FlyingAxx

I'm using full screen all the time and got a truncated menu nonetheless - at least in this example. At the moment the only possibility seems to be using the external tool as it allows accessing all user settings being listed in "userCfg.opt". Like the configuration file it handles RAW-data that you have to translate yourself to in-game-values like "ultra" = 3 or "medium" = 0.

Could you or somebody else give me a hint how I can influence the mentioned GUI restrictions? I have a quite powerful gear but still running a "simple" HD monitor. Could this be the reason? However, most initial settings of MSFS2024 had been ULTRA or HIGH. When setting up GENERAL -> GRAPHICS, unfolding then GLOBAL RENDERING QUALITY, the last visible item is PARKED AIRCRAFT QUANTITY and some space below. I saw the screenshot of a friend who has 4 items more AIRCRAFT TRAFFIC VARIETY, ROAD TRAFFIC, SEA TRAFFIC, and FAUNA. Hints are very much appreciated. EDIT: I just found and tried a tool enabling to set up all settings outside MSFS 2024. It's called "FS2024 - UserCfg Editor". The items are accessible, nonetheless they are not available directly in the sim menu.

This would at least remove one hurdle on a long way towards a usable MSFS2024.

I totally agree. After the latest update my hope that the ground handling would be better was soon blown in the wind. It's impossible making slow and narrow turns. The front wheel flutters like being completely unguided even if pedals and yoke are both at full deflection. I've even flattened the initial brake forces dramatically, but the aircraft stops even with the slightest brake axis movement. While taking off and landing it now feels much better compared to former times, but ground handling is a real show stopper.

I can only agree to the last statement of Tom as far as wake turbulences are concerned. I'd opened a Ticket at HiFiSim and got really good support. They produced and offered some Beta versions, got feedback and for me the problem is solved now. However, the recommendation to set the wake influence back to 20% is what I'm doing as well, even after running the updated version. The other weather settings are okay for me. The problem of always generated thunderstorms is solved, but they still appear where I would expect them. ASN is now a great and usable product.

How did you install the new NGX version? Did you just install it over the previous one or did you first remove the forerunner version? For me the "repair" did not work, I had remove the existent version first. There was no error message nor any sign that anything went wrong - with just one exception, the weather radar didn't work.

That's my experience, too. That's why I'm not sure on which side of the interface the best could be done.

Devin, your last hint can be helpful for sure. I've lost sight of this function and I'm afraid I have to search for it...

Meanwhile HiFi got a ticket. Interesting, it seems to be time to find out specific differences in the setup or environment. In order to start with something: I'm flying online just by using a FsHost Client-Server configuration and none of the usual online networks like VATSIM or IVAO. I'm using UT with 100% traffic which is still active when flying with my friends (we're not too many). However I'll make some tests now with locally induced traffic only and I'll look far a busy airport, too (I think London Heathrow is okay). Let's see what happens.

Devin, I'm wondering a bit about your statement and if you would read some comments here it seems that I'm not the only one being afflicted with this behaviour. However, there are several entries in HiFi's support forum and you would find me amongst them. By the way, when flying online with a couple of friends I can hear (and sometimes watch) others sharing this experience, too. As I have to leave now, I'm going to submit a ticket later today (I'm already registered)

Unfortunately all expectations that one of both interfacing companies would solve the overwhelming wake effect for the NGX failed. I have the latest Beta of ASN installed and forget to check the turbulence settings after the update (of course, they where set to default) and made a flight today with my brand new WX radar equipped NGX. The result had been a crash with likely no survivors (a A320 landed about 4 mins in front of me). What do we have now, a weather program requiring aircraft specific settings? A ridiculous idea I suppose. It seems to be something that should be resolved between HiFi and PMDG. At the moment the bird's behaviour is not controllable as long as the related effects are set within ASN to anything > 0. EDIT: If the fault is clearly on ASN's side I surely would expect a little bit of pressure on them from PMDG, probably together with Aerosoft (their Bus seems to have similar problems).

Actually you can get any relevant European chart here for free (http://www.ead.eurocontrol.int/publicuser/public/pu/login.jsp). You just have to register, that's it.

I agree! I've had to know this stuff while studying electrical engineering and I never had to recapitulate it again. Of course I forgot almost everything - non, je ne regrette rien.

Well explained Brian. I was about to pick up the water analogy again and then luckily decided to read the thread to it's preliminary (?) end. At the beginning I was asking myself if we would end up with Maxwell's equations. :huh:

Mark, What happens if you use <ctrl>+<space> after loading the overhead panel view? This should reset any view to its defaults.

Thanks to all for your opinions. Michael, specifically this one meets exactly my experience! I don't think that I should mark the question to be solved. It's obviously rather a method to avoid trouble. Kevin,let's hope together. I'm just afraid that we all are expecting rather a new product even if it's already a great one.

Thanks Dan, this makes sense. Meanwhile (today) I tested new settings while flying with some buddies in Japan where the have airports on to of hills (it's really like a carrier landing) and with each setting reduced to 5% for gusts and wake turbulence it was a rather smooth ride even if the weather was quite gusty. Other planes have had problems, too. I'm often flying to remote fields with Aerosoft's DHC6-300 and got similar effects before. Today it felt much better as well. It seems that my present approach is somehow asymptotic to your present policy (default, 20%, 10%, 5%...and later probably 0%). B) By the way, so far I cannot remember problems with PMDG's B772. EDIT: Before I forget, just today a friend of mine moaned about the behaviour of his A319 (Aerosoft) while using ASN. He recently changed to P3D.

Even if I usually appreciate Kyle's massages, in this case I tend partly to disagree ("no S-turns" is okay for me). Due to the fact that I bought the T7 I decided to upgrade my AS2012 to Active Sky NEXT in order to enjoy the weather radar function. However, since I'm using ASN I'm experiencing quite often landing situations with my PMDG 737NGX, neither me nor the autopilot are able to cope with. It's always the same: At short final just a second or two before the upcoming touch-down the aircraft rolls immediately clockwise in a quite unrealistic way. The necessary moment of inertia shouldn't allow such a move - else I never would fly again in reality. Even if I'm alerted there is in most cases no time or even the slightest chance to react (autolanding does show the same effects and the a/p is overstrained, too). I have no turbulence effects turned on in FSX, FSUIPC is set to smoothen turbulences, ASN has the same settings as I used in AS2012 (10% for max wind shear and wake turbulence strenght), and there are no aircraft that could cause wake effects in front of me and if so I would know how to deal with the flight path. Any advice or recommended settings that would allow effects reflecting a bit better the reality would be appreciated. BTW, as far as I understand some contributions in the AS forum, there are some other aircraft (e.g. the buses of Aerosoft) having problems as well, others are unaffected.

Ivan, Real flightplans (some might be outdated) you can find here http://www.edi-gla.co.uk/fpl/login.php?go=/fpl/index.php (requires registration) or could be constructed here (for FS use only): http://rfinder.asalink.net/free/. Real flightplans within the US are available here: http://de.flightaware.com/live/flight/UAL130/history/20120625/2249Z/KIAD/EGLL (this example is even pond crossing). Weight & Balance sheets are available mostly for high-end add-ons like the NGX. You might want to search here in the Forum. I remembered this one, but it might not be the final and latest development here: http://forum.avsim.net/topic/424726-737ng-dispatch-sheet-updated-to-version-495/?hl=%2Bexcel

Its here http://www.simforums.com/forums/the-fsx-computer-system-the-bible-by-nickn_topic46211.html

I don't think that FSC9 claims to be a complete planner. You can find a route, you can import weather information related (only) to airports, you can visualise SIDs and STARs and the result can be exported. The rest has to be done with the little help of other tools - or your FMC. In this respect PFPX is quite complete. Yes, it fits usually, even after I received a bundle of error messages recently I wasn't able to handle. Finally I added an extra ton of fuel which appeared to be just more ballast at the end.

In principle you're right. However, for me PFPX is now just leaving the Beta-phase. It has in my opinion still some inconsistencies and even missing functions. For pure chair pilots like me I would wish to have explaining tool-tips even for the used abbreviations rather than the need to search for external handbooks of the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) in order to decipher error messages. At least it's now more stable. Even if FSC9 is far away from being really comfortable, it allows to visualise immediately SIDs and STARS as well - admittedly not as close to the charts as PFPX does. I'll try to find out how to plan GA flights with PFPX, too. Well, I think we're quite off topic here and should close this thread.

I have to correct myself (too late for just editing my previous post). I just checked PFPX again and obviously the variety of selectable aircraft is meanwhile better than the templates may suggest. Max is right with his statement.

Derek, FS Commander generates its database directly from your FS. Of course it's somehow not realistic and in most cases aged data too. However, as long as you don't have the chance to update all airport and navaid information within your sim it might happen that you are approaching towards a non existent runway. Principally you are right that most other planning software uses data being derived from the present real world situation (there are not too many sources). Actually, you can add "unknown" airports but up to now it only is possible to add them as waypoints. Regarding the variety of airplanes I'm not quite sure what Max is referring to when writing that planning for GA and other types is possible. You'll find the full list of templates attached.

Ivan, as Kyle said PFPX wants to be as close to professional planning as possible. This means vice versa that there are not to many different aircraft models implemented. Furthermore you will not find all airports too, just those knowing some commercial traffic. For your fleet I would recommend FSC9 as PFPX would produce plans for your NGX only.