thea330flyer

Nevermind, its fixed.

Recently I went from the HDD to an SSD and the performance is great. I also moved FSX to the 128GB ssd as well so that it loads faster. I would like to know how to fix errors that pop up everytime I start FSX that do with add on scenery not being in the scenery.cfg. I get a message like this: Local scenery directory (G:\Games\FS10\...\FlyTampa) in scenery area.129 not found. I looked at the scenery.cfg multiple times and did not find that entry. Please bear in mind that I get this error for the following sceneries: -Fly Tampa Athens -Maldives X -Fly Tampa St Maarten -Fly Tampa Dubai Rebooted My other add on sceneries like Heathrow X or Frankfurt etc are all ok.

Nevermind, I found my solution. What I did was to go to where the FSX folder was and set the permissions for that folder so that I, the user have full control/rights of FSX. Then I started and made a flightplan, no crash. :lol:

I do not have REX running in the background.

Recently made the move from FS9 to FSX I wanted to just to test out a few things. I wanted to create an IFR flightplan on FSX, after everything is done and saved, everything stops and crashes. I have deleted my fsx.cfg a couple times and restarted fsx to let it rebuild the cfg file but nothing has changed. Any solutions to this?

Thanks for the feedback. My FSX settings are not on ultra anyway, my weather settings are pretty high but nonetheless my CPU can handle it. If I can just push it to 3.7Ghz it should get more out of it. One question: does AI affect FPS? I use World of AI on FS9 and it did not affect performance, not so sure on FSX but I will use World of AI as well.

I would like to know before I upgrade my video card, how does the GTX 560SE model do in terms of FSX and my Phenom II X4 @ 3.6 Ghz? My current ATI card is wearing out and cannot handle FSX very well and keeps overheating. My lowest constant FPS I recorded is when I load aerosoft Madrid scenery, my average is 3 FPS. I am also planning of putting FSX on an SSD but thats another subject. I ask specifically for this Nvidia card because the 550Ti is on the weaker end of things and the GTX 560 is a little over my max budget and I do not want to stay with AMD/ATI. Reason is, that Nvidia seems to be choice card for FSX over AMD, so I am not willing to take chances. http://www.newegg.co...N82E16814500241 Cheers.

Ok, then it looks like it is worth investing in an SSD, what do you think of this one: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820227812 Also, I want to ask if going to a GTX 550 Ti can smooth things out on FSX as well?

From what I have read so far, SSD's help a lot with stutters in FSX. I want to know why that is though? Yes it loads things faster but should only the OS and FSX be installed on the SSD or can add-ons like aircraft and sceneries go on there as well?

I was going to ask the same question on this forum concerning SSD's. Having never owned one before, I want to look into one as I am currently suffering from constant stutters, since the whole limited writes issue is no that big of a deal. Currently I have two HDD drives, one is C:\ and the other is G:\. My FSX is installed on G:\ which has more space but nonetheless I get stutters. I am planning on upgrading my video card to a GTX 550 Ti but I do not know whether that will be enough for more FPS. And yes, I do understand that SSD's increase loading times but not FPS.

How is the GTX 550 Ti? Good enough? Kind of on a budget here.

Understood. Because there is the possibility of bottlenecking. Mine is @ 3.6Ghz while yours is 4.9Ghz, a big gap in speed/frequency. Guess I will give it a go and upgrade. I am fully aware of that. Going from 32-bit to 64-bit always requires a clean install. Lets concentrate on performace.

I have two hard disks, one is C:\ and the other is G:\. I installed FSX on G:\, will that make an impact on performance? I have the directory set to G:\Games\FS10. I am really considering going for Nvidia however I have an AMD CPU and I have heard that Nvidia video and AMD CPU creates a few problems, but I am not so sure on that claim.

Yes, I am planning on upgrading soon, Nvidia or AMD? But more importantly, Vista or Windows 7? Really wanted to get an answer for my question above.

I recently made the move from FS9 to FSX and as I went from a constant 60+ FPS to around 20-40 FPS I started thinking: what if Vista is causing the decrease in performance? Currently, I run Win Vista Home Basic 32-bit and on FS9 I used to get 60+FPS on my current hardware(see signature). Since I do have a copy of Win 7 Ultimate 32-bit lying around, if I upgrade to Win 7 Ultimate will I see some sort of improvement in FPS? I have already tweaked the fsx.cfg a lot to work more efficiently with my current hardware. If you want to know what kinds of addons I use, you can see my profile. If I need to upgrade to a 64-bit, will there be any changes or not? I do plan on replacing my current video card.

Iim going to give my review on this evolution upgrade, i actually got ONLY the update for the vol.1 edition (whats a little around $20 worth of a small investment?)I did a small test flight around frankfurt, except heres the catch, i did it with the project airbus model (i never, ever, fly with the wilco model), yes, i just copied the panel and put it in the PA airbus A320(no merge at all, and it flies near-perfect).First impression: absolutely nothing newSo here is what i thought while flying:-not even a adequate difference from deluxe model-the HUD is a bit hard to read-the FMGC will draw curves only on the SID-Still a lot of work to do on this model-not an evolution if nothing is really changed-needs more features in systems, esp. in FMGC-where oh where is the weather radar?:Confused:i bought this also because i do believe that there will be a service pack sometime in the near future, i dont see how people say the A/P is screwed up, because i flew it and the A/P works fine, speed also holds great, and i never ever had a 6000ft dive(maybe in the wilco model, its screwed up, but i dont know). i personally dont care for a VC, because neither wilco or PA have a good one, and it will be a while if we ever get a good one. i just care about systems and getting from point A to point B. As i have probably stated before, wilco are the only ones who have pulled a legitimate airbus plane and it works(OK), so even if everybody loathes them, just remember, making an airbus simulation is a lot harder than it sounds, i even have my doubts about them. So there you have it, my advice is: if you are just trying to get a small taste of what the so proclaimed "evolution series" has to offer, get ONLY the update and not the whole pack. and if you dont want anything to do with this so-called legitimate upgrade, then continue flying your 737's and 757's.:(

Its a shame really, we fly more Boeing than Airbus and the most popular airbus aircraft, in general, is the A320 or the A330, in general, since a lot of them are flown worldwide. I know that everyone expected big of Wilco, but you have to realise, that they were the only people that pulled off a legitimate airbus plane and it works (im talking of course the deluxe version). Go try airsimmer and see how it handles, right now, there are more doubters (more like and angry mob) in that project of theirs than wilco. Perhaps, maybe they will launch a service pack, im sure they can see their faults. they launched a SP with the deluxe version.In my opinion, i really thought wilco should fix their models in the evolution pack, so that they look more like airbus aircraft.For me however, im just waiting for the day that a functioning A330 comes out with systems, because i am tired of merges.:(

so, its really that bad eh? to be quite honest, i really expected more functionality from the panel and also the ND to draw "curves" when going from one waypoint to another, that is all i really wanted, since i have merged the wilco panel with the project airbus plane. its a shame really, i really hope there is going to be a service pack or something, then maybe i will consider buying this product. but after reading the reviews, i think i will continue to fly the deluxe version and have a peace of mind here.what i dont understand here is that why is it always the Airbus planes that always have these issues and not the Boeing planes like the PMDG 747 or the 737?

Leen,Again, I dont know why it might be still a mystery as to how the problem disappeared, but all I did was follow what the Paint FAQ's had to say, and yes all I did was open the fuselage textures up in DXTBmp, re-save them with the "mip-maps include when saving" box unchecked, and i have no more blurries. Also, I did not add this before, but i did save them as DXT 3 as well, so maybe that was why it made them disappear. I really have no other solution.

perhaps my explanation did not work, however, the pictures provided will:

Hey, i finally fixed the textures up, i opened them up in DXTBmp and replaced the fuselage files when i saved without "include mip-maps" and it worked! by the way, should i put up the fix for this file? anyways, blurries are gone and the air canada A330 has never looked better.

I was talking about this file in the library: smsa330cgfaf.zipanyways, thanks for the guide.

I am totally new to doing repaints, but I am wanting to do a better repaint of the Air Canada A330 from Overland, except I have no idea where to start. Is there a specific program needed? The reason i want to repaint that aircraft is because the repaint out on the library is blurry whenever I fly the Air Canada A330 textures in the simulator.

thank god microsoft flight is coming out, i was really going to get FSX thinking that even if i have and AMD quad core phenom that it will perform smoothly. but i have question for the person who posted this topic: do you use gamebooster? if you dont, really, go and try it out, i get up to 40~50FPS average on only FS9 and thats when im in high quality airports like aerosoft, and my traffic is set at 80%.anyways, hope you get this solved, really your CPU should run FSX with ease. its more of background services issue. i know because i used to run FS9 with a bunch of tasks that were runnign in the background and that really slowed down performance.

i have gotten a relpy from GE pro:"Note that GE Pro is a texture replacement program and as such is not scenery nor should it appear in your scenery listing. The textures (either default or GE Pro) will be called by your seasons.bgl plus whatever Landclass is defined for the area. Thus it is unlikely that GE Pro is causing the problem, although the replacement textures may show it up more clearly. I have seen similar problems in the past, and they tend to be date related. Try selecting a range of dates from autumn/fall to spring. If the problem only exists between a limited range of dates (eg. 21st November to 21st January) then you may have to either live with it or simply avoid this area within this time period. "what can you make of this? in other words, does yours behave like mine does?