snalz

After 7 years i still did now a complete FSX fresh install. :rolleyes: Hard work taking lots of time to do things as correct as possible. In case of other users have the same result assigning AP disconnect button via LINDA that leeds into a FSX CTD, this function should be disabled in the next Cherokee- Module update. My target is to assign as much as possible via FSUIPC/LINDA/Ezdok deleting the relevant standard FSX assignments prior. I do not want to run into trouble mixing too much assigning via FSX, any aircraft configurator tools and FSUIPC/LINDA. At the moment only the general elevator trim function for every aircraft i have assigned within FSX to be flexible with trim speed.

Hi Guenter, think about to check if "AP Disconnect"- command is correct. Getting FSX CTD when assigning this function to a yoke button. Gruss Nico

Hi, just assigned some exterior lights to my saitek throttles that works. Now assigned Cherokee´s AP Cutout button to my saitek yoke. When i press the AP cutout button at the hardware yoke - FSX crashes emidiately. What is wrong here? Kind regards Nico

Hi, using networked computers for FSX. FSX i use in fullscreen mode and to start some programms in background it is neccessary to switch between FSX fullscreen and windowed mode. Test showed, that "g3d9.dll" file causes an FSX error sooner or later. So ENB mod is not usable. I am sad about that because that massive improvement of quality. In the meantime, is there any solution making ENB mod again usable? Is FXAA tool a solution which not causes FSX errors like ENB nod does? Regards

Hi, servers still down. Any solution to expect within next hour?

Hi, same issue here. Missing autogen trees. Maybe there are also some buildings missing. After a fresh installation/reinstallation of haute Normandie 3D all autogen is visible, restarting computer, autogen is lost. Is there any solution or reason?

I remembered user "Guenseli" found a solution for that issue, that imc conditions will get shown. Guenseli´s original post: http://forum.avsim.n...imc-conditions/ Guenseli´s solution: I had today a look into the AS2012 file and there is the same problem. It seems to be also necessary to modify the file like at ASE long time ago (?).

Hi, how to use "PPIT" AND "Framerate Limiter 0.2" together in FSX root folder? Both using their own d3d9.dll. Can anyone tell me a solution? I have to use Framerate Limiter 0.2 having best overall results.

Hi there, same issue here. I have to use that "Framerate Limiter 0.2" with it´s own d3d9.dll. How can i use PPIT and FRL 0.2 together (both have theri own d3d9.dll) ? In previous ENB mod it´s d3d9.dll was able to be renamed and modified in enbseries.ini. Did not find a chance now Need help please. Kind regards

Hi, as i wrote before "old" problems and uncompleteness are also at newer releases. You are absolutely right, good standard at programming an addon will cost litte more money, but i have no problem to pay for quality work. We are talking about FSX addons, FSX seems presently to be the only flight simulator who makes sense to use. I think there are more than enough "aviation games" aviable at the market for those who do not like to have a state of the art system simulation programm for planes. Regards

Hi, but why does Marcel Felde´s Katana 4X and the A2A stuff etc. work much more better or even perfect? Would innovation in programming techniques be a solution? State of the art is programming outside FSX to circumvent limitations. Regards Nico

Sorry for my bad written english, here again the modified questions: Hi, i have some questions concerning the deep quality of carenado addons. Why? - I have demand on the real role models of what carenado deliveres for fsx. I was customer of the Mooney M20J, where i had unrealistic carb ice effects without having a carburetor installed at this engine. That was not the only one major bug i found at that time. Several unrealistic errors and uncompleteness in system modeling and behavior. An efficient quality management should have solved such problems. A second chance was the C152 and that was my last order. The only advantage is: - Model selection is good. - External texturing is good That is all. Nice preview screenshots using environmental effects of AS or REX should not be all i think. New releases becomes more and more, faster and faster. Is there any chance in the future to get completely finished products without beeing a beta tester? Is there any chance to have realistic working leaning of combustion engine? Any chance for working variabel oil temp an pressures up to the environmental conditions? Fluctuating dynamic (living) gauges which are not static programmed? Variabel engine reactions and sounds? Why is a turning propeller a totally flat disc in external view? Why do i ask such things? Because other developers are an example how to implement that. Every aircraft feels different in the air. A2A simulations shows steady what i like to say. Where is the trend and innovation getting better at carenado? Talked to several advanced simmers and real life aviation work colleagues about the known steady issues of carenado products. They confirmed again insufficient system and flight physics simulation quality. You still see it at preview screenshots. RPM at or above the "red line". This is again an example for the overall quality. Is carenado interested in customers coming from real aviation business? Has carenado quality- demanding on themselves/ flight simulation customers? Any chance for improvements, about 10 newer developements after the C152? Regards Nico

Hi, i have some questions concerning the deep quality of carenado addons. Why? - I have demand on the real role models of what carenado deliveres for fsx. I was customer of the Mooney M20J, where i had unrealistic carb ice effects without having a carburetor installed at this engine. That was only one major bug i found at that time. Several unrealistic errors and uncompleteness in system modeling and behavoir. An efficient quality management should have solved such problems. A second chance was the C152 and that was my last order. The only advantage is: - Model selection is good. - External texturing is good That is all. Nice preview screenshots using environmental effects of AS or REX should not be all i think. New releases becomes more and more, faster and faster. Is there any chance in the future to get completely finished products without beeing a beta tester? Is there any chance to have realistic working leaning if combustion engine? Any chance for working variabel oil temp an pressures up to the environmental conditions? Fluctuating dynamic (living) gauges which are not static programmed? Variabel engine reactions and sounds? Why is a turning propeller a totally flat disc in external view? Why do i ask such things? Because other developers are an example how to implement that. Every aircraft feels different in the air. A2A simulations shows what i like to say. Is carenado interested in customers coming from real aviation business. Has carenado quality- demanding on themselves/ flight simulation customers? Any chance for improvements, about 10 newer developements after the C152? Regards Nico

- deleted, double post -

- deleted, double post -