeleration friendly, display black VC glass. I finally got the Wigla for FSX, one of my favourite little AC, and can I use it - no.Apart from the gripe about making SP2 affect the alpha channel so ac that previously worked no longer do (great move), does anyone know if there is a fix for it, other than editing the alpha channels of each AC?Can I simply unistall SP2, and if so, will it return functionality, and what will I lose.Many thanksPhil

Thanks for that, much appreciated.

So is that the same for FS Global? I always assumed there were pretty big files, as there are three DVDs worth of files to install. Also, when you say the folders must be activated in the scenery.cfg, does selecting them in the addon scenery menu do the same job?Thanks for the help.

I'm trying to install FS9 onto a vista machine, but my addon terrain mesh FSGlobal SE won;t install (Vista, I expect). I've copied my old XP install across and overwritten the whole install, and it works, but it seems the terrain mesh is the old FS9 and not the Ultimate terrain mesh. Where are the terrain mesh files, and anyone any ideas why they don;t seem to be copied over, or work once they are?I had this problem a while back when I was copying over an install to a new drive. Then I simply reinstalled the FSGlobal, but that isn't an option now. Oh all the addon scenery seems to be added and selected.I did try this over on the scenery design board, but it seems pretty slow, and no definitive answer.Many thanks.

Sorry, yes, I was at work and relying on memory. It isn;t UT, as you so rightly point out, but FS Global.Do you know where that might be installed?

I'm trying to install FS9 onto a vista machine, but my addon terrain mesh (utimate terrain)won;t install (Vista, I expect). I've copied my old XP install across and overwritten the whole install, and it works, but it seems the terrain mesh is the old FS9 and not the Ultimate terrain mesh. Where are the terrain mesh files, and anyone any ideas why they don;t seem to be copied over (I coppied the entire directory, and all the addon scenery seems to be added and selected)?

Wow, so am I right in thinking that the majority of buildings will not cast shadows? My heart sinks. Shadows really create a realistic atmosphere, in my opinion. There's nothing like an evening flight with that lovely misty light, and long shadows being cast as the sun sinks.I'm glum now.Firehawk, thanks for that link, much appreciated.

Thanks for that. I haven;t got time to try it tonight, but I'll try first thing tomorrow.

I most certainly do, up one step from top, both sliders.

I really think the ground shadows cast from buildings really sets the scene for me, but I don;t seem to have them, even though I have "Scenery Casts Shadows" checked. I have a Geforce 9600 GT, with Vista. FSX is fatched to SP2, and I also have UTX, but no matter how much I check it and uncheck it, in both FSX and UT, I can;t get them. Anyone got any ideas?

Hi,I just tried it with sliders set as above, flew around NYC, and got an average of about 7.5 FPS.That's way below the 20 or so for a similar rig. Any ideas where I should start?

Thanks for that, chaps. I don;t know if I'll get any time to do any comparisons with the setup there before Monday. I'll also check on the MB setup. I had another look last night and couldn;t see anything. But I don;t know if there's some separate utilities on the MB disk that need installing. Roll on Monday when the kids are back at school.Once again, many thanks.

Thanks for that, much appreciated.It isn;t a standard machine - made up at the local comp shop. What other info do you want?Here's some stuff I forgot to mention:I'm running UTX Europe, and have tried disabling it, but it made no difference.I'm running Vista 32 bit.It was the first game on the machine - fresh install on virgin drive. Again, many thanks for the input, and tell me what else you need to know.All the best

Thanks for that. I get 5.1 on everything except the graphics card, which is 5.9.I know my board and card are clockable, but I was hoping I woudn;t need to do that, being happy with good visuals at anything around the 20fps mark. But the way it is now is ridiculous.

Sorry, forgot to metion the Q6600 was rated at 240 Mhz (from memory).