CoolDude

Mandatory Airbus Sharklet advertisement:

Much appreciated. Are you also working on seated passengers support for the Fenix A321?

Fortunately, more than 5,000 people live in Chicago, IL so it doesn't require addon scenery. In fact it even used to be the MSFS default city.Also it's meaningful to me because the next President of the United States lives there. ;)

Yes, that makes perfect sense. I uninstalled FSWC because the installer didn't automatically create a new FSWC directory after I had changed the install path when installing. Thus, the uninstaller thought that the partition FSWC had been installed on was all FSWC content, which it deleted when uninstalled :(

Edit: sorry, wrong thread, ignore please

hmmm seems like it happened to me too, but I wasn't sure if FSWC was responsible. I installed FSWC into a directory that I didn't want it in, then I uninstalled it, and then when I tried to install it into the right place it said that it couldn't find FSX, and when I navigated to my FSX partition, the entire partition was empty. I've since reinstalled FSX and FSWC and it's working fine.I'm running Vista 32 bit with FSX Deluxe. FSX was/is installed on my G: partition, my OS is on my C: partition.

I'm not sure I'm completely understanding this then... I thought that the conveyor belt was like a treadmill, and that it would match the aircraft's speed precisely. If the plane was going at 150 knots at it's undercarriage, the belt would be going at 150 knots in the opposite direction, resulting in zero forward motion on the part of the plane overall. Zero forward motion wound result in no air over the wings, and no liftoff.

I have trouble believing that the test holds sway over the debate. Why was the aircraft in the test moving forward (the camera had to pan) if the conveyor belt was "matching" the plane's speed? If it was matching the plane's speed, then the plane should not have moved, no matter how much it accelerated. Zero movement would have meant zero airflow over the wings, resulting in no takeoff.

Use the Firefox web browser, keep Windows updated, and be intelligent in what you d/l and what files you open. If you do that, you don't really need a system-slowing antivirus. (this is, though, coming from a self-described computer geek...)

Did you botch the installation of the FSX water tweak? That's what my water looked like when I misspelled the name of the new water file.

Excellent work gentlemen, these shader hacks are doing some great things for the Flight Sim. I'll try out these new RGB values.

I'm running the same card and drivers, and have the same problem. It's pretty annoying.Until it's fixed, I'm not flying in rain or snow.

Hmmm I think that something is wrong with the new Water40.fx, because when I put it in I lose all my water. (there's no colour to it). When I use the original Water40.fx it all works. (running in DX10 mode)Apart from that, great job on the Water20.fxh! It looks awesome.

I see very little reason to believe that there would be any harmful effects for installing Acceleration over SP2. You can, after all, install Acceleration over SP1...

Is it possible to "fix" the default FSX models to make them VC-raindrop ready? Clearly, the FSX engine can support the animated bitmaps that are necessary for the VC raindrops...