N3744F

I think Steve's probably got your solution... If you're using Accufeel, turn off (or down) the 'side forces' slider. I've had problems with this myself whereby some a/c are thrown violently sideways, occasionally back into the air, if both main gear don't touch down at the exact same moment. I'm not sure what A2A are using to generate the effect but it really doesn't work too well with larger aircraft. For me, turning down the appropriate slider in the Accufeel settings solved it.

Thank you, that appears to have solved it and I've now purchased my upgrade license!

This has not worked for me, but may be of interest to others with a similar problem. http://www.hifitechinc.com/forums/showthread.php?1820-problem-with-ASN/

I have the same problem. Only occurs with ASN running, which is installed on the FSX PC (SP2, not accel). I've not set anything up in AV specifically for ASN but I cannot find any related details in your FAQ link (which implies this URL: http://www.hifitechinc.com/products/activeskynext?id=70). Can you please confirm the correct folder(s) or file-types to exclude from AV. Thanks! Looking awesome so far otherwise

I have the same issue sometimes. It seems to occur randomly and so far I've not found a solution (except apparently a full reinstall, which I really can't be bothered to do since P3D v2 is coming in a few months)... Best of luck!

Looks fairly typical of no 'HIGHMEMFIX' to me...?

Yes! PFPX profiles were (we are told) designed from real-world performance data. Of course, OEWs/DOWs are going to change though (there's even going to be fleet variation in a single type at any airline- I doubt any two aircraft would be exactly the same...) To be able to cater for everyone, I imagine PFPX was put together purely to meet the real-world values that they have, and were not adjusted for any addon in particular. There were certainly one or two things missed from PFPX, but aircraft performance flexibility is definitely not one, because after selecting the basic aircraft type, you have options to adjust OEW, MZFW, MTOW. MRW, MLW and fuel burn biases on an aircraft by aircraft basis. I really couldn't ask for more here... Regarding the missing profiles, I wouldn't worry too much. Maybe the developer missed a few, but if the actual number of purchasers is anywhere near the number of people showing interest in the product then many other people will be lacking types that they like to fly. I'd give it a couple of weeks before aircraft profiles and airline OFP templates are all over the place; check the FlightSimSoft and Aerosoft fora, Aerosoft files database and of course here! By the end of the year I suspect there'll be hardly any types left without a profile. Be patient, and appreciate a truly awesome piece of software with the types that are available I do think that your livery/aircraft paint selection idea is a good one though- could be quite useful to save us trying to memorise every registration... :S

That's brilliant, thank you!! The LUA solution is much appreciated (I only put the XML into a couple of aircraft, so this is a hanger-wide fix). I noticed that antiskid was left out of FSUIPC and just assumed it was by limitation, so it's really good to see that added now. Many thanks

Here's my solution (does not requre FSUIPC or LUA scripts, although they are a perfectly valid alternative)... First you will need to add the below line to every aircraft for which you want antiskid enabling. By adding this line, you won't ever be able to disable antiskid in these aircraft. This goes in any aircraft's panel.cfg under the [Vcockpit01] section, where [xx] is next number in sequence: gauge[xx]=antiskid!antiskid, 0,0,0,0 Next, create a file (using notepad or a text editor of your choice) which contains: <Gauge Name="antiskid" Version="1.0" Author=" "> <Update Frequency="6"/> <Element> <Select> <Value> (A:ANTISKID BRAKES ACTIVE,bool) ! if{ (> K:ANTISKID_BRAKES_TOGGLE) } </Value> </Select> </Element> </Gauge> And save the file somewhere as antiskid.xml (note XML format, not TXT). Create a folder called antiskid in the gauges folder (root FSX directory), and move antiskid.xml into there. All done, this works very reliably for me!

I just did exactly the same as the OP, and now feeling a little embarrassed about it... (God damn it, why did they have to make the UI live already! xD ) Seriously though, this software is going to be magic!

I've been following the thread intently over the last few days, and after some initial testing today I may have a solution. If you want it NOW, skip the next few paragraphs of intro and go to the red text. As mentioned by others, this problem is very insignificant in the grand scheme of things, but anyone who likes to fly an NG like I do will know that if anything can be made more realistic, it should be! As a home cockpit builder, everything counts, and this is especially true when it comes to the flight model and engine dynamics. After tweaking the FS9 PMDG 737NG for the last few months, merging it with the FSX POSky visual model and with many adjustments to the .cfg and .air files, I'm finally in a position where I'm completely satisfied with it in FSX. You may ask: why the FS9 version? Although I do own the NGX, I am not able to remove the inbuilt system logic which conflicts with the interactions of the Project Magenta cockpit software I use. As a result, I use it purely as a reference in modifying other things... Back to topic: It was during the months of gradual tweaking that I discovered an interesting line in the aircraft.cfg file. The ESP SDK simply describes it as the "Fuel flow gain constant", and through experimenting I found that it adjusted the rate at which the engines spool, and how much overshoot there was in N1 with thrust changes. I will make clear now that the following is likely to be entirely unsupported by PMDG, and unless you're really familiar with aircraft.cfg editing you should keep a backup of the original file! In addition, there may well be a few side-effects with the setting which I've not found (to be fair, it's likely - I'm no expert!). What the line will do, though, is give you that 2/3 % overshoot on the initial 40/45 % power setting. You could consider it to be an 'N1 stability scalar' if you like, where the higher the value, the less stable the thrust accelerations. For me, it works well in offering the small overshoot and also seems to increase the effect of the 35-45 % N1 boost shown in the original video. The only downside, as I say, is that this will make N1 (power) changes occur slightly faster, so the 45 % to TOGA (final take-off) spool will be not massively, but will be noticably faster than before. In the same way, large N1 decelerations (e.g in an RTO) will cause an overshoot. (98 % N1 will decrease to very high teens before idle is re-established in the low 20s. Maybe this is realistic? I have no idea! Of course, it certainly is not difficult to change back the setting if you don't like the result, and (thankfully) it definitely does not involve any complex .air file editing. By all means give it a try, but be prepared to restore your backup .cfg if you don't like the new effect! The line I changed is found in the [TurbineEngineData] section of the aircraft.cfg. It will need adjusting for every NGX variant you have - but has only been tested on the -800! By default, the first line reads: fuel_flow_gain=0.002 This can be increased slightly, I used 0.004 and am very happy with that value (although 0.003 or 0.0035 will give the same result to a lesser extent). Give it a try and post back your findings. As stated, this is not tested extensively and may have other side-effects. I will not be responsible for any damage to your software installation, and I'm only guessing that we're working inside the EULA (maybe I should check that!). Regardless, have fun guys! EDIT: One more thing while I think about it- for anyone not used to editing the aircraft.cfg file, you shouldn't do this while FSX is running!

I did exactly the same (convert and add mipmaps) to both the previous KATL (original) release and the new version. Visually, this process improves the scenery significantly and ImagineSim really let themselves down in my opinion by not completing this extremely simple and rewarding step prior to release. (I think that it's this lack of attention to detail - and lack of customer support, to be honest - which seems to keep them firmly below the standards of FlyTampa and FlightBeam.) However much the texture conversion and mips help though, I experienced the disappearing terminal buildings in both ImagineSim ATL products and have just learned to live with the issue when it occurs. It seems to be the same story with the crazy bright runway lights in the newest Atlanta - it's just how they chose to leave it...

Same issue sometimes- mainly after long flights. Not aware of any fix but fully agree with you!

Try including HIGHMEMFIX=1 in the fsx.cfg [GRAPHICS] section. Then report back your findings

In my opinion, you should be flaring slightly later than you would with the larger aircraft. I find that the wings on the NG, especially when at light weights, are pretty efficient and can easily lead to a float on landing without a solid flare technique. Personally (and I can't speak for the iFly particularly), I try to maintain the approach angle and aircraft attitude until about 40ft. At that point, I'll keep maintain nose attitude, but shift visual reference to the far end of the runway. As the aircraft comes down, I'll probably idle the power at about 25 to 20ft, depending on margin to Vref. As a general rule on the 737, I've learned to calculate Vapp by adding half of any headwind component and all of any additional gust to Vref. Don't be afraid to add an extra couple of knots if you want increased visibility from reduced deck angle during approach, but never allow Vapp to be greater than Vref + 20. Landing with Flaps 40 can also help get the nose down if needed. I stand to be corrected, but I believe the FCOM states that attitude on approach should be between 0 and 3 degrees, which should therefore result in a flare with no greater than 6 degrees nose up. At 20ft, I begin to raise the nose in order to obtain a smooth touchdown. This doesn't require a great deal of elevator input (if I'm correctly configured), but visual reference is crucial here to gauge my vertical speed so that I can adjust the rate at which I bring the nose up, preventing an over- or under-flare. Touchdown should come firmly (to an extent), but should not be hard. The most critical thing, I would say, is power management. I aim to reach Vref at touchdown and so if there is a large margin between Vapp and Vref, I bring back the power a little sooner (30ft?) and let the airspeed bleed. In contrast, if I only have the 5 knot minimum between Vapp and Vref, I'll hang on to it for longer. I think that airspeed makes a big difference to the flare and therefore has a significant effect on the touchdown, and while it's difficult to learn the technique as a whole, the best result will come mainly from experience. I hope this helped you a bit, best of luck!

Just Flight did a clip of an A330 for an AF447 news story on the BBC: http://www.youtube.com/embed/ikxiYgTf9Yc I also saw FSX used in an episode of US TV show 'Leverage' (S04E09 entitled 'The Cross My Heart Job'). Don't recall the storyline details though... Great idea for a thread, by the way!

forum.avsim.net/topic/349537-just-got-rid-of-the-horrible-milky-way-if-anyone-is-interested/ Have you considered AutoStar X (freeware)? No experience personally but it's supposed to be quite good...

A great idea! I hope to join you for the legs between Bangor and Atlanta, and will also try to continue on to Salt Lake. I'm on UK time and won't be around too late, but I am really looking forward to taking part!

Hi, I've had a few activation issues in the past, but I don't believe this one... Have you seen http://forum.avsim.net/topic/388239-fsx-activation-woes/ ? If this doesn't help, why not try a quick forum search - assuming you haven't done that already. Experience reminds me that another big problem with activation is trying to run FSX in any kind of compatibility mode. I'm not at all aware of what W8 supports, but I'd try to keep it 'vanilla'. If you have any further detailed info about specific errors you are getting, posting it can only help. I hope there was something useful there; best of luck!

I was a little hesitant at first, the price being way above that charged for apps generally, but ended up installing it on my Asus Transformer Prime and I have been very happy so far! As mentioned already, I have, once or twice, been unable to download charts because of 'network outages', but once a chart is downloaded, it stays on the device so that it can be accessed in future without the need to re-download. There is a huge number of charts included, and although the GUI could do with a little bit of touching up, it's likely that whichever airport you fly into, charts will be available! In all, a great app for the money. It makes online, especially VATSim flying soo much easier! Hope this helped

Thanks for the heads up! Just to make it completely clear though: The UK Xtreme airport sceneries displayed are not produced by Orbx, and are in fact creations of Gary Summons at UK2000. They are, however, fully compatible and - in my opinion - very complimentary to Orbx's latest EU England... For anyone considering a purchase, I shop regularly with PCAviator and own many of the addons displayed by the link - I don't think you can go far wrong with any of them! - Just for clarification

Mine are in FSX\Horizon Simulation\VFR-Gen-X-2.0\Volume1\Area3 Looks like it's been created by the same guys that do the UK photoscenery, which explains the folder structure...

Hi, Basically, the real world operation of the runways is not able to be replicated in FSX because no runway is ever permanently closed to either takeoffs or landings. From what I understand, FSX cannot selectively close runways to traffic based on any specific factors. The only option available is to modify the AFCAD file, closing one or both runways permantly to either arrivals or departures (your preference can dictate this...). A work-around might be to have two AFCADs - one arranged for landing 27R/09L and departing 27L/09R and the other file being the opposite. This would then involve you changing between the AFCADs as you see fit (when FSX is not running). I hope this was somewhat helpful

Yes, those features are present in ImagineSim's latest KATL. I read a great review about it from AirDailyX - lots of nice screenshots too. http://airdailyx.blogspot.co.uk/2012/09/hartsfield-jackson-atlanta-our-own.html

SHIFT-O will allow you to pan and zoom in most views with your mouse (in FSX).