stweaver321

It's completely normal to use AI with RC4. You just need to "turn off" FSX ATC first. Setup instructions are in the RC4 manual. Flying online with VATSIM I believe you can keep AI enabled, but it would be disruptive as the AI would, obviously, not be under the control of VATSIM ATC. I'm sure AI are used with PFE also althought I've never used it myself.

FYI, there usually is 2 or 3 error logs created when FSX crashes and often only one of them will identify the faulting module.

Alex,I think your best bet at getting help with CTDs is to include the application event log showing the crash. If you're running Win7, type "Event Viewer" in the Start menu lookup. In the Event Viewer, go to "Windows Logs-->Application" and find the FSX entries. There should be a Red icon next to the log entry showing that there was an Error. Often times there will be more than one, so find the one that contains Faulting module (e.g., ATC.dll) and copy the contents in your post. If it's always the same module causing your crash, it's easier to narrow down the problem. if you're seeing a variety of modules causing the CTD, then it's probably unstable hardware (e.g., bad RAM or unstable Overclock). There are other common causes of CTDs that can be addressed if you provide the faulting module.

Wow! That's one buggy piece of software. Apparently just downloading it is enough to cause problems! Emi, you may not have intended on blaming the SP1c patch for your problems, but the subject of your post sure does suggest that. If it was your intent to blame SP1c, I suggest you're looking in the wrong place.

If he purchased about 4 high quality, large displays along with 2-3 high end graphics cards, I can understand that amount. Otherwise, that is hard to imagine spending that much.

I use RC4 for offline ATC, but not because I think it's great. It's just the best available as far as I know. There are quite a few things that really annoy me about RC. However, it's far superior to FSX ATC.

To the best of my knowledge, I have eliminated the ATC.DLL crashes by not having a web browser open during my flights and ensuring FSX is always in focus. The other day, I accidently left FSX out of focus and had the FSX crash (due to ATC.DLL) for the first time in a long time. Hope this helps.

One thing that I've found helps quite a bit is right after you begin your decent, reduce your speed to around 0.70M or so. Up at the higher altitudes, I've found that it will slow down much easier than if you wait to slow down until lower altitudes.

To say that pirates would never have bought the product is flawed logic and obsurd. I don't know why some feel the need to say such things. There are those who want the product and will check if there is a cracked version before actually buying it. So yes, piracy absolutely does cost companies money. Those who steal software are leeches of society. Anyone who claims otherwise is just dillusional or dishonest themselves and looking to rationalize their own behavior. Stealing anything is wrong...period...end of story.

I've been reading quite a few comments from posters who are being critical of Microsoft because of the direction they've opted to take MS Flight. I, too, had high hopes for MS Flight and hoped that it would eventually replace FSX (and it might do so at some point). However, I feel the criticism is, for the most part, baseless and unfair.1) Microsoft is one of a handful of companies that has standardized the PC environment to a point where we can enjoy things like FSX, FS9, etc. Want to know what things might look like without Microsoft, just take a look at Linux...endless distributions with many different GUIs, etc. I use both Windows and Linux in my home. Windows is much more polished and standardized and allows users with very little technical knowledge, to do the basics with small learning curves.2) Microsoft does not exist to do charitable and benevolent acts for the niche that is the flight sim community. It is a business and it is the responsibility of the leadership team to use their limited resources in a way that will maximize their returns. Microsoft has made some decisions as it pertains to MS Flight that, although not ideal for us, is a business decision for them. It's not personal, it's not corporate greed, etc. It's business pure and simple. Many will have their own opinions about the merits of those decisions, however, it is their decision to make.3) Microsoft has become as large as they are because they are meeting customer needs. Although it may not be evident by my comments, I am not a Microsoft cheerleader. Honesty, however, compels me to acknowledge that they do a good job at what they do. Part of the success is due to making products that satisfy real needs and part of it is the business model they use. Like it or not, they have earned their success over many years and our lives as a community of PC users is enhanced because of it.So you might want to think twice before jumping on the "evil Microsoft" bandwagon. There may have been some individuals within Microsoft who did a poor job of managing their relationship with PMDG, but that certainly does not implicate an entire organization that is comprised of 10's or 100's of thousands of people all over the world.

Hear, hear! Well said!

1. Is it windy? 2. Have you properly calibrated your rudder?3. Are you using FSUIPC, CH Control Panel, or FSX for the rudder calibration?4. Is this unique to all of your A/C or just the NGX?

Yes, UT2 works fine with Radar Contact. The only odd thing I've noticed at times is the callsigns. Instead of "United 123", for example, I'll sometimes hear "Uniform 123". Same is true for other airlines as well. I assume it a result of how the UT2 traffic database is coded for a given flight, but I'm not sure.

How did you get around the issue of needing the file called Cessna208.gau from FS9? I just extracted it from the CAB on FS9 CD #2, but if you don't have FS9 CDs, you won't have that guage file and your VC will be incomplete.

From the updates we get from PMDG, it's quite obvious that they "feel" or at least acknowledge the types of comments being posted here. Seeing numerous comments that encourage them to take their time and get it right will have a positive effect on the developers and quality of the product. It's basic human psychology (as mentioned by Jigsaw in the previous comment). On that note, I'm totally fine with PMDG taking as much time as they need to get their releases in order. I'm enjoying the NGX as it is currently.