Driftdown

No And I've had plenty of PM and emails about the same problem and blatant disregard for customers. FsLabs clearly doens't care about their customers. Such petty things when they have so much important stuff to attend to. After all, who are we to complain ? Customers ? pffffff... We were blessed they even allowed us to purchase their ######*y driver. We should probably thank them considering the tone of their answers. Their Airbus will probably sell... but considering how poorly they handle customers, I probably won't buy it. Anyway, wait for 747 v2 which will prevent FsLabs from taking advantage of their monopoly.

Hi guys, now that things have moved on, any news on this ? I'm running the NGX with multiple screens quite happily now (triple head 2go for the outisde view and VC, and other monitors for 2D undocked panels) but this takes its toll on FPS and is not as smooth as it could be. So I'm still -and I bet we're quite a bunch- very, very (did I mention very ?) interested in a 777 version that could run on a networked PC. Would be sooo great to have PMDG's fantastic quality along with default aircraft's smoothness. Cheers guys

Anybody else who can't get access to the servers ? Both AS2012 and ASE are unable to download anything from primary or secondary servers today.

I was more thinking along those lines Anyway That's such fantastic news ! Thanks a lot for at least considering it !! I think so many of us would be interested ! I'll indulge myself in some fake DVD cover later on if nobody minds, although the first one was erased. One that shouldn't bring any trouble :Tounge:

What could be useful is for potential customers interested in such a version (which does obviously not preclude the full VC version as some misunderstood) to manifest themselves. Although I bet most of them do not come to these parts often unfortunately.

Hi fellow PMDG lovers, The usual question (it was just a matter of time before someone asked this. Maybe it even already was asked in which case all my apologies) : considering the amazing quality of the 737NGX system and gauges depiction, and considering it will most probably be at least as good for the 777/747 v2, would it be possible to create a version WITHOUT a VC ? A version that could be partially run on a networked PC in order to get the most out of FS in terms of landscape graphics but leave the system/gauges rendering to another PC (a la SimA/PM) ? I am no software developper so I have no idea how difficult it would be, what it would take, how different it would be from the all-in-one VC version, so this is just a question. What I am sure of, is that there would definitely be customers for this, albeit I am sure PMDG staff has most probably already thought of it and estimated the percentage (not high I guess). But nonetheless : if it was possible in a "simple" (please note the quotation marks) way to get systems and gauges alone (but keep the flight model, integrated fuel/mass system,....), on a networked PC, I'd be ready, and others as well I'm sure, to pay for this other version ! Just a thought Back to my NGX for now :P Crap, my browser f*** up and I sent the message twice. Could a moderator get rid of this one please ? Sorry again.

Hi fellow PMDG lovers, The usual question (it was just a matter of time before someone asked this. Maybe it even already was asked in which case all my apologies) : considering the amazing quality of the 737NGX system and gauges depiction, and considering it will most probably be at least as good for the 777/747 v2, would it be possible to create a version WITHOUT a VC ? A version that could be partially run on a networked PC in order to get the most out of FS in terms of landscape graphics but leave the system/gauges rendering to another PC (a la SimA/PM) ? I am no software developper so I have no idea how difficult it would be, what it would take, how different it would be from the all-in-one VC version, so this is just a question. What I am sure of, is that there would definitely be customers for this, albeit I am sure PMDG staff has most probably already thought of it and estimated the percentage (not high I guess). But nonetheless : if it was possible in a "simple" (please note the quotation marks) way to get systems and gauges alone (but keep the flight model, integrated fuel/mass system,....), on a networked PC, I'd be ready, and others as well I'm sure, to pay for this other version ! Just a thought Back to my NGX for now :P

Replace the H100 fans with cougars CF-V12HP and you'll be as quiet as the NH-D14. I'm a happy NH-D14 user myself though.

I've got 295.73 and no problem either.

try ticking "prevent cloud redraws". Although it also has its issues, especially for depicting arrival weather. But that should do the trick, and you can keep DWC which is the best depiction available.

One of the main interests of the 680 for us simmers might be the possibility to avoid ATI and its eyefinity or Matrox's TH2G, and use 4 screens directly from the Graphics Card : 3 for FSX's cockpit view and 1 for instrument display/FMC/you name it. That's what I'll be looking for when deciding when I'll start building my IB setup this summer.My 2 cents anyway.

Fantastic news. Can't wait.Any thoughts about us cockpit builders : ie about a possibility to have panels only/possibility to run on a secondary PC ?SDK to interface with hardware as there was for the 737 NGX ?Such exciting times !

It does ;) Otherwise where would be the point of having a hardware CDU if you have to go back to the mouse and clicking on the screen all the time. So it's perfectly synchronized.Actually I just noticed that FDS has managed to get all their Jetmax suite interfaced with the NGX :source https://www.facebook.com/pages/JetMax-by-FlightDeck-Solutions-Ltd/169734156443131And Cpflight has released their drivers, which means that their hardware is now fully compatible too.http://www.cpflight.com/sito/news/comunicazioni.asp

200% worth it. Once you've tasted that kind of stuff, you'll never understand how you may have tried anything else. It's worth waiting to have the money to use this kind of quality instead of rushing to lesser quality. My humble opinion anyway.

FDS CDU http://www.flightdec...info.php?id=712 Fantastic stuff !CpFlight MCP will be very very soon (one or two weeks) http://www.cpflight....i/mcp737pro.asp Fantastic stuff too !Both with great customer support and great quality !

Hi Ryan, thanks for the answer. I can't talk for others, but as far as I am concerned, I only start the PMDG 737NGX with the default cold and dark state that you very generously supplied. So nothing to do with saved state in my experience (again can't speak for others). As for the "reproductible fashion" I'll try my best to identify what could have been the context leading to this. I'll redo the exact same flight the exact same way (-ish) and let you know.

Unfortunately it was the same with both typing using the keyboard or using the mouse click on the buttons. First thing I thought of too, although I doubted myself quickly as it was the same when clicking on the FMS keypad with the mouse. And indeed INSER or not INSER didn't change a thing unfortunately.@scandinavia13 and Jude Bradley : Gentlemen. Don't think I don't value your opinion. I do. You're most probably hundreds of times more competent than I will ever be on software/programming/debugging/... things. And if I'm proven wrong in the end with my finding useless the idea of a screenshot I will present my sincerest apologies.However when I read "Most I.T companies would insist on screenshots if reporting issues" I can't help but think two things :1) it is not because MOST of the time, MOST companies will ask for screenshots that it is ALWAYS useful. That's why we have two words/expressions : "most of the time" and "always". That's also why we've been given a brain : to think out of the box when necessary.2) what happened to good old reading carefully, understanding really, thinking instead of applying a basic "If there's no screenshot it's not even worth reading the post, I'm gonna tell them to post a screenshot before I even start thinking about their problem"Have you even read really what we all wrote ? I believe asking for a screenshot is pointless for a very simple reason (not to mention the fact that it apparently happened only once to all of us and that we may not have been able to replicate the issue and didn't take any screens the first time...) : it is a dynamic problem. Not a static glitch. Therefore a screenshot will only show, as we stated several times, a normal FMS with just one symbol in the scratchpad. If we take several screenshot all you will see is that same FMS on the same page, with just one symbol (changing) in the scratchpad.I can replicate/simulate this behaviour if you reaaaaaaaaaally insist on having a screenshot by just taking a screenshot at any time during any flight of the FMS with one symbol in the scratchpad... but would that be really usefull ? Allow me to seriously doubt it.Hence my "let's try to think out of the box and not use such hackneyed and pointless classics as "A picture is a thousand words""All the very best to all and thanks for all the ideas

Lol what good is a screenshot I wonder : how much more clearer can it be than :"when I type another symbol, instead of appearing in the scratchpad AFTER the previous ones as usual, it replaces the previous one. Therefore only ONE symbol at a time appears in the scratchpad. As it is impossible to have more than one symbol at a time in the scratchpad, It is therefore impossible to use complex expression such as waypoint/navaids/fixes names, radials or range ring in the FIX page, speed and altitude constraints... which makes the FMC far less efficient".No screenshot will be of any use. It's the just the usual FMC with one letter in the scratchpad. Period. Nothing more, nothing less. Or if you absolutely want a screenshot I can take one of the FMC without the problem by typing just one letter. Is this your idea of a "useful" screenshot ? :(

Sorry to dig up this old thread but same thing happened to me today after months of flawless behaviour : I was training on NPA around Bordeaux LFBD, made three NPAs (VOR 11, VOR 23, VOR 05) with their GA and holding, and for the last one, as I was heading to ETPAR for the holding, I wanted to change the altitude of the hold from 4000 to 5000, but impossible : I could only enter one symbol. If typing another symbol, instead of putting the new symbol AFTER the ones already present in the scratchpad as usual, it would simply replace the symbol. Therefore only one symbol at a time was possible on the scratchpad. Which of course makes it quite difficult to use the FMC. Landed without a problem after a last NPA, still unable to put anymore than one symbol during the approach, and during the powerdown at the gate, I noticed that I could now again put the symbols as usual on the FMC, one after the other.Any clue ? Or is this a bug I should report to the team ?Happy flights.

I am also back to using ASE for a while as AS2012 has been very disappointing lately. Especially during the past fews days when most of Europe was OVC045 and all I got was OVC for approx 30 seconds when lauching AS2012 and after 30 seconds it would revert to a nice SCT. I I can't understand why the depiction would be almost perfect during the first seconds, only to disappear after less than a minute.I will keep testing both to compare, as I know Damian, Chris and the entire team are hard at work to solve these issues.

OK made some more testing, and the result is clear : enroute can be very well depicted as OVC, but there is a HUUUUUUUGE problem when it comes to destination clouds ! Especially when using "Prevent redraws" option. This was not the case with ASE after SP2 so here AS2012 is going backwards which is a shame. Two examples (among others) :Arrival on EGKK on the 31st of january 2012. METAR : EGKK 311450Z 03006KT 2500 -SG OVC008 01/M00 Q1026And it had been like that for more than three hours so more than the flight I had done, which means when I first started AS2012 for my flight the weather was already pretty much like that at EGKK, meaning that AS2012 could depict it very accurately from the start : there can be no excuse such as "but the weather changed just prior to your arrival so AS2012 didn't have time to adjust".I had had a perfect OVC depiction during all cruise, and (why oh why ???) the skies started clearing when descending on EGKK, which was supposedly OVC too !!! Why did the depiction change there ???!!! It would have stayed the same, it would have been perfect !!! But no, here is what I got :Does it look OVC down to 800ft to you ? I was so upset I tried unchecking the "prevent redraws" and indeed it changed. Only... I'm not sure which one is ugliest and less realistic :Made a few other flights, other tests with other settings, but the main idea is : for cruise the "prevent redraw is excellent", but from the descent to final approach, it is total crap ! Usually before starting descent the depiction is excellent, and -god knows why- from a very good depiction, AS2012 decides to change something for no reason towards worse instead of better depiction. Better not change if it's to go worse !Another example coming back to EGLL. Again a wonderful metar on descent : EGMC 061350Z 00000KT 0400 FZFG OVC001 M01/M02 Q1033and arrival EGLL 061350Z 32004KT 3200 HZ FEW008 BKN011 05/03 Q1033 NOSIGAs one can see, AS2012 has detected that the weather was very poor on all the area. Detected but... will it depict it corretly in FSX ?See for yourselves :Does any of this look like 0400 FZFG OVC001 to you ? Or even 3200 HZ FEW004 BKN009 ?So again I tried unticking the "prevent redraws" but this time, in order to avoid the flat ugly layer of so-called "overcast" we had seen in the previous approach, I also prevented AS2012 from using anything to replace the Cumulus. ANd instantly I got this :Now THAT's what I'm taking about ! But why oh why isn't it possible to have this directly ? Without having to fiddle inside AS2012 in order to get something at least half decent ?There is a huge area for improvement there !And Chris, Damian, could we have some feedback on this please ? Don't say we haven't been supportive, but no word from you for weeks now...

I wish they are. I've been expecting some comments on destination weather inaccuracies/overcast good-lousy depiction/prevent redraws as well.

No it definitely is NOT the fsx.cfg. Don't start messing with this one with what I posted earlier ! The file is, as written above : FSXOptions.cfg NOT fsx.cfgYou will find it here : Users[Your user name]AppDataRoamingHiFiAS2012Options or the equivalent folder in Vista/XP

Hi leeflet,no it's not only a good angle for the screenshot : it's really OVC, even under my plane. First thing I checked :) It's just that a screenshot from top to bottom doesn't show really how large the OVC cover can be.AS for the "prevent cloud redraws" it didn't maintain the overcast it put it back : I had a very good OVC depiction during all the cruise and the beginning of descent, but as soon as I reached overhead my destination, which moreover showed OVC in its interpolated METAR (FIrst : it should not have been interpolated at all, and second it's even worse because the interpolation was supposedly OVC), the clouds started to disappear and a very nice SCT/FEW was depicted, with perfect visibility. As soon as I unchecked the "prevent redraw" the depiction was back to a OVC as it should have been... however the OVC depicted and the visibility were not as they should have been. First the base of the clouds should have been much much lower, and the visibility worse. So the "prevent redraws" did not maintain the OVC as it has disappeared, it merely put it back, albeit in a not perfect manner.Hope this clears things a bit.

All right, a few more observations on that matter : left EGLL to EDDF, where the metar was quite interegesting and alluring :EDDF 251020Z 05005KT 1600 BR FEW001 BKN002 BKN005 M01/M01 Q1023 BECMG 3000 SCT002EDDF 250950Z 06005KT 1000 R25L/1500VP2000D R25C/P2000N R25R/P2000D BR SCT001 BKN002 M01/M01 Q1023 BECMG 2000 BCFG SCT002EDDF 250920Z 05005KT 0800 R25L/P2000N R25C/1100VP2000U R25R/1300V1900U=EDDF 250850Z 06005KT 0700 R25L/1200N R25C/1100V1700N R25R/1000N=EDDF 250750Z 04005KT 0600 R25L/1200U R25C/0700V1100N R25R/0650N FZFG VV/// M02/M02 Q1023 NOSIGFirst thing : I had very satisfactory OVC coverage all along the route over Europe, as planned (cf. TEMSI chart and enroute metars) :But, when arriving not far from EDDF, where the metar was undoubtedly horrible, both in terms of clouds and visibility, I had two surprises :first AS2012 was using advanced interpolation (!!! on a huuuge and important airport such as EDDF ? With a perfectly normal metar ???) instead of the METAR, and it's only there that the clouds starting to gently scatter, and the visibility was wonderful... Exactly the contrary to what I was expecting. I didn't want my end of trip to be ruined by poor weather rendition and decided to try to uncheck the "prevent cloud redraws" when I was overhead EDDF at about FL110. Immediately the clouds changed and I passed from a gentle SCT (even though AS2012 advanced interpolation was claiming on the wx report : OVC001 !!!!) to a real cloudy BKN/OVC sky.Good to know I said, without the prevent cloud redraws, weather depiction on arrival is far better (although I don't understand why since from when I started AS2012, loaded my flight plan and when I arrived, the metar scarcely changed, but anyway...)Procedure, establish on the ILS and instead of coming out of the clouds between 1000ft to 200ft above ground as I would have hoped and expected (and as both METAR and AS2012 were claming, as AS2012 was still interpolating the thing into a OVC001 !!!!) here I am at 2000ft, having gone out of the clouds a loooooong time ago (at about 4000ft).Knowing that EDDF's elevation is 364ft, with OVC001 (AS2012's interpolation) or even with the real BKN002 of the metar, I should have had the pleasure of a real challenging instrument approach until at best 600ft, at worst 1000-1200ft.What is funny is that the rendition DID go right after a while... After I waited for about 10 minutes on the ground, parked at my stand. Useless.So there IS indeed something to do here. I'd be happy to hear from Damian or Chris. Or submit a ticket if it's better for them.