kanoasurf2

Is it possible to use custom zoomlevels for an airport and its surroundings, including using different source? So far, if I just compile a tile for one given zoomlevel, lets say the standard 16, all is fin. I have dine the same adding custom zoomlevels for the airport an interestling, what I get is the area meant to be covered with the neew zoom levels, it simply comes like a "hole" in the tile. I mean the airport area is showing my default scenery (ORBX in my case) and the rest of the tile is the zoomlevel tile 16... Am I missing something here? Cheers Kano

Bruce I also have them in separate drivers and works beautifully, even power pack, I can still do exactly the same as I was doing when it was only in FSX. Thanks for your process. I would like to say thank you to Rob as well because even if his method may be a bit more complicated, his effort is to help have produced this very useful thread. Antonio

I hope that picture at the top right corner never goes away (as it is, without the black lace) it gives so much of a sense that he is still here as always... To whoever has in heritage his task, all my support and help if he/they wish. Antonio

March 2014. That provides even more evidence that I am saying the truth when stating that in about 12 years as a member of this community (a lot more time than the other two members that have reply together) I just post in the PMDG forum, so how I would know. However that mistake gave you a brilliant opportunity to laugh at me and you didn't. I sincerely appreciate it and I apologize for my error. Mr Young, although not entirely satisfactory, your reply is good enough, and together with Mr Allensworth's, no offence to others, are the only ones worth considering, thank you. From now on and keeping a low profile as I have been doing for almost 12 years, my respect for you both will continue to be intact, in fact it has increased. I am glad to see that you are still the kind of people I always thought you both were through all the posts I've read from you, and I am really pleased that you react in such a gentleman fashion to an opinion different than yours including an inaccuracy such as the one of the year pointed out. Considering the matter closed from my side Kind regards P.S.: I have moved Mr Daveo's e-mail from my spam e-mail. I thought you both and Mr Daveo himself might want to know.

What do you mean? Before I got it fixed or after? Anyway, I always test without weather. Using wind to test does not make sense as would hide the problem. If I want to know whether the problem relates to the controls or not, the first thing I have to do is eliminate any other potential causes, and the first one is the wind, and the second any propeller. So I test without weather and with a jet. Cheers

Dear Mr Young I do not think a verbal warning is a friendly reminder at all. Not in proper English at least. A Verbal warning is simply pure enforcement which can never be consider friendly (regardless the inverted commas). (I am a senior enforcement officer myself by the way) Good idea the one about the specs, but applied with inexcusable unfairness and bad manners, at least in my case and by Mr Daveo. The policy seems to have came into force on the 3rd of March and today, only just 10 days later, and bearing in mind that I do only may have post once in any other forum than the PMDG for more than 11 years already (and there is no rule specifying I have to check any other forum) how do you expect me to know? A friendly reminder is a message/e-mail asking whether I'm aware of the new rule and if I could ensure I comply with it as soon as possible. You do not deliver it in a verbal warning format at all, never ever. What I have received has brought down my opinion of the forum management and of Mr Daveo in particular big time. (Actually, I found his rude e-mail in my spam folder, where it will remain for the time being). My signature is now update, just minutes after I received such an unfair and unnecessary verbal warning, and it would have been changed at identical speed with a real friendly reminder. However the later, and considering my immaculate record in the forum since even before Mr Daveo belonged to it, first as Kanoasurf and when something happened after the big hack, as Kanoasurf2, would have been a fair way to treat me. And Mr Young, If where we put our system specs has become more important in this forum than the good manners, politeness and fairness when interacting with each other, please let me know. Any way, your forum, your call... my opinion. Kind regards

If it helps: I unplugged the controls and uninstalled Control manger. Plug them back in and used ClrCalib64.exe. Run the simulator and all is working (I have to re-assign some of the buttons like trim, flaps and so on) but is working without the need for further calibration. Thanks to all for your help

I rather not. I didn't need to in ten years using the controls, so at least I would like to try to understand, and fix it if possible, why out of the blue is not working.

I thought that after the new installation of both the ngx and 777 with the new update it would be solved... but not. I have been using the CH pedals (and yoke) for yeayrs and years. Only recently I started to have the following problem. Please see the picture attached. Both aircrafts go off to the right. If I press numpad 5, it centres but in a few seconds goes to the position in the picture and then off to the right again. Other aircrafts like Aerosoft 320 does not have the problem but the Quality wings Avro suffers the same (although I barely use them at all). My concern are the PMDG, the ones I fly all the time. I calibrated with FSX. Not easy for the peddlas but did it anyway. No success. I have calibrated with CH control manager (o whatever is called). No success I deleted the "standard.xml" from the users forlder, and the fsx folder (including the root_standard.xml from the setup folder in the fsx folder) pluged the controls again and see... no siccess I installed a new FSUIPC. Nothing I run out of ideas.... Any suggestions? (Just in case I haven't made it 100% clear: it is not a PMDG fault. I'm posting here just for help and because the PMDG planes are the only ones I'm interested on and because you guys are the most knowledgeable overall ) How can I attaché the picture?

Thanks both, got it know Cheers

See on the last post from Mr Randazzo before the one announcing the release? The one saying that Tabs had insisted in adding a link that took you to a pdf doc where how to set up ASN files and son on? Does anybody know where that pdf is? Cheers a

Two things 1) How could I agree more? 2) As said above I'm not of the same language... please could someone clarified RTM version meaning? Cheers

thanks

Hi Can the wind dir/and speed be input in the FMC for landing? Cheers

I would agree. As they are two really different planes, (just look at their history) they are no really good to compare them. However, from the simulation point of view (how well simulated they are) it is definitively possible. Although I love them both and I fly them both irrespectively any time the conditions allow me to, the 777 wins in two main aspects: The simulation rate feature. As a husband and father of small children, it has change my simulation world dramatically. With the NGX I am constrained to small trips of 250-350 miles to try to keep it to around an hour, so you can guess the impact of the T7 simulation rate feature (if you don't, please leave it, this is a fact). The facility to import enroute winds into the FMC, beautiful! To me these are the two main advantages simulation wise (there may be more, but to me, not of this impact). Cheers

Hi Very interesting post although as someone has pointed out useless (and I'm suprised it was no closed as it was not signed...) perhaps the nice way you all publish is keeping it open :) Very interesting and sometimes peculiar opinions here whether right, accurate or not... In my humble opinion, PMDG is the standard to beat in the market, and in terms of consistency, no doubt. Other publishers may get close, even match, several aspects but not the whole PMDG offer. I really hope we'll have more PMDG standards and consistency out there! If I'm not wrong, one of the main reasons why PMDG is not into the Airbus business is because Airbus itself. Boing has worked very closely with them facilitating the production of an excepcioanlly accurate simulation. If they have not that info, they will have to "guess" the manufacture details, not always that reliable. Both the 737 series and the A32X series are the most flawn aircrafts in history therefore the bigest market potential. If PMDG was confortable with the info the may get to deveolp it, there is no doubt whatsoever they would have done it or scheduled. But to match the ngx or 777 standards they need that info from the manufacture.... listen is not the same to draw a ferrari watching it in the street than based in the info that the designer can give you from Maranello... if you know what I meant. I'm looking forward for an Airbus at the PMDG standards or above and I would like to think we'll have it, but before we can say it, we have to fly it, don't you think so? Cheers Antonio Valcarce

Actually... I can't figure out how an aicraft developed or to be developed by PMDG can't be cool... it may happen, but honestly I can't imagine the case...So Michael, no ofense, but the title of the post says very little... unless you mean that you really would like a 787... different thing altogether that doesn't include any doubts about how cool PMDG products are. ... posting while hanging arround waiting you guess what.... I hate when someone break the rules... Mr Randazzo insist that PMDG won't give release dates.... I can, and I am patient for as many years as need it to develope whatever is worth.... but the count down.... is unbearable!!! I would rather wake up one day and ops!!! there it is.... but these ten days are as bad as when I was waiting for my wife to give birth when we went beyond the due day!!!!!

5! and 6 with the one I have edited already!!! as I said.. something happened when uploading.. it look fezzed and probably the botom was working anyway...:(

Please moderator clean up all those repited posts. Something happened with the server, too busy, slow.. I can remember the message, and it came up with all those repited posts!!! Sorry, I can't delete them!!

making it smaller awaiting to be deleted... :(

making it shrter while awaiting to be deleted...:(

making it shorter while awaiting to be deleted... sorry...:(

making it shorter while awaiting to be deleted... sorry...:(

Fully agree...Actually FSXman (and yes sign with your name as suggested or you will be told off as it is an strict rule in this forum :( ) you are quite right in both, your question and your "complaint":a) Your question and the little debate that has generated has make me even more aware of how incredible detailed is going to be the new NGX. As detail as for a "request" to be made one has to come across with something (really legitimate) that looks almost ludicrous for a simulation. Well done. (In fact I have another "suggestion", less serious than the yours by all means that I will put below lol and reflect my point very well...) b People should be a bit more open minded and polite regardless: they are not charged for that as they are not for being... not very polite.. so better to choose the first for the same effort I think. Regarding my suggestion... lol yes it is such a detailed product that I can't even come across with a sensible precise detail as FSXman... but I always thought... if it wasn't not a great deal, has the developer ever though to facilitate a customization tool where you stick a pic of your face and/or your mate and it will come up on the external model in the cockpit?? :( It would be a really funny smart touch in such a state of the art simulation.... lol :( honestly I struggle to think about anything more sensible to suggest although it is something completely unneccesary... lolCheers

SpencerIn my personal opinion you do not want a PC with a good bunch of faster components; you want a balanced PC. Just as an example, no matter how extreme is your RAM and processor on an amazing MOBO and so on... if just only your power supply is not up to scratch, the system will not perform, full stop.My advice is tell us which of the components you have mentioned above is your bee's knees. And we would be able to tell you how to balanced the others.Just a quick example: if your rig is build up arround that great processor, at glance you should reduce the amount of RAM and increase its quality. An nVidia GTX580 should be the bride and definitively, as Ryan pointed out, an SSD. Ofcourse ther are too many details to look at like Win 7 64 and so on.... This is just an example of what I mean.The point is a well balance PC will run faster that another one that is not but has few far superior components.My 2 cents.