Knight55

Hi,Thanks for the tip. I have assigned the front scroll wheel on the throttle to this function and it does work but I was looking for a permanent solution. Do the pilots in a real LearJet cockpit only see as much as is shown in the default eyepoint setting in FS9 virtual cockpit? What is the most realistic value for the eyepoint line in the aircraft configuration file for the LearJet?

Hi,I have been flying the default Learjet using the X52 joystick with throttle. I have noticed that when flying a steady course the plane does not want to fly level. It maintains altitude but it tilts slightly to the right as if I am turning right but it is actually flying straight. The joystick is centered and it is doing this while flying on auto pilot. Does anyone have any suggestions why this is happening? I also find that I need to adjust the seat height manually during landing as I don't see the runway with default height. I did find the place where I can adjust it in the aircraft file but I wanted to adjust it to a realistic level and was wondering what are the realistic values for the seat height setting? Thanks in advance for any responses.

Hi,I used to use the 19 setting but I tried the 21 setting based on a recommendation by someone on the net and some of the scenery such as hills and valleys became more detailed. I only have 2 add on airports but they are both freeware. I am also using the Real Environment Pro freeware. I am considering changing the setting to 20 to see if that will help with performance without reducing the image quality.

Hi,I am using FS2004 with the Ground Environment add-on. This is the only scenery add-on that I have installed besides additional airports. What should I set the TERRAIN_MAX_VERTEX_LEVEL to be? I have been using 21 as a setting but I am not sure if this is correct. Thanks in advance for the answers.

Hi,I am also using Ground Environment non pro edition and I am not getting any blurries with my system. My specs are as follows:Pentium 4 3.0 GHz HT Processor1 GB of PC 3200 Memory80 & 160 GB ATA 100 Hard DrivesATI Radeon X800XT 256MB AGP Video Card17" LCD Display running at 1280 x 1024 (native resolution)Below are the major modifications to my fs9.cfg:[DISPLAY]UPPER_FRAMERATE_LIMIT=20TEXTURE_BANDWIDTH_MULT=300RUNWAY_LIGHTS_SURFACE_SCALAR=.9RUNWAY_LIGHTS_VASI_SCALAR=.9RUNWAY_LIGHTS_APPROACH_SCALAR=.9RUNWAY_LIGHTS_STROBE_SCALAR=.9[TERRAIN]TERRAIN_ERROR_FACTOR=100.000000TERRAIN_MIN_DEM_AREA=10.000000TERRAIN_MAX_DEM_AREA=100.000000TERRAIN_MAX_VERTEX_LEVEL=21TERRAIN_TEXTURE_SIZE_EXP=8TERRAIN_AUTOGEN_DENSITY=5TERRAIN_USE_GRADIENT_MAP=1TERRAIN_EXTENDED_TEXTURES=1TERRAIN_DEFAULT_RADIUS=4.000000 (try first)TERRAIN_EXTENDED_RADIUS=4.000000 (try first)TERRAIN_EXTENDED_LEVELS=4 (try first)The 20 fps may seem slow as a number but after doing lots of testing I determined that I am able to get the most eye candy and frame rate stability with 20 fps while still retaining smoothness. If you try the above changes let me know how they work for you.

Hi. I only have one monitor on my setup. I was considering retarding the display slider but with only one monitor it shouldn't be necessary. I was trying some tweaks and noticed that with the following fs9.cfg changes I get the most smoothness and least micro stutter even at major airports.[DISPLAY]UPPER_FRAMERATE_LIMIT=20TEXTURE_BANDWIDTH_MULT=200[TERRAIN]TERRAIN_ERROR_FACTOR=100.000000TERRAIN_MIN_DEM_AREA=10.000000TERRAIN_MAX_DEM_AREA=100.000000TERRAIN_MAX_VERTEX_LEVEL=21TERRAIN_EXTENDED_TEXTURES=1TERRAIN_DEFAULT_RADIUS=4.000000TERRAIN_EXTENDED_RADIUS=4.000000TERRAIN_EXTENDED_LEVELS=4If I set the TEXTURE_BANDWITH_MULT to 400 the scenery can load faster but there is more micro stutter then there is with that line set to 200. I have a feeling that this line either specifies how much time or cycles are dedicated to the scenery and the rest gets set aside for the flight dynamics, ai traffic, and weather. I have read somewhere that this line may have to do with how much video card memory one has and it was stated that for a 256MB card it should be set to 200 and for 512MB card it should be set to 400. My PAN_RATE is set to 400 but I am not sure if that is good. I read somewhere that the PAN_RATE is related to the TEXTURE_BANDWIDTH_MULT line in that one is some kind of multiple of the other. I can get around 30 fps when flying but when an airport comes into view it drops to around 20 fps so I keep it at 20 so that I don't have to see the slow down on the screen. The above are just some things I found during my tweaking. If anyone has any suggestions or tips let me know. Thanks for all the help and all the responses.

Hi. Someone sent a reply to my mailbox regarding the above post but I accidently deleted it. If that person could resend it or post a message here I will be able to answer it. Thanks.

Hi. I am currently using an ATI X800 XT video card on a Pentium 4 3.0 GHz computer with 1 GB of memory. I was able to max out everything in the display section exluding the shadows and set my weather to 60 / 40 / 100 / Maximum with dxt3 clouds and I am able to get 20 fps even at big airports with Traffic 2005 set to 25%. The problem I am having is that I get micro stutters especially when looking down at low altitudes while in the air. When I set the target frame rate to unlimited it smooths itself out but it does jump around from 20 to 40+ fps per second depending on what I look at. The micro stutter is not so bad when looking to the sides but it gets pronounced when looking down. The higher the altitude the less micro sttuter occurs when looking down. What could be causing this micro stutter?

Hi,I was wondering what is the most realistic sight distance and cloud draw distance setting in FS2004? I have seen all kinds of opinions ranging anywhere from 60 miles sight distance / 40 mile cloud draw distance to all settings maxed out but am not sure what is realistic. I fly mainly in US, Canada, and Europe at altitudes as high as 35,000 feet and sometimes higher. Also what controls the sight distance? The reason I ask is because there is a setting in the FS9.cfg file that mentions maximum unlimited visibility and it is defaulting to around 96000 no matter what you set the sight distance to. Thanks for the replys.

Hi,The TEXTURE_MAX_LOAD line is controlled by the Global Max Texture Size slider in the Hardware section of the Display settings within the simulator. I believe it represents the maximum texture size that can be loaded by the simulator if it is available. The TextureMaxLoad line is not included in the default fs9.cfg file. It is related to the TEXTURE_BANDWIDTH_MULT line that is in this file. I believe it has to do with the number of textures that are loaded at one time. Maybe someone else will know more about this then me.

Hi,I am currently running fs2004 on a pc with the following specs:Pentium 4 3.0 GHz HT ProcessorASUS P4S800D-X Motherboard350 Watt Power Supply1024MB DDR MemoryATI X700 Pro AGP 8X 256MB Video Card80GB and 160GB ATA100 Hard DrivesDVD-ROM and DVD-RW DrivesWhen I configure the display settings to the "Ultra High" profiles with 25% Traffic and Mild weather changes I am able to get around 25 fps. I have been testing my frame rates flying around London's Heathrow airport and at the airport itself. I also have Traffic 2005 and Ground Environment installed. If I try to max out all the settings in the display section I am sometimes able to get around 20 fps but it fluctuates too much. I have tried all the tweaks that exist but it does not really help. I would like to be able to get between 25 - 30 fps with all the settings maxed out in the display section of simulator. I was considering upgrading my video card to the ATI X800XT AGP 256MB model. Will upgrading to this video card let me achieve the frame rates that I am looking for or do I have to upgrade to the whole computer including the motherboard, processor, and memory? Thanks in advance for all the advise.

This topic has been moved by the moderator of this forum. It can be found at:http://forums.avsim.net/dcboard.php?az=sho...&topic_id=25449

Hi,I was able to set the processor affinity using the Task Manager but it did not improve my performance. I did further checking and found that I have the Intel Pentium 4 3.0E GHz with 1MB cache which makes it a Prescott processor I believe. It is installed in an ASUS motherboard. I performed an experiment last night and overclocked the processor to 3.40 GHz by changing the FSB setting to 227 and left all the other settings including the memory timing settings at Auto. I was able to boot up successfully without any errors and ran FS2004 for a few minutes. I also monitored the cpu and case temps using the Asus monitor. The case temperature stayed at around 26 degrees celcius and the Processor peaked at close to 55 degrees celcius with the stock heatsink and fan. The speeds remained relatively constant the whole time. The idle cpu temp was around 45 degrees celcius. The typical idle temp when not overclocked is at around 40 degrees celcius. Are these numbers reasonable? I haven't ran any special tests yet? Is it enough to just increase the FSB speed and leave all the other settings at Auto or should I manually adjust the memory timings, etc? Is it necessary to upgrade the CPU cooler if the peak temperature with the stock setup will not go above 55 to 60 degrees?

Hi,I have a Pentium 4 3.0 GHz HT processor in my pc. I was wondering if anyone knows of any good processor affinity utilities that will temporarily change the affinity of all the services running so that you could put FS2004 on one logical processor and the rest of the services and applications on the other processor? Also does anyone know how much I can overclock this processor using stock cooling? Thanks in advance.

Hi,I performed a complete uninstall and reinstall of FS2004 and tried all kinds of settings with mixed results. I was experimenting with different driver versions to see how the simulator would perform but I wasn't sure which driver is the best. What would be the best driver and version number for the ATI Radeon X700 Pro card? If ATI is the best source should I install the Catalyst Control Center or a utility like ATI Tool? Is it okay to install the display driver only? I would prefer to not use the Control Center as it uses up resources if it is not necessary. Are the Omega drivers better then the ATI drivers? Thanks for all the replys.