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 -

Using AS 2012 Build: 4387Hi, could AS2012 installation be the reason for that issue?Found rain drops are not visable out of cockpit view and outside view (adjusted completely down to surface level) when aircraft is on ground. About 1-2 meters above ground level, rain is visible in both situations. External view readjusted 1-2 meters above ground or after takeoff in cockpit view, rain becomes visible.I am not talking about visible raindrops at cockpit window or surface water effects at the runway.How to solve that issue which is mostly found at 3rd party payware addons?Regards,Nico

Hi there,we customers need to have "simulations" for aerobatic planes, nice to get that soon.First i was intereresting to read that carenado releases a new company maybe getting some aerodynamic and deep system modeling guys into the team. I was a customer of carenado with M20J and to get carenado a second chance with C152 to convince me doing better system modeling (like a simple correct indication of oil press gauge) etc. I was again disappointedof that same level addon for Microsoft Flight "Simulator". Nice textures was the only advantage.To get into that new segment "aerobatic" planes, please do not make same failures into basic systems. If you want to make quality (not quantity) addons for your customers, it is indispensable to improve your aerodynamics and systems quality.If i take a look into the brand new preview video, i can not feel to know anything about that "aerobatics" quality.-> there is no aerobatics demonstation shown of that aerobatic plane-> is the developer itsself able to fly advanced aerobatics to make quality work to the addon?-> rolls and half into inverted flight is the only i can see-> I again (like carenado) only gets demonstrated nice aircraft textures in ORBX sceneryWill that addon again get again only less quality SIMULATION with nice flying textures or are there any basic improvements to expect?Kind regardsNico

Same issue here as Guenther, just tried to simulate same situation. Put IMC conditions into ASE- Map screen: -> Checkbox "real weather deactivated"-> "Report" Menue reacted, airport METAR changed to vis. 0sm, OVC, wind 11 Gusts 14kt. (Is it possible to get Vis =0 with that strong winds?)-> Visibility range in cockpit slightly decreases until reaches about 100m, then "plopp", conditions back to real weather than before preloaded. Played a little, turned DWC off, CAVOK cloud generation slider to maximum etc. same issue. Unable for IMC conditions with visibility 0sm (or < than 100 meters out of cockpit view) Regards, Nico

Ok, for the moment i do not use random failures, so a fuel leak is impossible. There was also no cross flow of fuel possible, X Valve was closed. Strange that you had a misterious additional fuel consuption out of tank 2. But 1000 kg fuel imbalance would be a realistic amount of a running APU during a whole flight.I seems that some logic "behind" the systems has an hang up, so that in different situations or panel state changes there is a simulated fuel consumption of the APU - independent if that generator runs or not.

Correction of first part of my post: " at about 3889 kg in tank 1", ....

Hi, at about 3989 kg in tank 1, this margin to 3911 kg was burned fuel of APU from pre loaded panel state before. This panel state was active for a couple of minutes until i changed panel state to C&D condition, but the fuel burn -out of tank 1- continued in C&D without running APU. regards

-Aircraft ordered 05, August-Hotfixes installed: Hotfix No. 3 Hi, actually fired up FSX, loaded 737-800WL, standard preload panel state is "NGX SHORT". Inside the cockpit i decided to change panel state load in MCDU menue - changed now "STATE LOAD" to "NGX CLDDRK" for cold & dark conditions. All is fine in cockpit, all systems are completely off. Now i went through the "FUEL" page to insert my TOPCAT calculated fuel load. First i realized that tank 1 and tank 2 of each wing have a maximum capacity of 3911 kg. So i manually entered 3911 kg for tank 1. Tank 2 still had its full level of 3911 kg. I continued to fill center tank while realizing a permanent decreasing fuel load in tank 1. It seems that there is a "ghost"- APU running uses fuel. I hope to get that patched after changing panel state to C&D. Nicolas B.

Hi Michael,you only can remove your start locks if they were really locked before, means when you shut down your engines correctly before (reverse thrust below 50 % RPM). You see it when your propellers are in "fine pitch position"If you startup with fethered propellers using unfeather pumps before, you will don

Hi,good choice to make souch a beautiful single shaft (Garret driven) turboprop instead of boring "big ships" ;-).Recognized some blurs at my first IVAO-flights:1: After 45min of my LNAV- flight, my DIRECT page 2/3 was gone (empty), so i wasn