dcal

yep

I had wanted to see this topic take off, but I always forget to take note of the routes. But I did note Ariel's solo xcountry flight and thought I would drop it here. S03E06 - Radio Silence C172 PAUN PANV PARS PABE That dude snuggs also had a passenger flight from PAUN PAVA PAHP in a C340. I plan to fly these this weekend if the weather is bad here.

I am dying for any tri-cycle Cessna, I am not very fond of tail draggers. My votes are for any or all of: C-172, C-182RG, C-152

Word, same here. Makes me think I picked the wrong vid card, but at least I didn't drop a bundle on it. I did read it was the best bang for the buck, but I'm having serious doubts that it isn't the bottle neck in my system.

Thanks for the response. I too have gone with the fps lock (~30fps) for the purpose of reserving resources for more scenery loading and such. Does anyone have an opinion on the difference between the FSX fps limiter and the third party FPSLimiter? I have not seen a difference myself and just limit it in FSX without creating the funky batch to start FSX.

Wow thanks for the settings, I will give it a go. I had road settings up around 40% but only because it didn't seem to have much of an effect whether it was 1% or 40%. Up the Irons!!! (BTW, when I was still flying x-plane I made an Ed Force one paint)

Well Acceleration, but same thing yeah.

FYI at my home airport (KCDW 30nm outside of NYC) the fps still drops down to 15-20s, but at least it's not dropping below 15fps. I'm going to try lowering the autogen with the new settings and see if I can at least maintain 25, but I think northern NJ/NYC is too much for my CPU.

I set it in the nVidia console. I think the biggest boost was from lowering the water setting and filtering down to trilinear.

Ok report time. I bumped the water settings down to 2.x mid, filtering to trilinear, AA on, nVid Setting to perfomance, and everything else full. 27 to 50fps easy in Friday Harbor. Thanks Relax, I guess the 9800GTX+ isn't enough for full water and anisotropic filtering. Good enough though! One thing though, I had set the nHancer and nVid settings to override the application settings for filtering and AA, but it seems changing the FSX settings still changes the visuals in sim. I thought the driver would override, weird. I'll try this and see if it allows me to bump up the water. Nice Avatar! :( What's the verdict on the FPSLimiter vs FSX Limiter vs no limiter?Thanks for the help folks!

I tried last night. Looking at a low of 17fps and a high of 35fps. I'll try tweaking the settings to hit 40, at least I have a target. Edit... Found Nick's settings. These are the settings I used for my system.I had read the opposite about FSX and the limiter. To be honest I haven't noticed a difference in either because i can't get consistent frame rates above 30 so it's always dangling below that. I'll keep looking for that topic.

I went through the tuning guides and have FSX running OK, but whenever I get within 30nm of an urban area the fps goes south fast (around 15-20fps). If I up the autogen anywhere past sparse the fps tanks. I've tried going to DX10 and the fps was a little better, but the flickers are pretty bad at most airports. To be honest I thought with the 3.3Ghz quad core the autogen settings would be higher. Any tips given the configuration listed below? Or have I maxed her out? I've tried scaling back the texture settings but it doesn't increase performance at all.Also, a slightly related question. Is there any advantage to using the third party plugin FPSLimiter as opposed to the FSX limiter? System Specs-------------------AMD 940 Phenom II X4 Black Edition - OC'd to 3.30Ghz4MB RAMnVidia 9800GTX+ (Driver 180.50)Windows Vista 64I've also installed nHancer and configured according to the guide. FSX Settings-------------------Full except for AutoGen which is running at sparse. DirectX 9 modeLight Bloom is off.FPSLimiter set to 30fpsFSX Addons-------------------FSX AccelerationREX/GEX/UTX

My vid card only has a DVI output, but I have a DVI to HDMI cable that works pretty well.

19something by 76something. I'll check later. It's far from perfect, this LCD is a little bit old, I bet it would look better on a newer model with a better native resolution. But it is nice to be able to make out the runways from further away and stuff like that.

I had my sim rig setup to run sharing a monitor with the wife's internet machine and at the request of the wife I've moved the sim rig to the bedroom where I'm running it on a Samsung 42" LCD HDTV. The resolution could be a little sharper, but the sheer size of the display really brings an element of realism to the sim. I use TrackIR so I feel as though I really need to sit up straight to see over the panel on approach. It's a nice effect.Anybody else running a setup like that? Any tips?

I just installed the nForce drivers for my Mobo at the recommendation of Vista 64 problem solver.Giggity... FPS shot up from 30s to 70s. I guess the PCI bus driver really sped things up.That is all.ETA: System Specs--------------------------------------------------------Hardware: AMD Phenom II X4 940 3GHz (OC'd to 3.3GHz) nVidia 9800 GTX+ 1GB 4GB RAM Software: Vista 64 FSX Acceleration REX GEX UTX

Toby, I don't disagree. :( I returned to the sim hobby after a decade long hiatus. I was an MSFS user back in the day, but I had read that the ACES team got sacked and heard good things about XP. So I bought XP at version 9.1. I was impressed and definitely felt I made the right choice. Then two things got to me after flying it for a few months. I got tired of the default C-172 (which rolls like a fighter jet for some reason) and I thought I'd explore some payware. I bought some pipers and a couple Cessnas, to my surprise the payware offerings were down right mickey mouse when compared to what FSX offered. Their flight models appeared accurate enough to me, but the 3D cockpits and exterior modeling were downright laughable when compared to even FSX's default aircraft, let alone the FSX payware offerings. Most of the A/C don't have 3D cockpits and the ones that did were light years behind any FSX offering.All I kept hearing about was XP's amazing flight model, but when a novice XP user would post a question like why does my 172 roll like a F16, the response: well the flight model is awesome, but that's only as good as the plane model you're flying in. And seeing as there are so few great plane models out there it seems XP is all dressed up with nowhere to go.Then I was reading about xpjets releasing the new defacto C-172 which took true advantage of the 3D cockpit and exterior model features and I was excited. Then it got delayed because they wanted to wait for 9.3, then it got delayed because getting it 9.3 "certified" is a big process. Now 9.4b5 is out so I'd imagine there will be another delay. It is, as of today, still not available. I should note: The Mitsubishi MU2 was done right, and looks to be the only v9 A/C worth buying at the moment.The second reason I became disenchanted with XP is the default scenery. After I realized there are virtually no third party scenery developers (save one excellent one) and much of the free stuff was mainly scenery from Europe, I started editing the airports I liked, posted them on the "Community Site," and was even nominated into a "best of" competition for some of my work. But after a while I realized I was spending more time overlaying airports than I was flying the damn sim.The final nail in the coffin was a blog article written by a x-plane.org community member which can be found here. He hit the final nail so squarely on the head that I, almost immediately, went to the store and picked up a copy of FSX for $35 or something like that. I cranked the settings, added REX, GEX, UTX, and a few Carenado addons, and guess what? I'm actually flying the sim not just constantly tweaking it in an effort to make it more fun to fly.Is X-Plane a solid flight sim for the fantastic price of $29 plus S&H? You're damn skippy it is. Is it the end all, be all of flight sim experiences as touted by many? Not really. I'll fly x-plane 9 again and I'll probably buy XP10, because the product has potential. But for now FSX is definitely the better choice for me. Better looking, good flight model, more available stuff out there to see and fly.Anyway, sorry for the long winded response, but I wish this kind of feedback was available when I was researching the FSX vs XP decision.

This was great news. Until I loaded up the default Mooney, which we are agreed has aileron trim. Guess what? No joy. Dammit... I guess all that's left is to buy fsuipc and give that a whirl. :( Would it help if I posted my fsx.cfg? I don't have a lot of experience with it yet, so I don't know what I'm looking at.ETA, Default Mooney Bravo doesn't have aileron trim either. Loaded up the King Air 350 and guess what? JOY!I feel pretty silly actually, although I can't believe someone else hadn't posted about this already. I did plenty of searching first. Thanks for the help everyone.

Really!?!? That was my initial reaction, it was only after I emailed Carenado and they said it had it that I thought I had a problem. I guess I should email them again to confirm.

snave, thanks for replying. I've tried with the default C172 and Carenado's C172. I even emailed Carenado to ask if their version of the 172 was equipped with AT. The response was yes, with no reported issues. I didn't consider the fuel tank problem, but then again in the 172 with both selected I shouldn't have a problem with unbalancing the tanks. I will confirm this after work today. I will also try out some other planes to be sure.It seems very odd that these two controls are the only two that don't work, I really thought killing the cfg would resolve it. I'll look into this FSUIPC4 as well. Please keep the ideas coming.ETA: I should also note that I'm using TrackIR, though I don't see how that would be an issue.

Well I tried deleting the fsx.cfg file, no joy. Any other ideas?

PeterH, thanks for the tips. Here are the things I definitely validated.1. CTRL key works (CTRL + . sets the pkg brake fine)2. Num4 and Num6 control the bank fine3. Every other key that's assigned to a function in FSX appears to be working.One thing I should note, I used to be an x-plane user and was able to configure the hat switch to control the pitch and roll trim. I tried it in FSX which didn't work. I wonder if that screwed it up.So, I guess I will try deleting the fsx.cfg file. The only add-ons I have installed are REX1.0 and a Carenado plane. Deleting the fsx.cfg shouldn't affect that should it?

Hello folks. I'm having a strange problem with FSX. I can't get aileron trim to work. I tried the FSX defaults of Ctrl-Num4 and Ctrl-Num6 (Num Lock light OFF), and nothing. I tried assigning to other keys nothing. Oddly enough the elevator and rudder trim buttons are working fine. Needless to say it's getting rather annoying trying to fly without it. I'm wondering if someone here has heard of a problem like this, or maybe can help me figure out what's going on with it.I'm running FSX Acceleration on Vista 64 with REX1.0 installed. I have one add on airplane (Carenado C172N) and nothing else installed. Using a Saitek AV8R and acer mouse and keyboard. This is driving me mad that I can't get it to work. Any ideas?