Ramjett

Quasi, It sounds to me, in my limited experience, that something that was installed as a part of the scenery, deleted something that was default to FS9. I've looked at my FS9 Scenery.cfg before and most of the lower numbered entries have been default. My addon areas are usually 3 digits long. I would look in your original FS2004 install disks (you'll have to open several cab files to locate it) and see if you can find the default areas 33, 38, and 41. Randy

Just out of curiousity, and I'm sure after the reinstall of FSX you already accomplished this but, have you set the "default weather" to "User Defined" allowing ASN to control the weather you see or is it still set to "Clear and Sunny" the way a fresh install sets the config? Randy

I wasn't trying to be sarcastic or condescending, John, if that's the way you took my post. That's the trouble with the written word. Inflections are so hard to figure out. My post, and the post of many others, seems to indicate that the OP's problem...and yours...are not the norm. I wonder if perhaps there is a setting in the FSX configuration file for you and the OP that has made "on the beam" a necessity? I don't know of one, but then I have never perused the FSX.cfg file line by line, word by word. Randy

I have the MAAM, CalClassics' DC-4, -6, and -7, and the Connie as well and never experienced this, either the OP's or your's John. With all of them I turn to an intercept heading of 45 degrees or less and, depending on the panel I'm using, engage heading hold or LOC or both. When I get to the radial I want HDG disengages and LOC takes over turning me on the radial to (or away from if past the VOR) the VOR Station. Randy

Curious....then why did you buy classic analog aircraft? I personally love flying the old steam gauges. Most I have retrofitted to the CIVA-INS and use that solely as my point to point source until just before starting my descent. I have the ISG FMC also, fitted into my modern freeware jetliners, but it has been my experience that I seldom "liked" the way the contributors to the ISG Panels designed their use of the gauges. I would suspect, since it is usually just a config that you download that whoever contributed that panel config had their system set up differently, i.e. gauges in a different place or something like that. Compare your original config with the one you got from the ISG site paying close attention to the location of the ISG and original gauges in the file. Randy

Thanks for your comments. I appreciate them. From this thread and the one I posted over at VATSIM here is what I have "gotten". 1) While it may not be proper or standard phraseology, "With You" is heard in the real world comms from pilots to ATC. Therefore, there is no basis for VATSIM controllers to get upset when a pilot checks in saying "XYZ Center, ABC123 with you at FL360 35 miles north of the XXX VOR". 2) Pilots should not be requesting their clearance from VATSIM controllers (providing Top Down Coverage) saying "ABC Center/Departure/ETC. XXX4506 on the ground at KXXX, IFR to KZZZ as filed." Reasoning, you may not be able to get your flightplan "as filed" and be issued a different SID or STAR (if preferred routing or TEC Route) depending on traffic and current operations. 3) You may possibly hear "Then As Filed" from ATC if they have amended your flightplan taking into account the current traffic and operations situation, i.e. SOUTH/NORTH/EAST/WEST Ops and the associated runways dealing with that situation, especially in areas of the world away from North America. Perhaps the best example of this would be a departure out of Heathrow toward North America. I f you submitted WOBUN as your departure gate and first waypoint on your flightplan you could be given 4 different SIDs by ATC...maybe more, I haven't looked at them all as I write this. Randy

Hello My Friends, I wasn't sure exactly where to post this since it fringes on Real World, MS Flight Sim 2004 and MS FSX. Hopefully a moderator will move this if necessary and not just summarily delete it. Over on the VATSIM Network Forums I posted this exact topic, but wanted to touch base with my friends on AVSIM to get their input. Would certainly appreciate your take on the subject. Randy

I use it in FS9 and FSX both and I honestly can't tell you what my actual frames are like. I can tell you I am happy with it. I use it mostly in FS9 but that is only because I have more invested in my FS9 scenery. Randy

I'm not at my home computer right now, so I can't get to the specific section, but I believe it's in the configuration manager that comes with the Level-D. As for my system, like I said, I bought it brand new in 2005. It's Intel PIV, ATI Radeon 4XXX something, and the rest I couldn't tell ya. I'm not that "techie" to have all that memorized. It's a Gateway that was set up for gaming, but I installed the ATI Radeon from my son's computer when he went to a bigger/better on his system. When I get home in about three hours I'll look and give you some specifics. Randy

One thing you may want to look at, He Who Shall Remain Without Name, is whether you are using DXT3 or 32-bit livery textures. One of the recommendations from Level-D if your frames take hit is using DXT3 textures instead of 32-bit. Oh, and really I don't think this is a Level-D Performance issue, but a computer issue. I run the Level-D for FS9 on a much older and much less powerful system that is 9 years old and get great framerates with it, even with 32-bit textures. In the files that come with the Level-D is a section on different things you can do to the setup if your frames take a hit. Have you tried any of those? Randy

I realize this topic is over two years old, but I saw there had been no replies. I was also looking for such a repaint and could not find one. So, I went on airliners.net and found a photo of N717AN, a B777-300ER in the new AAL colors. I just completed a repaint of the JF/PSS B777-300ER in AAL's new colors using that photo as a guideline. I've got some final tweaking of lines to do and then I will submit to the file library for eventual download. Randy

I regard all opinions as just that...opinions. However I first started looking at this thread because of the subject line, yet nowhere in here have I seen someone claim to be a real life NG driver and a PMDG user and then go on to compare the two. Disappointing, because I was really curious about their opinion. Kudos to this thread for it's entertainment value, but KITA for it's educational/informational value. One thing I always try to remember...it's a hobby for most if not all who participate. No different than for someone who wanders the forest and collects animal droppings for their growing collection of preserved scat in the basement. To them its fascinating. To me, disgusting. A hobby is for enjoyment, not chastisement. I really would hate to see this thread get locked before a bonafide 737NG Pilot chimes in with his or her opinions and insight. Randy

That did the trick. Thanks Gerard. Randy

Thanks for the suggestion Alan, but no joy. I changed the size of the FMC window to smaller and larger and in both cases I had had the same issue with the lower buttons on the FMC in both the panel folder and the panel.vc folder. I also changed the position the windows opens in but it still continues to open in the upper left side of the screen at the 400,600 size regardless of what the panel.cfg says. I doublechecked and the config file is accepting and saving my changes, but the changes don't display. It's like something in the PMDG files elsewhere is overriding any changes I make. Still looking at how to fix it. Randy

The popup window for the FMC has always been too short for the size of the FMC. I see the entire FMC but it appears "squashed" into a length that is too short. When I press the "8" key a "5" shows up in the scratchpad. Press "0" and I get "8". I have gotten around this issue by simply finding the lower edge of the FMC Window with my cursor and making the window longer. Then all the keys work correctly. I had hoped the window size would be saved, but the next time I load the 737 it's back to being too short. I thought maybe I could edit the panel.cfg file and make the FMC window larger that way, but the changes I make don't seem to be saved. I use Windows XP so it is not a admin thing. This is for FS9. I don;t really recall when it started, but I believe it was when I installed the -800 and -900 addon over the initial -600/-700. The cockpit changes from the initial cockpit you have with just the -600/-700. I seem to recall having to run a texture correction program to make liveries show up and something about the VC, but I've had this for 4 years now and the original install is "fuzzy" at my age. Any one else experienced this and if so how did you fix it. Looked at the unofficial PMDG Forum here but found nothing similar. Randy

I bought the NG for FS9 way back when a PMDG 737 for FSX was just a dream. All my investments have been in FS9, scenery and aircraft. I bought the -600/-700 base pack and then the -800/-900 expansion pack. I have started dabbling in repaints for the FS9 PMDG and found one I want to do for the -900. Trouble is, it is a winglet repaint of a real world aircraft livery. In looking through my aircraft folders there is no winglet mdl file or air file for the -900, only for the -700 and -800, and the PMDG Paintkit for the -900 doesn't even show winglets in the base textures so it will do me absolutely no good trying to add winglets to my repaint. I actually tried copying and renaming the 737-800WL model and air file to 737-900WL and placing those to files/folders in my -900 aircraft folder. I now get winglets, but obviously I also get the shorter -800 model and the repaint overlaps near where the mid and rear fuselage sections mate up. Did I miss something years ago when I originally purchased the -800/-900? Did the -900 expansion ever have or "service pack" a winglet version that I missed? Finally, is there any way to "modify" the -900 model files and air file to add winglets to it? Ya know what, just as an addon to this...I noticed in the Paintkit for the -900 (which is available separately from the -800 paintkit) that it uses the -800 fuselage sections for their base, yet the -900 is 8'8" longer with plugs fore and aft of the wings. I know the original -900 did not come with a winglet version from Boeing and only the newer -900ER has winglets. Despite this fact, I see no difference between the base texture files in the -800 paintkit and the -900 paintkit (which is what prompted me to try renaming the -800.mdl and air file) Randy

Perfect,Thank you both for your help. As always, I am in awe at the level of realism in the Tinmouse, but the one thing I have never figured out is why is it called the "Tinmouse"? An inside reference only B732 drivers will get?Loading up the TM right now to see how I do with this new bit of "wisdom".Randy

Col Scott,My apologies if this issue has already been discussed. Using the Forum search engine found lot's of hits, but nothing that seemed specific to the TM.I like to start from cold and dark to add to the realism when I fly the 732. It seems here lately that after I get engines running, packs set, and bleed air properly configured that when it comes time to turn off the APU it immediately goes into the red and overheats and I get a yellow "Overheat" warning on the panel. I never get a fire warning, but the APU stays in an overheat condition until I land and turn the APU back on while taxiing to the gate.A brief synopsis of my "cold/dark" process, which by no means includes everything I do on the checklist is:Gnd Call for airCall for external power(Seems like at this point the APU is already running, even though I have not started it, but temps are normal)Switch to external powerSet the aircraft up for flightTurn off packsOpen the isolation valveEngine Bleed is already on, so switch APU Bleed to on.Start enginesTurn off APU BleedTurn Packs onLeave engine bleed onNumber 1 hydraulics on (number 2 is already on)Isolation switch to AutoGasper onCall for Ground Air disconnectTurn on 1 and 2 generatorsCall for external power disconnectTurn APU offBefore I can even taxi to the runway the APU Overheat light is on and nothing I do short of restarting the APU will cause it to go out or the temp to fall back into the green.I must be forgetting something, but I follow the checklist item by item and don't see where I am screwing up.Randy

Once again, David, Thank You :( I just finished downloading it and will begin using it first thing tomorrow

Thanks for the speedy reply David. Those libraries are what I was using to add the "A" above the numbered gates in the library, but lining them up was difficult using the C-172 default. I have since downloaded the Finney Crosshair Plus and find using it much easier.Still, adding 5 items per gate (Jetway, A, 2, 4, and aircraft outline on tarmac) can get somewhat intense on a large default airport. Not so bad on Tulsa, but...Thanks again.

I have been using EZ Scenery by Abacus to make some sorely needed changes to a few default airports in FS9, ACOF. Especially in the area of adding Jetways to the default terminal building(s). One in particular is the terminal at Tulsa, Oklahoma. I have the correct number of jetways added, but can't seem to find in the vast libraries ones that come with correct numbering. Several of the jetways come with existing numbers, but do not identify it as a concourse A, B, C, etc jetway. As a partial fix, I took (gate A24 for example) an alphanumeric "A" and placed it on top of the jetway numbered "24". However functional, the result looks "tacky" at best. Is there a way within EZ Scenery or similar scenery design programs to create a jetway number "A24". Please note, I am a very, very novice scenery designed. I have created one airport from scratch, but that was easy...it was a small private strip i know to exist in Idaho that wasn't in the default airports. I have also "modified" the muni where I live to more closely match it's RW counterpart. Both these actions were simple matters using EZ Scenery because there were no numbers on buildings to "create"

I ordered the 747 last Friday and only got charged $54.95. I had no idea why, but I don't look a gift horse in the mouth. I was expecting to be charged (and budgeted for) $70.00. Had I paid $70.00 it would have still been worth it and I would not be looking for a rebate (I never send in those cards you get with over the counter purchases either...not worth the time to me).However, having said that...if I paid too little by mistake don't come looking for me to send in more money. A deal's a deal :( Truth said...it's not about the money, it's about the product. Pay only what you can afford. If what you want is more than you can afford...DON'T BUY IT :( You paid $80...you could afford $80...now go fly. That's what it's all aboutRandy Tyndall

Everytime I open the FSInn Control Panel to log in to the VATSIM server I get the subject warning for all the add-on liveries I downloaded from the PMDG Website for the B1900D. I have five liveries for the 1900D dowloaded beside the "default" PMDG livery that comes with the purchase of the aircraft. The warning that is generated does not list the PMDG liveries of 2D, VC, and VC/Cabin as an error. Only the add-on ones. A sample of that warning is copied below: The same warning is generated for the VC Livery and again for the VC/Cabin Livery of each add-on livery I downloaded.Not being sure if it was a PMDG issue or a VATSIM/FSInn issue, I have posted in both forums hoping each of you does not refer me to the other's forum, because then there will be no solution, will there?Any help will be appreciated. By the way, the livery still shows up on my screen and the aircraft functions normally, it simply does not show in the FSInn list of aircraft.Randy

I saw the patch you are referring to and the way I read the details, it would only work on the CD version of the aircraft. PMDG Support is aware of the issue (other people have reported the same problem--they're working directly with myself and one other reporter trying to duplicate). The e-mail I got said they were researching the problem and would let us know what the fix was when they got it all sorted out.Thanks for your help, I sincerely appreciate everyone's input to help me resolve this issue, cause the 737NG is awesome, even when less than 100% as is my case.Randy

Just to update my update so everyone is aware I have sorta solved my own problem with help from folks in my VA. I didn't realize there was a PMDG Download that updates the entire 600/700/800/900 series all at once specifically to correct a known VC problem. I ran it and now the 600/700 issue is resolved. I still have a black screen when looking right or left from the 2D cockpit of the 2D version of the 800 and 900, but that issue too goes away when I use the 2D view of the VC version of both. Problem solved.Thanks for listening.Randy Tyndall