wingsoffire

Getting fed up with this. Its happening too often mostly at weekends ! Also fed up with being told that the 'servers aren't down' and the issue is at my end. I've just tried REX - downloaded metar OK and the demo version of Opus - also no problem. If I they don't fix this in the next coule of weeks I am going to buy opus and ditch AS2012. All I need is good textures for OPUS and REx will do for that.

You all need to Listen to PfPeter. I jave 64bit WIN7 Ultimate, I have 16GB of RAM, a good graphics card and I still get OOMs with sliders maxed out . FSX was developed as a 32bit programme. It can only address 3.5gb of memory. You can't change this unless you re-write FSX. So even if you ran FSX on a nitrogen cooled Cray supercomputer with a gazillion GBs of RAM, it wouldn't make a blind bit of difference - you would get OOMs because of the programme limitations - nothing to do with the hardware. 64 bit Windows and additional physical RAM only helps in freeing up the 3.5GB on start up that FSX actually uses - it can use no more. Most memory errors are actually caused by virtual address space problems not the amount of physical RAM installed. Beacause FSX is a 32 bit appllication and can only address 3.5gb of RAM it manages memory by moving stuff in and out of a virtual address space on the hard disk. Sometimes this gets fragmented and or corrupted - also if you place heavy demands on the system such as having all your sliders set to Max - it struggles to find enough contigous virtual address space to park the stuff that it moves in an out of RAM so you get an Out of Memory message. Some things that might help are 1) putting HIGHMEMFIX=1 in your FSX config file. 2) Changing your windows swap file size from automatically managed to manually managed and setting it to be equal equal 1.5 times the size of your physical RAM (techniocal reasons for this- cant go into here). 3) Enure your LOD setting in FSXConfig is not set higher than 4.5 4) moving your sliders down. autogen takes up a lot, traffic setting take up a lot, so do tool tips and aircraft labels 5) Checking your graphics card. Unlike most modern games/simulations, FSX doesn't care to much about your graphics card - it is essentially a CPU bound application. Aces designed it this way because at the time of release, graphics cards weren't that powerful. The upshot of this is that the 3.5gb of space that FSX uses includes the memory used by the Graphics card. To cut through all the technical details if you have a 3GB Graphics card, FSX will include the 3GB memory on the graphics card in with its 3.5GB limitation leaving only 0.5GB for FSX to run in. So you could end up with bags of RAM a good CPU and the latest graphics card and still get OOMs. So a graphics card with a lot of on board memory isn't a good idea for FSX. If you have one, there is a fix you can put into the FSX config file to limit memor usage to 1GB - which is the maximum recommended. Having said this, you will see some improvements with the latest graphics card but the biggest improvement you make to FSX is to get a fast CPU and, if you know how to overclock it, do so. With a combination of a fast graphics card with no more than 1Gb of on board RAM and a fast CPU you can eliminate the bufferpool setting in FSX config and get a really smooth experience with good framerates (the framerates will have to be locked at 30 to do this - but anything over 30 is a waste of time because the human eye cant discern more than 30 frames per second). Good luck

MS pitched this 'flight simulation' at the 'general gaming community' . However, I strongly suspect it is unlikely to appeal to average 'microsoft gamer'. Why? Because of its very nature. If I take the opinion of my son ( an avid 'general Microsoft Gamer') and his friends (who have all tried Flight) , 'Flight sucks' because it is 'boring' and nobody is going to spend hard cash on add-ons for a 'game' that 'sucks'. Unfortunately the decision to chase this particular, largely uniiterested, commmunity, by offering a dumbed down FSX has aliented the hard-core simulation community who are, and always have been, the main market for FS9 and FSX over the years and remain the major purchasers of add-ons (I have over 2GBs) . This smacks of a serious misjudgment by MS regarding the core-market from flight simulation products- but time will tell. To add insult to injury MS they also screwed up the licensing arrangments for developers. Nobody begrudges Microsof from wanting to make a few bucks from its platform, the problem is how they proposed to do this. Most of the developers they were pitching to are not huge multinantional companies earning millions of dollars a year. However, MS effectively required them to hitch their entire future to MS in general, and the Flight platform in particular - in effect turning them from independent companies into vassels of the MS state only able to sell what MS permits them sell at a price dictated by MS through channels determined by MS, no other retail sales allowed. This smacks of a attempt at corporate bullying and If I had bult a company from scratch such as PMDG and as was presented by an MS lawyer with a contract like this I would tell him to take a hike, which is exactly what most developers, including PMDG, have done. If the sales were going to be astronomical maybe I would reconsider, but MS have provided no evidence to back up their sales figures other than wishful thinking . Why should I hand over my company to MS for a product that isn't even proven? This again demonstrates a serious misjudgement by MS who genuinely thought that they could coerce companies to 'toe the MS line' and I suspect it was something of a shock when developer after developer turned them down. To simmarise MS have got it wrong on two counts, Firstly, they have targeted the product at the wrong market - a market that doesn't buy flight simulation products and secondly their draconioan licencing arrangements have aliented just about every developer out there. In my view, the success of Flight is going to be largely dependent on the flexibility of MS on these two counts. If they want to sell to general gamers they are going to have to make it alot more appealing to the average gamer and they want serious simulation enthusists to buy it and use it they will have re-engineer aspects of the product and get some serious third party developers on board which will mean changing the licensing arrangements. I doubt they will do either, I have tried Flight but as a serious simmer and a real life pilot I don't care for it, the aerodynamics and aircraft handling characteristics are way off, FSX isnt perfect but with suitable add-ons it is way, way better. I am not worried howeve,r as I suspect that over time other companies such as X-Plane will take up the slack and we will all continue to sim long after Flight has expired.

I now look forward to logging into this forum and reading 'are we there yet?' posts every day for the next six months (.....sigh).

Not as old as the pogo stick!

Take care what you buy. Video memory is included within the Virtual Address space FSX alocates which means that the more video memory you have on the card the less is availble to FSX. FSX has a limit of 4GB so whereas a BIG card with BIG memory seems like a good deal (and it would be for Skyrim) it could create more problems than it solves for FSX.. People have reported a lot of problems with FSX CTD when using video cards above 1GB. Ryan has commented on this before in the PMDG forum because PMDG were getting lots of support calls which turned out to have their origins in this problem. It is not the fault of the ACES team who programmed FGSX in 2006 when 1GB of DDR5 on a video card was a distant dream. There is a tweak you can add to the FSX.cfg file to limit the amount of video RAM used buy I'm not sure how effective it is.Thw 580 will work fine provided you don't go above 1GB limit, but remember FSX is a processor based application. In the words of Lady GA GA it was 'born that way' so you will see a bigger difference with a faster processor. With a fast CPU and a fast card you should be able to run with Buffers pools =0 which will give you smooooooth framerates. The alternative is to buy a cheaper card and overclock it with MSI afterburner. I run an an overclocked 570 which gives me the same throughput as a 580. Couple this with an overclocked i5 at 4.5ghz and some basic Config tweaks FSX runs really well. I have frames extyernal;ly limited to 30fps (the human eye can't make out anything faster than this) most sliders turned up and a ton of addons. As long as your cooling is good you'll be OK.If you want cheaper bangs for your buck go for ATI but Nvidia still has advantages because of Nvidia inspector which enables you to optimise the card for FSX. Hope this helps.

PMDG have always been the tops for me not only in terms of depth and the sheer quality of everything they produ,e but the customer service and professionalism of their staff is first class. I hope Robert keeps it so because this company is a class act.Level D did a great simulation but as everyone else has commented its looking dated now. The Flightsim Labs Concorde is fantastic . The Maddog MD80 is also a great in-depth simulation although I have had a few issues with it in FSX. I don't think anybody has mentioned the Flight1 ATR - yes I know its a port from FS9 but it is still very good.I genuinely believe that PMDG have raised the bar with the NGX and I can't wait to see the triple 7. I am also keen to see the FSLABS Airbus. I know I'll probably be shot because of all the Boeing fans on this forum (I like Boeing honestly) but nobody has yet produced a decent Airbus for FSX and given the number of A320 - 60s in service its a HUGE gap in the market. I know its really tough to properly simulate FBW airbus laws in FSX, Airsimmer tried and failed, but I think FSLabs may the ones to pull it off.The other thing I would like is a decent Cessna 172SP - I am learning to fly in real life and would like to practice between lessons but the default Cessna really doesn't handle like the real thing far too jittery.

I've used ENB in the past but for whatever reason I had more instabilty with it installed than without. I have now replaced it with a payware utilty called 'shade'. It does the same thing but I it seems to be much moire stable.

Whatever anybody tells you, there is nothing inhernetly wrong with running FSX upon a laptop but there are however pros and cons which you need to consider carefully.Pros are1) you have limited space2) you want to use FSX on the moveCons are1) It may not have the 'grunt' - this is certainly true of netbooks but an Alienware overclocked i7 should be OK. I don't think that overheating is an issue as t Alienware systems are bult for it. It will be is desgned to run with overclocked i7 and they have beefy ventilation and cooling fans to cope (althoughthe kit might be noisy.|). THats what you are paying a huge premium for.2) The screen may be too small - particularly at higher resolutions. If you wnat a bigger screen your only option is free standing monitor (which kinda defeats the point of having a laptop) ditto for addons like Joysticks/Yokes/ruddser pedals etc.3) Cost - generally a suitably specified laptop is a lot more expensive than a similarly specced desktop machine.4) Upgrading is a nightmare. About the only thing you upgrade on a laptop are the batteries, the HDD and the RAM unless you are particulrly handy with a soldering iron and don't mind blowing your warrenty because everything else is likely to soldered to the motherboard (which will inavariably be propriatary). - but if you don't regularly tear your systems apart and upgarde them (like I do) it won't be a problem.5) Anything that goes wrong outside the warranty period will cost an arm and a leg to fix (unlike a desktop where you may be able to swap out standard components). The motherbord in my tower went recently and I swapped it out in an afternoon..As far as Graphic cards are concerned Nvidia always used to be the recommended option for FSX and this was largely due to the architecture being more suited to the way FSX works, but nowadays graphics cards are so fast it doesn't really matter.The one advantage you will have with Nvidia is something called Nvidia Inspector (downloaded for free) which enables you to tweak settings and optimise graphics in FSX - I believe Ryan over on the PMDG general Forum has listed the optimal settings. ATI has something similar but I never seen settings for the ATI version posted on any forum. I am not sure ATI recognises the existence of FSX because its an old piece of software but the card will work with FSX and I have used ATI in the past.The one thing you DO have to remember is don't, for the love of God, opt for any card with more than 1GB of video memory. There are very good reasons for this concerned with the way that FSX handles its Vitual Address Space. FSX is a CPU bound 32 bit application which means that can only ever handle 4GB of memory even if you stuff your laptop to the gunnels with RAM. Critically, any Video RAM you have is incluided within this. limit. The net result of this is the more video RAM you have the less VAS is availkable for FSX and you are heading into Blue screen of death territory. Many people are shocked to find out that despite having spend huge sums of money on systems with top of the range graphic cards, FSX runs like a dog with three legs and CTDs every two seconds. The culprit is often a card with huige amounts of vido memory - A BIG card with BIG memory is good for a BIG ego and possiblely SKYRIM but it will be lousy for FSX. There is a tweak youi can put in the config file to limit the vido ram used in VAS but its a faff and I am not convinced it works.With a fast processor and a fast graphic card with modest video RAM you should be able to switch off the buiffer setting in the FSX config file and it will give you smooth framrates with next to no microstutters.If you have 8gb of RAM the laptop will come with64bit WIN7. When you install FSX don't under any circumstances install it on the C Drive under programes86. This is the default location where windows wants to put all 32 bit applications. You don't want to do that because you don't want to create a world pain for yourself with the infamous User Account Control that M$ thouight was a good idea. Put it anywahere else - under the root of the C drive for example. It will run smoother, better and you wont have UAC issues with every single add-on you buy. .When you have installed it also remember to put the 32bit VISTA version of the UIAUTOMATIONCORE.DLL into the FSX root directory. This will stop random crashes. Ignore any rubbish you read on the Internet about 'registering' this dll or removing the version of it in the Windows sytem directory as 'advised' in countless forums If anybody tells you to do this, ask them whether they are a Microsoft Certified Engineer. It isn't necessary and it is downright dangerous. Such advice displays nothing but a deep and profound ignorance of the way Windows actually works.Have fun

Having had FSX stable for several months I am now getting OOms during practically every flight. The start of it seemed to coincide with my use of Active Sky 2012. I have no idea why. I have a huge number of add-ons. I've tried the FSUIPC autosave option and whereas it doesn't seem to stop FSX bombing out it does at least allow me to reocover the flight at a fixed point and seems to reset the VAS.Well if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck...... it seems to me to be a classic to me like a classic memory leak problem. Whether it is the fault of ACES and their coding is a different issue, I do know that C++ should operate in managed mode whereby memory release for objects is automated (i.e. you don't have to specifically code the release of memory in object handling ) but I am also aware that this doesn't always work. If this is the root cause, you could point the finger at almost anybody that develops for FSX.I have 16gb of physical RAM on a 64 bit systenm so have just tried Petes Reg fix (after creating a restore point) and it will interesting to see whethr it makes any difference.There seems to be an awful lot of duff information in the forums about this issue with all sorts of snake oil suggestions - but it would be good to get a more focussed group on this as it affects so many people (at lets face we are hardly likely to collectively move to M$ 'Flight' anytime soon as M$ are pitching this at the gaming commuinity not the hard core simmer).Having seen all the 'utilities' being pedddled on Simmarket to give your FSX 'go faster stripes' its a pity no developer has bent their mind to this one. If they came up with a viable 'OOM be gone' utility they would clean up !

Airsimmer grossly undertestimated the amount of work required to program a realistioc FBW system in FSX and stopped oincew they finished the eyecandy- Flight Sim labs have an airbus project underway. They did a damn good model of concorde so I reckon they may just pull it off.

What did you use for the RAM diagostic? Memtest 86 sometimes lies (I think modern Bios systems attempt to compensate for bad RAM) I've just had a spate of problems with a new PC build. I initially thought it was a RAM problem. Tested it with Memtest 86 and no errors shown. Iwas g to RMA the Mobo and then decided to boot one stick at a time (I have 16gb RAM 4gbx4 modiules) . Booted fine with three modules qand then I got to the last one advice is that if you have more thanm one module try it one stick at a time to see. Other potentioal; causes of blue scvreens of death could be a CPU overheatging (FSX is VERY CPU intensive) if the TEmps are too high under load the CPU will shut down. This sometimes happens if the PC is dirty dusty inside (blocks airflow) or the thermal; past on the CPU has failed. A graphics card overheating could cause the same problem or the mobo could be failing (cheap VRMs are often the culprits). Personally I reckon its a RAM problem.

Well good luck because once you go down that route and they tie you in contractually they will own you and they call ALL the shots. You no longer have your own company becuase you have mortgaged it to M$ - better hope they don't dump you when something bnetter comes along.

You don't negotiate with Microsoft - they own all the toys and they dicatate how you will play with them. I work for a large Global Bank with turnover in tens of billions of dollars. We are one of M$ s biggest corporate customers and we can't get them to the negotiating table, How do you thing PMDG are going to manage it? M$ argue that if you want their products you play by their rules - end of story. These developers are being told to morgtage the companies have painfully built up over many years on the basis of a busines model where M$ holds all the card with vague unsubstantiated promise of 'jam tomorrow' - if it were you and it were your business would you agree to it? Remember If it doesn't work out M$ will walk away without a scratch but the small developers will be out of business. If you really want to preserve the future of simming and not see it turned into another XBOX shoot-em-up you should be encouraging all quality developers to walk away from this debacle as fast as possible.

I got a an introductory pack from the wife which pays for my first six lessons towards my PPL. I start with Skytrek flying club in Januray learning the ropes on a Cessna 152. Saving the pennies now to finish the course !

If its a simconnect problem you are going to get a lot of sporadic eros from services that call Simconnect and the 'smart assembly' error will re-occur. Unfortunately there is no easy way of telling whether you have a corrupt simconnet installation or not without a lot more information. I would sugget that you have a look at this thread on AVSIM http://forum.avsim.net/topic/323016-smart-assembly-ctd/This may help you further. It also confirms that in many instances 'smart assembly' errors arise from simconnect problems.If you cant solve the problem by re-installing Net Framework or running an FSX repair and you are worried about timnkering with your system you can download a zip file to reinstall Simconnect from Flight 1 http://ultimatetraff.../SimConnect.zip. Again it doesn't always work but it worth a shot if all else fails.A lot of people running UT2 appear to have experienced 'smart assembly errors' and Flight1 proivided this link to help out. It may work for - I hope it does. If it doesn't the only way around this is to follow Mike Dowsons advice - delete the simconnect files from the windows system files and clean up the registry with CCleaner before re-installing FSX and all your add ons. Its painful, but I don't know of any other way. One of the guys at Aces who worked on Simnconnect was in the process of developing a fix routine before they were wound up primarlily because SimConnect was acknowledged to be a tad 'flaky'. Sadly with the demise of ACES before the work was finished , we all have to live with the result.When you have it working go to control panels\system & security\System\system protection and create a restore point. This will enable you to roll back your system to a working FSX if it happens again (rember to keep a seperate backup of anything else - email - documents etc) which you can the relaod when you have restored.Anyway have a good holiday and let us know how you get on. If I can think of anything else to help you I will post.

Ryan is correct. Smart Assembly is a source code obfuscator used by a number of developers and it needs Netframework to function. I have had this problem on several occasions. Unfortunately reinstalling NetFramework doesn't always solve the problem. In my experience, one issue that is frequently associated with error message is a corrupt Simconnect installation. Simconnect is widely recognised as the achilles heel of FSX and it can become corrupted for a number of reasons - badly designed add-ons, CTDs etc. Unfortunately Microsoft, in its infinite wisdom, decided that Simconnect mwill never become corrupt and will never need repair so running a repair from the installation disk won't fix it (essentially all repair does is check the windows system files for Simconnect entries and if they exist it says -Yup all in order we'll skip that) i.e. it doesn't check to see whether the entries are corrupt.I would try re-installing Netframework from the Microsoft site first and if that doesn't work reinstall Ultimate Traffic 2 if you use it and any other add-ons that use smart assembly.If all else fails it could well be a Simconnect error. You can try the routine that Pete Dowson (of FSUIPC fame developed) . It was designed for Vista but should work on Win7. I have copied the routine below. Unfortunately it is not foolproof and It doesn't always work. If you have tried all the obvious options first and Petes fix routinbe doesn't work you will have to unistall FSX and all your addons. Uninstall everything and clean out the registry with a good registry cleaner such as CCleaner (freeware) and re-install from scratch. Remember to layer your installation. i.e. FSX, Meshes, scenery, environmnet, aircraft. I have had to do this twice over the past few years and with several gigabytes oif add-ons it is no easy task ! (If you are lucky and have an image back-up of your installation before corruption you may be able to reinstall that)."This guideline is originally made by Pete Dowson, the author of FSUIPC. We publish it here for reference for our users, the original version can be found here:http://forums.simflight.com/viewtopic.php?f=54&t=58095To get a SimConnect LOGCreate a file containing these lines:Code: [simConnect] level=Verbose console=No file=<path to FSX>ModulesSimConnect%01u.Log file_max_index=9where you need to replace the "<path to FSX>" by your particular path for the main FSX folder,and save this file as Simconnect.ini in your "My DocumentsFlight Simulator X files" folder.The Log will be found, after or even during your FSX session, in the FSX Modules folder. (You can of course set the path to somewhere more convenient).With the options as shown you will get a file "SimConnect1.Log" first, then on the next FSX session "SimConnect2.Log" and so on, with it cycling to 0 after 9, overwriting previous copies.If you run FSX in Windowed mode you can set "console=yes" to see a real-time display of what is going on.Re-installing SimConnectRe-installing SimConnectSometimes it seems that the FSX install does not install SimConnect properly, and re-installing it seems to fix problems with Add-Ons.Do not resort to a complete FSX re-install, as the same mis-install of SimConnect seems to re-occur. Instead try the following:1. Find and delete the following file folder (change the C:WINDOWS part to your Windows folder if it isn't in the standard place):WARNING: Microsoft says you should NOT manually delete any WinSxS folders. Well, in the sense they are system folders, no, of course they are correct. However, they also say this can make matters worse, not better, and that to repair SimConnect all you have to do is "... use the "Repair Installation" option from the FSX program setup file on your DVD: setup.exe."The problem is, and this has certainly been reported to those Microsoft folks, that the repair apparently repairs everything BUT SimConnect. It seems to check the correct presence of the folders and if they are there, skips the re-installation of SimConnect. So the only reason I suggest deleting the folder is to cause the Microsoft-recommended method to actually work!All I can say is that it has so far helped a lot more folks than it has hindered.Now, I cannot say the same for the other SimConnect versions, those for SP1 and SP2/Acceleration, which will, if installed, also have similar folders here. I make no recommendation about those at all. In order for SimConnect to load FSUIPC4 (and many other add-ons), the original "base" version of SimConnect must be correctly installed and fully operation, and that is what concerns me here.Anyway, please read the full Microsoft text here before proceeding:http://www.fsinsider.com/tips/Pages/SA0001.aspxSkip step 1 if you want to try Microsoft's method first. Here it is again (step 1 I mean):1. Find and delete the following file folder (change the C:WINDOWS part to your Windows folder if it isn't in the standard place):C:WINDOWSWinSxSx86_Microsoft.FlightSimulator.SimConnect_67c7c14424d61b5b_10.0.60905.0_...(the part at the end is different on XP and Vista -- only the part shown here matters.2. Insert the FSX CD, and run the repair utility. This should do the trick.Incidentally, in case you need to do the same before re-installing FSX SP1, or FSX Acceleration or SP2, there will be one or two more folders to delete. But as I intimate above, I am not so sure the procedure works so well for these. Desperate problems call for desperate measures, however. It is up to you.C:WINDOWSWinSxSx86_Microsoft.FlightSimulator.SimConnect_67c7c14424d61b5b_10.0.61242.0_...C:WINDOWSWinSxSx86_Microsoft.FlightSimulator.SimConnect_67c7c14424d61b5b_10.0.61259.0_...The first (61242) is the SP1 version, and the second (61259) is the SP2/Acceleration version.When deleting these in Vista you will have to run Explorer by right-clicking and selecting "run as Administrator" (this is necessary even if the account you are logged into Vista with already has Administrator rights!) and maybe also change the folder permissions. One user has helpfully provided the following link for instructions about this:http://www.howtogeek.com/howto/windows-vista/how-to-delete-a-system-file-in-windows-vistaPlease be careful!"Good luck.and have a good Xmas.

No you don't. As I have said in an earlier post - FSX looks for this dll first in the root FSX folder and will only go 'a ' hunting' if it can''t find it. When it goes 'a hunting ' it if it cant find it it in the FSX toot directory, Its next step is to interrogate your system files and it will, if you are using Win 7 or 32 or 64 bit, find a version it doesn't recognise - attempt to use it and then CTD. LEAVE THE SYSWOW FOLDER ALONE. If you are a qualified M$ engineer you can tinker with it, otherwise keep out. FSX may not use the dlls in this folder but plenty of other stuff in Win7 does so DONT delete anything unless you really fully understand what you are doing and what the implications are. I have wasteed years of my life fixing systems that people have screwed bercause thaey have 'a little knowledge' - which is always a dangerous thing. ALL you need to do is drop the Vista 32 bit version of the UIAUTOMATIONCORE.DLL into you root folder. Thats it - finito -period - end - nothing more.

Yes its the Vista 32bit version - definitively - you can take it to the Bank. FSX is a 32 bit application and it was developed for use on Vista. Drop the dll into you FSX root folder- thats all you have to do - no registration no messing around with systems folders.FSX will find it and use it.To end the confusion It doesn't mattter one iota whether or not you are running Win7 64 bit - FSX will still run as a 32bit application and it always wil,l so it cannot use a 64 bit dll. One of the reasons why M$ designed 64bit Win7 to have a program Files(x86) folder was to hold all the 32 bit aplications and their associated dls. Nice idea, but the reality is of course that you don't need to load FSX into this folder (the default option when you install on Win7 64bit) and there are VERY good reasons why you shouldn't do so . With the exception of trhe UIAUTOMATIONCORE.dll,( which FSX is expecting to find on your system because it was built to run under 32 bit Vista and knows nothing about WIN7) all you need to run FSX is installed from the installer disk. The problem is that if you install FSX on Win 7 with the default option (e.g in the program files or programe files(x86) folder, clever little Win 7 will then immedietly apply User account control (ubless you physically turn it off) to stop anything 'nasty' running which could 'harm' your computer. This is good if you want to stop evil malware merchants stealing your bank account details, but many.... many FSX add-ons look like malware to UAC so you will have endless problems. Install FSX on the root of the C drive (or anywhere else but under program files) and you won't have to deal with this issue.The other much debated topic surrounds RAM so lets clear that one up.. Because FSX is coded as a 32 BIt application it physically CANNOT USE more than 4GB of RAM (I think technically it is nearer 3.7Gb - no doubt some pedant will correct me). So you can stuff as much RAM into your PC as you like but FSX will never be able to use it. Does this mean that running FSX under Win7 64 bit is a waste of time? (64 bit applications can address up to 1000gb of RAM). Well not entirely - running Windows under Win 64 bit is helpful because the additional RAM can be used by other applications - all those lovely little system tray applications that load at boot time without impacting FSX. Win 7 64 bit handles this much more effeciently than win7 32bit for technical rerasons).Anothewr thing you need to remember with FSX is that a) it is a CPU bound application and :( your video card memory counts as part of the 4GB that FSX can address. This has a LOTof implications for hardware.Firstly whilst the latest video card will help you, buying one with more that 1GB of RAM will positively hinder you. If you buy the latest hot Nvidia card with 3GB of DDR5 and sling in your system expectiing FSX to explode into a mindblowing orgy of realism you will be bitterly disappointed and you will be fighting off endless CTDs because FSX will only have 1Gb or RAM to play with - a lot of people don't understand this and a lot of good money gets wasted on useless high end graphic cards with stonkingly useless amounts of video RAM. The reality is that,proportionately, you will get more bang from your buck from FSX by buying a really good intel processor (AMD are rubbish these days) such as the i5 2500k (which is the best price performance point at the moment) and overclocking it, which is very easy to do. With an Asus motherboard you an autoclock it up to 4.5ghz and with a good aftermarket cooler it won't break a sweat. Do this and you will probably find find you can run FSX with many of the sliders maxed out, I do, and I run textures at 4096 with HD REX clouds, UTX, GEX and SHADE as well as flying complex aircraft such as those from PMDG. I lock frames at 30 (technical reasons for this ). All the debate about running FSX at 40 FPS and more makes me laugh because the the human eye can't make out anything faster than 30 frames per second anyway and thats a physiological limitation concerned with how the rods and cones within the retina work - ask a good opthalmic surgeon.. Keep the FSX config tweaks down to the essentials (i.e. the ones that do work - go to Bjotes site) and you will one happy bunny. This is a far more effective 'holy grail' than following a lot nof the snake oil mythology doing the rounds on the internet, much of which is based upon a profound misunderstsnding of how FSX actually works.

PMDG made a number of changes to their development process with NGX which they believe will improve the development time. I suspect that if the coding is modular there is lot they can rre-use on the 777 which should cut the development time down considerably. Notwithstanding this they are not going to announce anything until its ready to roll so as to avoid feeding the trolls.

Yes UIAutomationCore.dll goes into your FSX folder - just cut and paste. BUT MAKE SURE IT IS THE VISTA 32BIT VERSIONFor the sake of clarity msvcp71.dll (version. 7.10.3077.0) and msvcr71.dll (version 7.10.3052.4) are dlls associated with C++ runtime libaries. They are associated with Visual studio and need NET framework (I presume you have that installed?). For the sake of argument you shouldn't be putting these dlls in the System folder anyway - see the M$ knowledge base article http://support.microsoft.com/kb/326922. THe runtime libaries are used by add-ons and the most likely cause of a CTD is that the library is corrupt. The easiest way to solve this is to uninstall the offending add-on using the uninstall facility provided saying 'yes' when it asks you whether to uninstall all components. Afterwards run a GOOD registry cleaner such as CCleaner - and reboot (to reinitialise/rebuild the registry and then reinstall the add-on - remembering to wait untl it asks if it can install the associated runtime libraries at which point you say ' yes' . Most of the time this will fix the problem without resoriting to poking around the windows systems files.If this dosen't work, try sticking the FSX disk in the slot and run a repair - FSX needs the 2005 and 2008 redistributable libaries which you should get from FSX FSX SP1 and SP2 or acceleration.If you still get problems, rather than hunting around the internet for dlls (which may be dlls but could also be malware- how would you know?). Visit microsoft, download and install the relevent redistributable libaries direct from MicrosoftMicrosoft Visual C++ 2005 Service Pack 1 (KB2538242)http://www.microsoft...s.aspx?id=26347Microsoft Visual C++ 2008 Service Pack 1 (KB2538243)http://www.microsoft...s.aspx?id=26368Microsoft Visual C++ 2010 Service Pack 1 (KB2565063)http://www.microsoft...s.aspx?id=26999 This should fix yoiur problems.AES memory leak solution anybody?

Rick if you are talking about the UIAUTOMATIONCORE.DLL then technically you can put it in here as this holds 32bit binaries on 64bit systems but you are much better off putting it to your FSX folder - you don't need to register it or go through any fancy routines - copy and paste thats all - FSX will find it . The reason for doing it this way is that Windows follows a hierachy when it looks for .dlls - it will look first in the root directory of the programe that is calling the dll (FSX) and only if it can't find it there will go hunting around the System directorioes so it is generally faster and much safer putting it into the FSX directory rather than messing around with the Windows system directories. Similarly if anyone advises you to delete dlls from the windows system directories to 'improve FSX' you should ask them if they are Microsoft Certified Engineers and if they aren't treat all such advice with a very heavy pinch of salt because they frequently have little idea what they are advising you to do nor why. Just make sure that you copy the right version of the dll. FSX was designed to use the VISTA32 bit version (see Ryans post) not any of the other alphabet soup version you may find on the internet.If you running WIN7 64bit you also need to make sure that you install FSX in a directory OTHER than Program files (x86) or Program files (same applies to Win7 32 bit as well). If you install with the default option, Windows says 'hey its a 32 bit application, I'll shove it my 32 bit programs folder where all the other 32 bit binaries live,it'll find all the lovely 32bit dlls there and they will be very happy together !' . Once it does this it will then routinely apply the dreaded User Account Control to FSX and sadly FSX was coded before UAC was a glint in Steve Balmer's eye so it can't handle it. The net result is that your FSX and all your myriad of add-ons will generate a plethora of CTDs and error messages leaving you to figure out the reason why and probably blame PMDG or some other hapless developer for 'bad coding' . I have installed my copy of FSX on a seperate internal disk.Now - anyone with advice on fixing the AES memory leak problem?

Much of the problems associated with uiautomationcore.dll is that people download the wrong versions and copy them into the wrong place.FSX needs this dynamic link library but it needs the vista 32 bit version not the XP version or the 64 bit version etc etc .. You should put the 32 bit Vista dll in the FSX root folder because windown will always look in the root folder for it first.Deleting .dlls in the windows folder is not only pointless it is positively dangersous and if you do this you deserve everything you get. I agree with Ryan, and can vouch from experience if this dll isn't there you will get CTDs after 10-20 menu clicks but the error that 'causes' the CTD could be from any one of a thousand varieties of modules that FSX was trying to call when the system bombed i.e. it wont point the finger at uiautomationcore. Its not a PMDG issue - it never was.The other problem that causes sporadic CTDs is a corrupt simconnect installation. Again this isn't a PMDG problem. Sim Connect is widely acknowledged in the developer community as being the achiles heel of FSX . Corruption can happen for a variety of reasons and the results can, once again, produce an alphabet soup of .dlls showing up as faulting moduies. I have had this problem a couple of times. Sadly you can't run an FSX repair on this issue because M$ in its infinite wisdom developed a repair algorithm on the FSX disc that repairs everything BUT Simconnect - basically it just looks to see whether the Simconnect files are present in the WINSYS directory and if they are it says"Ok I'll skip that then " - i.e it doesn't check to see if they are corrupt.Peter Dowson of FSUPIC fame developed a methodology to repair Simconnect files manually but it doesn't always work (I have tried it). The only sure fire solution is the clear out FSX completely - use a good registry cleaner and re-install from scratch. - not easy when like me you have 150GB of add-ons.I have also found ocassional problems with the C++ libraries following a windows update which can be fixed with a re-installtion of the 2005 and 2008 run time libraries. I can also boast experience of the infamous 'smartassembly' error that appears to be related to a corrupt NetFramwork installation and seems to have particular resonance with users of Ultimate Traffic 2.Then of course we have the famous XML.config corruption problem caused by developers who use Unix editors to write installation routines with line feed returns that Windows can't process.Finally there are the usual round of ill-applied FSX config tweaks that end up hobbling the system rather than helping it. I remember the innfamous LOD_Radius snake oil a while back that maanged to bring a number of systems to their respective knees.Now if anyone knows how to fix the AES memory leak problem that causes CTDs when flying from an AES enabled to a non AES enabled airport I am all ears !The moral of all this is don't mess with what you don't understand, or if you do, make sure you have really good back-ups !

For water : Corsair H100 is good but it comes with a 240mm radiator so you need a case than can take it and not all them can. Also look at the Corsair H80. I have the H80 in Fractal Design case cooling a i5 2500K in a push-pull arrangemet. I replaced the stock fans with Akasa Apache PMW units and can't hear it, even under load ! I'm overclocked and stable at just over 4.7ghz and I'm pretty sure I can push it higher as temperatures are maxing under load in low to mid 70s. For Air : Noctua is good, but custom PC magazine did some cooler bench tests a while back and the Artic Cooler Freezer 13 came out well for good performance, being quiet in operation and good value The sandy bridge processors run cool and frankly if you get a good aftermarjket cooler you will probably reach the limit of the overclock before you the limit of your cooler. The i5-2500K has a design temperature limit of 98 deg C (although your Bios could be set to shut down down before this) I am running FSX with REX, Active Sky, UTX, GEX, SHADE and textures set at 4096 with high sliders and complex airports under WIN7 64bit. I use an external framelimiter and have a tweaked config file. I have an Nvidia 570 (overclocked and stable with MSI Afterburner). I am getting a minimum of 20fps at complex airports with all of the above and 30fps with the NGX in the air. I hope that this helps you. Good luck.

If it is of any help to you, I did the research before upgrading and settled on an i5 2500K which I have overclocked to 4.7ghz. The i72600k is a nice chip but, as stated already, it is lot more expensive and the only real difference between the two is that he i7 has hyperthreading (which FSX can't use) and a larger cache which may make a very minor difference but nothing that you would actually notice. I would save some money and get an unlocked i5 2500k and overclock it. It runs FSX very smoothly. I lock frames with an external frame locker at 30 fps (the human eye can't see anyting faster than this) and I get between 18-20fps with a GTX570 running NGX at complex airports with REX (4096 textures, UT2, Active Sky Evolution, UTX, GEX and various other add-ons. I disable FSX AI traffic (using UT2 only). I use the the ******* tweaks and shader 3 mod for water. Use the money you save by buying the i5 2500k over the i72600k and spend it on 'Shade' a really impressibve third partty add-on which enhances contrast and lighting, you won't regret it.