Swoop

OK Umberto, well take this over to your forum but I'd like to say something here as well. The test I ran was with a virgin install of FS9.1 and only your software...nothing else. At boot, the system only consumed 170mb of ram and I went directly into FS9.I think that if your software doesn't support 1gb video cards on FS9 then that should be well known to the entire FS9 community before they purchase it. I'm going to run sysmon and some other utilities that I have on my system and find out exactly how much VRAM and main memory are being consumed as to leave no doubt. You could be right but we'll see.That being said, I'll take this over to your forum and thank you for the help in this forum.Mark

Ha! I was waiting for someone to say that Umberto. There's nothing wrong with the system as far as a box goes, it's a really clean install of XP32. It's fast, slick, and performs as expected with most airports. I will say this, there have only been a couple of airports that I've tried lately that have simply been dogs on this box. They appear to be FSX ports to FS9 as an afterthought?But be that as it may, I could agree with the idea that I'm getting a corrupted download (possibly) from FSDT. The reason that's a possibility is because I am getting 25fps with the Cloud9 version...that's with 75% traffic, Active Sky running, MegaScenery SoCal, FSGlobal2010 and UT USA. Once I pull out of C9 KLAX and get into the air, the FPS jumps to 40fps because that's where I've got the fps locked. It's a really nice ride, smooth and clean.So it begs the question, does your software require a specific version of VC++ or C# library to operate? Are you statically linking the libraries when you're compiling the .DLL? Also, I run a minimum XP Service configuration turning off services like the Workstation and Server services (and many others). Could that be a cause if your software needs a service that is expected and its not there?I would like my vote to be a corrupted download but the jury is out on this one...any thoughts because rather then give you a hard time, I'd like the $40.00 airport to work. It's a really lovely rendition of the new KLAX :)MarkSoftware Engineer (Since the early 80's and still coding away)

I know how I like to set the aircraft doors and I set it in the FS9.cfg file. Instead of "SHIFT - E + N" I use "COMMA + N"TOGGLE_AIRCRAFT_EXIT=188,8I'm not sure what you're after concerning the throttle...my FS9.cfg has the following values in it...THROTTLE_FULL=115,8THROTTLE_INCR_SMALL=114,8THROTTLE_DECR=113,8THROTTLE_CUT=112,8INCREASE_THROTTLE=33,8DECREASE_THROTTLE=34,8AUTO_THROTTLE_ARM=82,9AUTO_THROTTLE_TO_GA=71,11Hope that helps!Mark

Fresno would be great. You know, KSMO might be easy airport as well, although, it really doesn't have any terminals that I've seen. I just like relaxing on my balcony and watching the planes take off from KSMO and can't do it as I'm in still here in Sydney :)Regardless, thanks for all of your wonderful airports Shez...KLGB rocks!Mark

Just like to add to my post. I went ahead and put a virgin FS9.1 install in place. There was no aftermarket software of any kind involved, just a plain vanilla FS9.1 installation and FSDT KLAX. I started a flight at the active runway and was pulling 7fps ( seven frames per second).I started another flight at gate 47b and was receiving 10fps (ten frames per second). A little better because I was not staring down all of the southern terminals. Keep in mind that my system is mildly overclocked to 4.1ghz as I don't like pushing the base clock any higher if I don't have to. I also have the memory overclocked to 1600mhz...Mark

Really awful frame rates here on the system in my sig. We're talking 10fps...stuttering so badly I thought I was flying an Alaska winter tour in an ultralight. The screenshots look good however :)Mark

Yeah, I thought of that Steve and it's a good observation. I'm sure that FSDT has made the same observation as well. I'd also like to have this new version of KLAX but It's still $40.00 and is it worth it? It would also be nice to hear from non-forum regulars as it seems that hype leads to higher pricing. (I tried to warn) My opinion is that at 40 smakeroos, that airport better be perfect, with great frame rates, and Umberto if you're listening, forget about the moving vehicles, throw in some dancing girls instead please :)Mark

Doesn't anyone have an issue with it costing $40.00!!!! Mark

You should probably post this topic in the Video Cards and Drivers forum (here at Avsim) as they are quite in touch with this subject. I don't have the anti-aliasing checkbox checked in the FS9 interface, I let the NVidia driver handle it as with most of the other settings. Regardless, there are many discussions in the other forum concerning the settings for NVidia Inspector as the results tend to vary with your hardware and driver version. Below are a couple of links to topics which I found useful...hope that helps! Mark http://forum.avsim.n...f-all-settings/ or.... http://forum.avsim.n...69-8xq-or-8xsq/

I wonder if the order of installation was important. In other words, maybe one scenery installed a texture which another had overwrote? Also, it never hurts to let FS9 rebuild your "Documents and Settings\User Name\Application Data\Microsoft\FS9" folder (at least I haven't found one yet). I recently rolled back to an earlier version of NVidia driver and found that there were two entries for my GTX 560 TI in the FS9.cfg file.So I saved a copy of the FS9.cfg file (so I could retrieve my custom settings from it later) and then deleted the folder. When I restarted FS9 it simply rebuilt the folder and most importantly, created a clean copy of the FS9.cfg file. All I had to do was add my custom settings to it and I was ready to fly. I use TOGGLE_AIRCRAFT_EXIT=188,8 a bunch and didn't want to loose it...Hope that helps!Mark

Hey Mark, do you think that opinion would be from a payware point of view? Interestingly, this version of KSNA is freeware...just thought I'd point that out :) Mark

One more thing...I also use Ultimate Terrain, MegaScenery Southern California, and FSG2010.... Mark The bgl was distributed via the following file....Elevation Fix For Addon KBUR KDCA KSNA Airport Scenery by Scott Smart3altfix.ziphttp://library.avsim...scen&DLID=76926

I renamed the "KSNA_John_Wayne_Santa_Ana_SNA2004_17pt359.bgl" from .bgl to .xxx in the "Flight Simulator 9\Scenery\Namw\Scenery" folder and haven't had any issues so far. Mark

If I enable Trilinear in FS9, how should the Trilinear Optimization parameter in NVidia Inspector be set? Which also begs the question should Trilinear be set for FS9 at all? So please advise and thanks!Mark

Has anyone noticed that some of the default Garmin 500 approaches at EDDH are not being flown properly? I was on the LBE approach to runway 15 which had a smooth DME arc transitioning from a northern heading to the south facing ILS at runway 15. (I was on route from EDLW).The aircraft was about to fly the GPS transition when it decided to ignore the arc and headed directly for the runway's ILS. The avionics were set to GPS (not NAV) so I assumed that it would follow the transition as shown in the GPS by the little white flight path line :)Mark

+3 on would like to know...AND...It would be very nice if Mr. Flightbeam added some screen shots of the FS9 version so we can have a gander, that is, if I haven't missed them by some chance?Mark

Yeah, I dig...it's $26 smakeroos and the question that comes to mind is how effective will it be? Could be great, could be adequate...hopefully its a worthwhile purchase...Mark

Count me in as well...although...Umberto...if you're listening, will we be able to dial down resolutions or turn things off if we want? I never used the docking gates in the Cloud 9 version and would love to add any FPS to the static scenery rather then the dynamic (if that makes any sense).Regardless...it seems to have the new terminals which would be really cool :)Mark

Jeff, have you taken the plunge...love to hear your critique :)Mark

This may sound very basic, (so forgive me if it does), but are you monitoring temperatures? It almost sounds like something is heating up and by the time you go back into the sim, it has cooled itself off enough to continue. Also, (and I may be reaching here), but do you think that the condition happens if the system starts using more then one memory module? I wonder if you swapped memory modules around if the behavior goes away.Another system parameter you could monitor would be processes with a large number of open handles which continues to grow...the dreaded memory leak!Mark

Thanks...I thought that it might be useful after reading some of the topics that are currently under discussion in this forum. And I do use The Elder Geek, (good call on that one :), have been for quite some time. The advice there is sound and they do post updates as well as end user comments.MarkThe Elder Geek Websitehttp://www.theeldergeek.com/index.htm

Just thought that some of you might be interested in seeing what others are currently running for Windows XP32 SP3 processes. Now keep in mind that your requirements will vary but the following process list yields about 150mb of used memory at boot and works perfectly with the setup in my sig... Mark Service Name, Status, StartupCOM+ Event System, Running, ManualCryptographic Services, Running, AutoDCOM Server Process Launcher, Running, AutoEvent Log, Running, AutoHID Input Service, Running, AutoLogical Disk Manager, Running, AutoNetwork Connections, Running, ManualPlug and Play, Running, AutoRemote Access Connection Manager, Running, ManualRemote Procedure Call (RPC), Running, AutoSaitek DirectOutput, Running, AutoSecurity Accounts Manager, Running, AutoShell Hardware Detection, Running, ManualSystem Event Notification, Running, AutoTCP/IP NetBIOS Helper, Running, AutoTelephony, Running, ManualThemes, Running, AutoWindows Audio, Running, AutoWindows Management Instrumentation, Running, Auto

No insult intended Andy...(don't know why you think it is one)...but I really haven't seen a PC come loaded with less then a gig in many years. Not saying that they don't or maybe it is that I just don't look at them if they do? On an interesting note, I've got my services down to a science here and get a clean WinXP32 SP3 boot with about 150mb. I can reduce it another 30mb or so if I want. So in other words, I'm wondering if I can get a minimal FS9 run with 512mb myself!Mark

My goodness Andy, how old is your box? I haven't seen PC's come with 512mb since the early 90's! At least that's what I remember :)Mark

Check the following registry key...HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Microsoft Games\Flight Simulator\9.0\CDPathand for good measure note this key as well...HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Microsoft Games\Flight Simulator\9.0\EXE PathMark