NGXfanatic

What is the logic behind the CLB thrust during cruise? Is it there so there is more thrust in reserve in case of traffic incursions, i.e. TCAS warnings and resolutions or surprise ATC requests?

Looks like people are missing out on this post, and are only seeing the 2nd part http://forum.avsim.net/topic/422558-delta-airlines-777-200lr-kmsp-to-rjaa-part-2-warning-big-pictures/

Don't forget to view the 1st part of this journey: http://forum.avsim.net/topic/422548-delta-airlines-777-200lr-kmsp-to-rjaa-part-1-warning-big-pictures/

Yep! The scenery is Overland RJAA

You picked the perfect time to return to the hobby. FSX is going to what I call a Renaissance period, as some game changing products have been released: PMDG 777, Orbx Global, PFPX. The future will bring Orbx Global Vector, and what I think will be the most revolutionary product ever for FSX if it developer keeps it's promises, is Active Sky Next. Sometimes a break is needed. 3 years is pretty long, but I had a bit of a break from January to May this year, and even last year there were some months I never touched the sim. I suppose it was burnout, but also resignation that addon development had hit a dead end. Not so anymore, I'm happy to declare! I'm also looking to update my 3 year old system to the latest standard (Haswell), so that is another activity I have to look forward to.

Welcome back to part 2 of my trip log on this flight from KMSP to RJAA. A few hours into the cruise, things are peaceful and calm with just a slight crosswind pushing me from the north. Getting close to the point of descent, I marvel at the slowly receding sun as late afternoon approaches. Heading directly west on this point on the Daisy STAR, watching the Japanese coastline settle into view. Now flying south on the intercept leg to the ILS localizer capture, I follow ATC commands to slow to 220kts and descend to 4000ft. Having intercepted the localizer signal, I finally cross the beautiful coastline. Interesting fact: Published charts mandate the early extension of landing gear right at this point to prevent ice chunks from falling from the gear bays onto the populated areas in the approach flight path. I remember this rule from my 2011 "trip", and it must have something to do with long haul flights arriving from trips over the frigid Bering Sea east of Russia. RJAA has a set of parallel runways, so ATC has assigned a Japan Airlines 777 to arrive simultaneously! This is the small town of Yokoshibahikari. Gear down and keeping a steady speed of 160kts, in compliance with rules stating that all aircraft maintain that speed between 10nm and 4.8nm from the runway threshold. The region just before runway 34 is full of low hills. Very pretty. Since I'm now past the 4.0DME mark, I am allowed to extend final flaps 30 and slow to VAPP speed of 142kts as I attempt to stabilize the approach a minute before landing. Yes, I'm almost 5 kts below VREF, which is the no go limit for approach speeds in the 777. Reason: rapidly oscillating wind direction by the weather engine and using the autothrottle to control the speed, which is 777 SOP. This was totally unexpected, and a fault of the weather engine. Yep, good ole FSX limitations.... Next time I see "variable winds" in the briefing, I'm going to turn off the A/T to allow for better control. Shortly before touchdown, this is the southeast apron which is used for overflow parking. Tires smoking as the mains settle down, the time is 5:13pm local time. Spoilers extended and idle reverse thrust helping with the deceleration, we see the south end of Terminal 1, home to Japan's largest airline, All Nippon Airways. Also sharing this space are some codeshare partners, such as Etihad (seen here) and United Airlines. More of Terminal 1, with a glimpse at the north end of Terminal 1, which provides gates for the extensive Delta hub here in Tokyo, a base for the airline's Asian operations. Dusk is upon us, and the passengers on the left hand side are greeted by large welcome signage. I taxi on taxiway A for a quick jaunt to my waiting gate at Terminal 1. Delta is very popular I see! With the engines shutdown and cargo doors opened, the seat belt signs are turned off and I snap this quick picture of the nearby cargo apron, which is the busiest air freight hub in the country. "You don't have to go home, but you can't stay here." Here are the plots of my two flights from the U.S. to Tokyo, the 2011 flight as United Flight 881 as the topmost route, and this flight below. I use a payware Google Earth tracking module, FSEarth, to record my flight progress for analysis and to keep track of where I am anywhere in the virtual world. It's nice to be in the land of the rising sun, or really the setting sun with my late afternoon arrival. Real route was 11 hours 36 minutes, I managed 11 hours 44 minutes. Fuel burn was a lot more than I expected, PFPX planned for 27,885lbs, actual amount remaining was 19,500lbs. There are two possible reasons for this: headwinds were a little stronger later in the flight and I also changed the cost index from 60 to 120 an hour into cruise to make up for the late departure. I still need more experience with PFPX, but I do hope that once some time passes we will benefit from some advanced fuel planning tutorials and a better PFPX aircraft profile. Fuel planning is a complex subject of study in itself, as is flight dispatching, but I'm learning more everyday. I want to thank NickN for pointing out an excellent freeware landclass file for Japan on his Simforums forum: http://www.simforums.com/forums/japan-freeware-landclass-gex-asa-users_topic44729.html It has made a noticeable improvement to an otherwise poor representation of the area in FSX. Well, I have now completed my 3rd long haul in the PMDG 777-200LR, and I'm starting to get accustomed to the ins and outs of the big bird. Even without FS2crew to assist in the workload, I feel pretty comfortable flying this thing by myself. Thanks for sticking with me though this rather lengthy report. It's time to rest for about 2 days, and I'll return to the cockpit to continue with the rest of this flight. Yes, Flight 621 is not really complete because the final destination is Singapore Changi Airport, a 6 hour flight! I'm looking forward to a continuation of my tour of Asia, and it's nice to break free from my routine of FSX flights in the U.S. and Europe. If there is a take away from the availability of high quality study sims of long haul transports like the PMDG 777, the user should take the opportunity to visit more far away places never seen before. I intend to do just that. Thanks for the views!

I haven't flown the NGX since the T7, but unlike past purchases where I basically "disown" the older addon, I am positive I will fly her again in the future. I love the 777 and all, but there's no doubt in my mind that the NG is more of a pilot's plane. There is a lot of hand holding in the 777 and she's very easy to fly, almost too easy. The NG felt more like a cessna, you really felt like you had a connection to the machine.

Hi folks. As alluded to in my last diary, OMDB to KATL part 2, I have taken on a slightly shorter route this time, flying somewhere new for a change. I was considering a run to Europe or Australia, but as I have only been to East Asia only once before in FSX, I decided to visit Japan. This is a real route served by Delta on the LR, as Flight 621. Having been to Tokyo as a PMDG United 747 back in 2011, shortly before the devastating tsunami, I wanted to see how this flight compares to the 747 route I flew from KORD in January 2011. Delta Flight 621 from KMSP(Minneapolis-Saint Paul International Airport) to RJAA (Narita International Airport) is a 11 hour 36 minute flight according to the Flightaware record of the flight I simulated: http://flightaware.com/live/flight/DAL621/history/20130923/2000Z/KMSP/RJAA Departure time is scheduled for 3:00pm Minneapolis time, and arrival into Tokyo is expected to be 4:38pm local Tokyo time. SID is the MSP6 from runway 12R, STAR is the Daisy RNAV to runway 34L. Cost Index is 60, and Flaps 15 is the norm for aircraft with my level of payload an fuel and the short 9988ft runway. Without access to a proper takeoff calculator, I use full fixed takeoff thrust and a guesstimate of 38 degrees assumed temp for a slight derate. After receiving the paperwork from the dispatch team at PFPX, I study the expected weather and flight path to see if ETOPS is necessary. Because I am always at least 60 minutes away from a suitable diversion airfield, the nomination of ETOPS alternate airports and planning is not necessary. Winds are mostly crosswinds/tailwinds for the first half of the route, shifting to a slight headwind later in the flight. I learn that this is not like a traditional oceanic crossing over the Atlantic where the crew has to contend with strong headwinds from the jetstream. After some careful planning and research of the expected route, I proceed to the waiting aircraft. Here, I receive the paperwork from dispatch. I have all the figures I need for fuel/payload planning in an easy to read format, and I determine that I am within takeoff and landing weight limits. This is a Delta specific PFPX OFP, it even includes the exact reserve fuel figure I need to plug into the FMC! This is the route plotted on the PFPX world map. As we can see, this route will take us on a northwest trajectory over the U.S./Canadian border passing Winnipeg, the Northwest Territories, Central Alaska, over the Bering Sea and finally along the eastern shoreline of Japan. If you look closely, you will see a series of circles following my entire path. If there was a break in any of those circles, I would be required to file the route as an ETOPS flightplan and plan for any potential diversions to an airport no further than 120 minutes from my position over any area where a break in the circles occurs. This is not the best explanation, but that is the basic theory of ETOPS planning in PFPX. With the 777LR, an understanding of ETOPS procedures is mandatory. At gate G4 at KMSP, and you can see this is one of Delta Airlines' main hubs. Lots of Embraer EMB-170/175s operated by Delta's regional subsidiaries, Compass Airlines and Shuttle America, are seen at Terminal G. This particular concourse is where International flights operate. Please note this is the default scenery, but I am using an enhanced AFCAD by noted freeware scenery contributor Jim Viles, which can be found in the AVSIM library. After an on time pushback, I proceed along taxiway B to one of the three runways utilized for departures, 12R. Notice the lineup to runway 12L on my right. FSX AI is not very smart, and with arrival traffic as far away as 8 NM from touchdown, ATC forces the departure traffic to wait. Not very realistic, but what can you do..... I follow company traffic, a Delta A330 on it's way to EHAM. Parking brake set on the taxiway, I patiently wait as number 2 for departure, while a Sun Country 737-800 arrives. This small low cost airline is headquartered in Minneapolis and serves a wide variety of destinations from the remote Humphrey terminal between runway 12R and 17. As the Sun Country 737 flares above the piano keys, the famous Mall of America is seen just slightly right of center in the frame. The Amsterdam bound flight roaring down the runway, I am instructed by ATC to line up and wait so I proceed with the before takeoff checklist. Takeoff thrust is applied and I begin the takeoff roll. Time is 3:29pm, about 21 minutes after engine startup. Rotation! Passing over the intricate layout of nearby roads and highways and river situated to the south of the airport. Lakes aplenty here in the Twin City area. I am instructed to maintain 090 degrees and to climb to 12,000ft. In the distance is the skyline of one of the Twin Cities, Minneapolis. St. Paul Downtown Holman Field is seen just off my wingtip, as I make the sharp turn north to follow ATC vectors of 360 degrees awaiting clearance to the first VOR waypoint, BRD. The other "twin", St. Paul, is a stone throw away from Holman Field. Passing 18,000ft, the transition altitude in the United States, I set the altimeter setting to STD and shut off the external lights (landing, runway turnoff, and wing), flying parallel to Interstate 35. Near the U.S./Canadian border, below is the Red Lake. After some time of flying over nothing but lakes and flatland, the bustling city of Winnipeg greets me, as I am now in Canadian airspace. At the initial cruise level of FL320, with a nice 40 kt tailwind and a nice variety of clouds to keep me company, approaching the YQD VOR in Manitoba Canada. A land of many lakes, reservoirs, and rivers, the Canadian province of Saskatchewan lies beneath in this shot. Enjoying the view of the sun, which I'm chasing on this westward bound route. A nice solid overcast, that once elusive treat that I am able to enjoy more frequently because of improvements in my weather program, Active Sky 2012. This is part 1 of a 2 part series. On the following post, I will continue in the cruise on to the decent and arrival into Narita International. See you then.

Sorry to be a pest, but I just had an idea. If the crew has a long taxi after landing, don't they delay starting the APU to avoid wasting fuel? If so, could an option be added to allow the user put on the APU at their own discretion?

Hey Idaho, I remember seeing you over at NickN's forum when I was deciding on my current system in 2010, I chose the same RAM: http://forum.avsim.net/topic/282261-new-i7-build-960-or-930/ How time flies, right? This system is still a beast, considering it's age, but I do need to upgrade as I missed my normal "every 2 year" upgrade cycle. I'm afraid the Archon SB-E x2 is not going to fit my Antec 900 case. I really want to avoid getting a new case, unless I can find proof that this case is detrimental to the airflow to the new CPU. I think I'll try keeping my old Thermalright cooler initially, I'll see what I can find that looks like it will fit.

Hi Kyle, anyone else here following my indecision......I found an excellent link from the original FSX guru, NickN which ties in perfectly to what I was looking for in terms of what the hardware scene is like presently and the best choice out there for FSX: http://www.simforums.com/forums/the-fsx-computer-system-the-bible-by-nickn_topic46211.html I can't believe I didn't think of him first when I started this post, as I have followed his advice religiously over the years, but I figured he was not a frequent contributor anymore, especially since it's been argued that his opinions and tweaks are outdated what with faster hardware and newer tweaks from *******/Bojote and others here. I'm excited to know he is still at it, and in a nutshell, what he suggests as a great baseline system ties in with what some folks have said here. Consequently, his ideal system consists of the Haswell 4770k, an Asus mobo (anything over $180), 8 gigs RAM, and the Nvidia 780 GPU, which are exactly the specs I was beginning to figure out on my own is the best system for the buck! This post is just what I needed all along, and if anyone else here feels they are rusty when it comes to the relation between hardware and FSX, this post is pure gold. I just have to decide on the mobo, the ram, and which brand 780 gpu. Also, should I reuse my CPU cooler? It's a 1366 design, but I think Anthony here mentioned in one of the links above that 1366 and 1150 socket coolers are interchangeable. But even so, is my cooler adequate? It's a Thermalright U120extreme 120mm, and is not produced anymore.

"You could also say that when it comes to FPS in FSX, Haswell @ 4.30GHz = IvyBridge @ 4.77GHz = SandyBridge-E @ 5.02GHz." Thanks for those links! That line I quote here from the 2nd link is exactly the comparison I was looking for. I think I can finally say that Haswell is the CPU for me. I appreciate your assistance Ant.

Hey Howell, you have the same exact CPU setup as me, pretty cool. I hear what you are saying about FSX not using all the CPU, but that has been the case for as long as FSX/FS9 has been around, especially since FSX doesn't not take advantage off all the cores. With that said, FSX still benefits from the raw horsepower of the CPU, so the 20% or so improvement in migrating from the 930 to 4770k will undoubtedly help in my situation. I average about 30 fps, even with 100% AI, at maybe 70% of the places I fly to in the PMDG NGX/777. But it's the 30% of my time in the sim, when I'm at heavy payware airports with cloudy skies and I see my frames dip to the low teens with slight stuttering, that makes the 20% improvement in cpu performance the most important to me. I notice the change when I gain 1 or 2 fps, it's amazing how it makes a world of difference when frames are that low. It means I don't have to reduce the sliders on my AI traffic, which basically is the only setting I "trim" when I fly into frame intensive areas. Otherwise, my sliders in the graphics settings are reasonable and remain consistent whenever I use FSX: I always fly with dense autogen and extremely dense scenery complexity and cloud draw at 60 miles. I can imagine that with the new cpu, I could nudge up the autogen to very dense permanently, and increase cloud density. And maybe I dont' have to worry about reducing AI density to 60% at heavy payware airports. So many possibilities await, because I will have more room to play with with the added frames, even if it's not much, because every frame counts in FSX. I appreciate the advice about setting up a networked computer, as I have read a lot about it here in the forums. If I had an extra laptop around, sure I'd probably do it, and I'm sure it would help a little. But my mind is made up, I'm getting a new CPU/mobo/RAM/GPU, it's just a matter of deciding between SB and Haswell. The more I read about Haswell, the more depressed I get. I mean, I know I'm probably going with Haswell as it is clock for clock faster than SB, but I was hoping for a real substantial improvement over the 3 year old SB. Intel really have let the gaming/FSX enthusiast crowd down. Without AMD as a competitor, and in this new Post PC age where laptops/tablets rule and even consoles have taken a bite out of the enthusiast PC market, I think we have reached the end as far as the once exciting PC hardware race is concerned. Haswell is really all about efficiency, and geared towards the laptop crowd. This is not the chip platform I was looking forward to upgrading to 3 years ago.

Yup, small world indeed. There are only a limited number of super long range routes out there for the -LR, or so it appears, so that may explain the coincidence! Have fun!

I don't know what your FSX settings are, your budget, or if you are or aren't happy with your performance, but I will say that overclocking will make your system feel brand new. I would read up on overclocking first, and if you are comfortable, give it a try and see if it makes a significant improvement in your sim or other games. My overclocked almost 4 year old system, from stock 2.8 to 4.2 ghz, still feels very sprightly, and I have no immediate need to upgrade. But with all the new high fidelity addons, and my insistence to run 100% AI traffic, I am noticing the toll to my frames, so I feel an upgrade is in order.

Good deal! I understand how complex your simulations are, and that there is only so much you can do as you have to cater to so many users all of which have their own favorite airline or SOP to follow. I just really think having the flexibility to further customize some settings in the .ini file helps the more advanced users get what they want without complicating the flows already scripted into the module. If anyone can figure out a way to do this, you can!

Folks, I have decided to fly the KMSP to RJAA route as Delta Flight 621. I am currently running through the preflight checks, and will make sure to take plenty of snaps along the way during the 11 hour 36 minute trip! See you soon!

I am a long time TrackIR 4 Pro user, and I'm very happy with the hardware. I have always used the TrackIRv4 program when using FSX, but I understand there is a TrackIRv5 app as well. I decided to give v5 a try, because I get some occasional crashes with v4, or sometimes the head movement goes haywire and I'm forced to restart the program. I was curious to see if v5 offered any benefit, but when I tried it out I found that I missed some things I enjoyed with the older program, specifically: 1. For some reason if I paused trackir with EZCA on, I lost the ability to use my joystick's hatswitch to pan around the cockpit. I refuse to use TrackIR for the entire session, and I must have access to my joystick's pan when I pause Trackir tracking. 2. Even though I copied over my v4 settings as closely as I could, including the "optimized flight" profile I love, I found head movement a lot faster, unpleasantly so. I know I could play around with the smoothness settings, but because of the above hatswitch issue, I grew impatient and gave up. I have since returned to v4's GUI. But I have to know, are any Trackir 4 Pro users using the v5 GUI when using FSX, and why? Is the program more stable, and are there settings I missed that I need to adjust?

Hi Bryan, I had posted the following in the button control sub forum, but the topic had zero views. It looks like everyone visits the voice control forum, so please excuse me as I paste my topic here: Knowing that you are currently working on this, I wanted to add some of what I'd like to see implemented. As a long time customer, I expect most of the same features that have been in past products, and I am only adding items here that I have not seen included in the PMDG NGX module. I understand that SOP is different among the world's carriers and you are targeting the "average" SOP of all the carriers for your target audience, but I am hoping that anything that deviates from the SOP you are modeling can be selected by the user. Much like the ability for U.S. users to enable landing lights to come on at 18,000ft in the NGX via a simple edit in an .ini file. - Wing lights. I think many carriers put them on during runway entry/off at runway exit. - Runway turnoff lights?. I have seen some folks say that these come on with the landing lights at 10,000ft (or 18,000 ft in the U.S.) to help other traffic see the 777 in the terminal area. The NGX had them come on only during the landing phase. - Have the copilot select ground air conditioning on gate arrival after engine shutdown. I'm not sure if this was supposed to work in the NGX, but I could never get it working as it only connected the GPU. I wonder if it was not allowed because the user may opt to use the air start cart instead? Anyhow, it's kind of strange to pull up that screen after engine shutdown to add ground air when your module already correctly added ground power. - Copilot select the correct flaps up bug on the PFD - this is wholly dependent on what the PMDG SDK allows of course, but I hope you can work out a solution. Sorry to bug you about it again, I just wanted to make sure it's on your to do list ^_^ I don't mean to dictate what features should be on by default in the final product, I just want the flexibility to enable some of these or other customer specific settings easily in the .ini file without cluttering the "script" or adding undue complexity for others, the majority of which may not use these region specific settings. Anyhow, I thought now is the best time to speak, or hold my peace. Perhaps others here can add features they think would add value to the final product.

I understand Howell's take on gaining performance by offloading some apps, like weather programs, to a separate computer. In a way, that is similar to something we all wished FSX did natively: offloading more tasks to the video card to take the load of the CPU. It makes perfect sense, and of course it will help. But how much benefit would one get? Not as much as a new CPU, and only if the CPU is decidedly more faster than the one it is replacing. And based on the passmark benchmarks cited earlier, a CPU upgrade is justified to me because in terms of raw speed, the replacement (4770k) is about twice as fast as my original (930). No way I'd get the same performance improvement if I moved Active Sky 2012 or some other small ancillary programs I need for FSX to a networked computer. I don't have proof, but come on, it seems like a no brainer which approach is better. I don't have access to a cheap old computer, and I don't want the hassle of starting up another desktop/laptop every time I want to fly for marginal benefits. And I said it before, part of the reason I want to upgrade is because I don't want to take the chance that these 3 1/2 year old parts may die in the near future. I know most PCs can last 5 years or so, but again, I'm not comfortable taking the chance, and I can still get a decent amount of money if I sell the parts on eBay. John's suggestion to wait for Black Friday sales sounds like a great idea. Have their traditionally been good sales by Amazon or Newegg on computer parts at that time?

Sounds like Haswell at 4.4-4.5 is basically the same or better performance as 4.8ghz SB, with the added benefits of more modern features like PCI-E 3.0 and others. As long as it's reasonable to expect at least 4.4ghz on an overclock with a decent aftermarket cooler, which I always spring for, that's all I need to know to help me make my final decision. Yeah, I'm not particularly concerned about a higher temp relative to the SB having an impact on the cpu lifespan, as I have overclocked my past 2 chips and have never had one die on me prematurely. I have read a lot on the subject of overclocking and understand that voltages outside the recommended limits are detrimental, and it's nice to know that is the leading cause of "fried" chips, not high temps, as FSX and other real world applications will never reach the sustained high temps found when running overclocking tools like OCCT, IBT, or the like. I have a nice long haul to fly now in the PMDG 777 from KMSP to RJAA, but the long cruise will give me the opportunity to play around with potential component choices on Newegg. I hope to spend no more than $800 total on the new build after selling off my old parts!

Hey Anthony, thanks for the followup. I am aware now of the potential for issues because of old driver bits, but the way I see things it won't hurt to try. If down the line I notice bad behavior, I will then go the clean install route. Does the Haswell top out about 4.4-4.5ghz? From what I have gathered, 4.8 at a minimum seemed the norm for SB, but that is anecdotal. I am a little concerned with reports that Haswell is running hotter than SB at the same or slightly better performance, even if we try to do an apples to apples comparison with a 4.5 Haswell vs. a 4.8 Sandy Bridge. I have to wonder what that means for the chip's lifespan. Folks really seem to love SB, and are much less than enthused with Intel's offerings since SB. It seems reflected in the parity of prices between the 2600k and 4770k, I won't lie, that alone makes it hard for me to make up my mind. Also, I have seen the reports here alluding to the "chip lottery" with Haswell: http://forum.avsim.net/topic/416434-do-you-have-a-good-haswell-i7-4770k-how-to-tell/

Hey Dylan, great minds think alike? I still have some researching to do, I'm really interested in the in place install, but deep inside I feel like it's not right somehow, as it's been ingrained in me that new hardware requires a clean sweep of the OS. But the clean install is very painful for me, especially since I have everything setup just the way I like it, and it took months to get to this point. I don't see how dropping the hard drives into the new system wouldn't work, there must be a way to load the new hardware drivers on a memory stick or something to get just the drivers replaced after the hardware swap. I still need to do my homework, but this kind of thing happens all the time in the corporate world, where workers' data is seamlessly transferred to new desktops, I just need to read up on the options and become comfortable with that approach. But it won't be the end of the world if I was forced to start from scratch. After some reading up on Haswell, I'm a little disappointed in the lack of progress Intel has made in performance relative to earlier generation chips. The consensus among the techie crowd is that Intel has become lazy as AMD is basically no longer a competitor in the high end/enthusiast hardware space and that Sandy Bridge was really the last great Intel chip that offered noticeable improvement over it's predecessors. IB and Haswell offer some improvements of course, but not as much as if AMD was still in the race. Integrated graphics? Who the heck needs that in this day and age, seems like it's geared to the laptop crowd. Speaking of laptops, it seems like Intel is prioritizing reducing power consumption over performance gains. Am I correct in my assumption? Anyway, it still makes more sense to go with Haswell over Sandy Bridge, even though SB seems like a better value/overclocker. As most people have said, clock for clock it's a faster chip and if I'm going to be using this build for the new few years, why not go with the newer spec versus a years old architecture?

I want to stay within $800-$1000 for the total upgrade. Now that you mention it, it would see be a shame to settle for a SB now that the brand new Haswell architecture is out, and it appears the prices are very comparable. I saw on Newegg that the SB chip I wanted, the 2600k, is the exact same price as the 4770k! I thought the prices would go down, which was part of the reason I was delaying my upgrade. So it would be foolish not to go for the newer tech, especially since I will be living with this system for the next 2-3 years. Didn't now Haswell doesn't oc like the SB, but I did know the IB doesn't oc as easy as SB, due to the IB having a subpar thermal design. I had pretty much ruled IB out of the running, and with the race now between SB and Haswell, looks like Haswell is in the lead! Thanks for the birthday wishes, and I especially value the Haswell advice. Those passmark scores are quite persuasive, and while I don't hold too much value to benchmarks as actual application performance under real world conditions is different, it's hard to argue with the drastic doubling in score. That certainly convinces me that it's time to stop sitting on the fence and just upgrade to the 4770k. I still have to price everything out, but I feel like I will spend the same amount of money on the Haswell build as I would the SB build. Is there anything really different between the two platforms in terms of memory config or mobo standards? I'm seeing some warnings about how the chip responds to overclocking, is it worse than IB? Regarding a clean install, I have a feeling it's the best option, but I would still like to try adding the hard drives intact to the new build, if it doesn't work I am fine with the clean install. Anyways, I still have lots of reading up to do on Haswell vs SB and I thank you for your advice.

Well said David. This mirrors my thoughts exactly, because if v2.0 or later iterations lead to demonstrably better performance AND visuals, and users mass migrate to the platform, PMDG and other high profile developers would be shooting themselves in the foot if they stick to their no P3D stance. When money is involved, any problem can be resolved. PMDG are very business savvy, and I'm sure if a new P3D revolution takes foot, they will monitor the development and keep their options open.