PerWel

So to sum up all this is that a PC today is to weak to do everything some people wants. Great flighmodel together with a great scenery/graphic. Next step if so is a fat UNIX machine with 16-32 CPUs working in paralell Wonder who will program such a thing? But it would be really cool to see. But the pricetag will be multiple of 10 maybe 100+ times a PC. Once again, real flying can only be done in a real aircraft. Some postings I have seen feels like they expect FSX to fly like a real aircraft, wich is wrong. It is close and OK for home use. That is the reason I put in my very first quote about this. Some have even said that FSX have perfect aerodynamics.??!!

OK thanks. Sounds reasonable. So I will try setting 2D to zero in Performance tab maybe it does something positive. If it screws up I have found what file it is saved in and can get it back from a backup.

I did not swallow the LookUp table thing from X-plane. I read about it on a MSDN/FSX Internals site and it is about how .air files looks. From that page: "Most of the base aerodynamic coefficients have a corresponding lookup table based on mach." And this was made for performance reasons as someone from FSX team said on a other forum, sorry but that site is gone. Takes to much CPU to calculate otherwise. Here it is, it's about .air files: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc526961.aspx In the end I do not care if it is lookup or not, it is what I see and experience on the screen that matters. Please, back off a little now. I did not start this because I think I am some kind of Judge that can tell what is right or wrong. I only said my opinion and findings. And being called a fool and not being able to discuss matters is pathetic. I like FSX and NGX, end of story. I do have some real pilot training and to me x-plane feels a lot more realistic in the yoke than FSX. That's my opinion!! In the Graphics area FSX is at the top right now, together with NGX. Also to Scandinavian: I only said that PFC did not have FSX on the approval list. Not in general. I DO also know about the different levels. Me at least, find more approved systems with x-plane then fsx. Might be that x-plane is still around and fully supported. I do not know?!

Yes you are right! X-plane is not certified 'out of the box' alone. But there are two versions of it, one Desktop and the other Professional. To get a FAA cert. both hardware and software (proff. version) together in a system can get a certification and for only one specific aircraft. So it is not on the software level but at system level. X-plane prof is different and have different airplane files then the desktop version. It also removes a lot of the graphic fancy stuff and enhance the instruments. Price tag is also higher. http://www.x-plane.com/pro/certified/ Interview with the CO of PFC: (They make FAA approved systems.) http://forums.x-plane.org/index.php?showtopic=32754 The answer I react on is about that the whole system must be within 5% of the real aircraft numbers to get a FAA Ok. And they use only X-plane in their systems. You can get FSX but without FAA approval. Check their site and the menu FAA certified systems: http://flypfc.com/ It is X-Plane in all of them, but the price tag is far to high for me. Unless I win on lottery. Up $150 000 You can get them with FSX but then it is NOT FAA approved. Maybe because it can't make 5% within a real aircraft. So why can not FSX make it into a FAA cert. system but X-plane can ?? FSX uses table lookup for all airplanes. X-Plane Desktop uses a simpler aerodynamics then the Proff because it needs CPU power to run all graphic. In Proff it need all CPU to run instruments and aerodynamics and turns off all fancy looking stuff. + that the airplane files are a lot more detailed. Anyway I will stay with FSX and PMDGs just because it is OK by me what it is. I do not expect it to be 100% perfect in aerodynamics but I do like that all the systems are working. Scenery and all addons. Why I put in the post about that FSX is only a Flight sim. is because I have seen many posts about people complaining about how it flies. Some think that they have a very advanced simulator in front of them and think it should fly as a real one, same with the weather. Me I am happy with what FSX is, only paid $30 for it and $50 for NGX so we are talking very low budget compared to eg. PFCs systems. Yoke and pedals I paid about $3-400 for, nothing compared to a HiFi version. But it works great for me. It is also just a hobbie at home, no plan to take a real license. I did try 30 years ago but ran out of money and had to quit training. Checked now today what it costs and it is sky high, around $15-20 000 for a singel engine VFR license. Forget it! So when I saw this subject on FAA and NGX I could not resist. I think PMDG can make it if they have a better plattform, so if they make a X-Plane version someone might try to get a FAA cert. for it. We'll see!? But in the end the only way to really learn how to fly by hand is in a real aircraft.

One thing if you run Bojotes tweak, first remove/rename the fsx.cfg and startup FSX so you get a new fresh fsx.cfg. And shipp that one to Bojote. I did that and after that I did some more tweaking myself. + installing nVidia inspector + a lot of reading about tweaking but do not do it to much. Can break something. So if you change something make a backup of the fsx.cfg first. Also look through dll.xml and exe.xml. There is a tag <Disabled>False</Disabled> for most of the addons if you want to turn something off just set it to True instead of uninstalling. It's there when you want it again. Nice feature if you are tracing problems.

No idea, I never have to do it. You must set it in TrafficX if possible, FSX can only handle its own AIs. UT2 just reduces at mega airports when FPS goes too low. At heathrow I have maybe around 15-20 planes around me, have never counted. I have set mine Min FPS to 18 and the Max # AIs in overall to 50 so in the air maybe all 50 is somewhere. Anyway RC4 as I use talkes a lot to the other AIs and warns me if someone gets close. One time I was number 7 in lineup for takoff, RC4 talked to everyone in turn. Really cool. Next time it happend I pressed Clear App and they were all gone. :crazy:

For me with my machine UT2 takes a lot power and FPS. When I turn it off via Addon meny in flight FSP jumps up right away. I have UT2 set at 65 % but it have a nice feature called Target FPS where you set minimum FPS you want, If it goes below that it reduces AI planes. A Max overall # of AI planes, visual settings like how far and low alt. before you see them on ground. And the best is the button to Clear Approach for you in case they takeoff right in your face or taxing out for takeoff when you are coming in.

Look what I have (below), have no problems at all. Not even the crazy behaviors that happens to some here at the forum. The only thing I have run into is OOM thing. Easy to fix, reduced the NGX textures. Now that error is gone since long time. 20+ at Mega Heathrow, 30+ in flight. Use nVidias FPS limiter. Some tweaks in fsx.cfg but not to much, run in 1920 x 1080 with nVidia inspector settings. Your machine is a rocket compared to mine so it must be some settings somewhere.

Is it possible to disable the 2D panels?? What happens if I edit the panels.cfg and comment out the gauges or remove the panel info att the top for the 2D panels?? Will the NGX go crazy? I only run in VC with Ezdoc. The only 2D I use sometimes is the FMC during flight, not during planning then I zoom in to it in VC. Just wonder, I have the 32-bit WinXP Prof. and need all power I can get. Why I ask is that in the Performance settings via FMC I lowered the 2D settings down to 5 and if I am not completly wrong I gained 5-8 FPS in overall. Anyway I could taxi around at Mega Heathrow with a lot smoother feeling, FPS was up around 20+ during taxi to runway. With all things running like UT2 and AS2012. Anyone tried this? Turning off the FO side looks a little wrong. So why not turn of 2D if not used Maybe first question should be: Are they running at all when not shown? Anyway I think they are loaded when loading the airplane so why not get updated aswell if you switch to it. FMC is in sync when you click on it to get the 2D version. I think I will first try setting Perormance to 0 (zero) and see what happens. If it does it's ok by me. When I lowered it the first time I was in a middle of a flight so I did not dare to set it to zero in case it "#&%&?, you know.

Sorry but can not resist..... Have you noticed FSXs name ?? It says Microsoft Flight Simulator, not airplane or flying or similar. It just Simulates a Flight, no promise about correct aerodynamics, weather or so. That's why X-Plane is certified by FAA, a lot better aerodynamics. Almost perfect, but boring scenery and VC panels. I know I have some of the early versions and it was as I remember very close to real life to takeoff and land in some wind. X-Plane is also used by some real airplane manufactures to prototype new models, you can monitor a couple of hundred parameters from it how different parts are affected during the flight. Includes a whole toolkit for plane making. Austin who is the programmer is also a aerodynamics enginer. FSX aerodynamics is far behind X-Plane, saw some note on a forum where someone who had a neighbor who is an real 737NGX pilot that tried the PMDG. He started to laugh, not at the panels and systems but to the aerodynamic behavior. Completly wrong was his judgment. But the panel and systems/buttons was great, like the real thing. So he said why not for training procedures or tricky approaches at home for well trained crews but a big NO for training manual flying of new pilot students, aerodynamics was to wrong. Not PMDGs fault but because of FSX core. FSX is all about a Flight experience with great scenery, airports and graphical look. + all addons to make it even better. In this case it is an great experience with the PMDG 737NGX that is really an experience in how a real big jet is handled/controlled with most systems working close to the real thing. I like it. But if you want to learn how to handle an airplane by hand go for X-Plane but if so forget the nice scenery and panels like what FSX have. Even if X-Plane have improved in those areas it is still behind. So that is why FAA does not call FSX for a simulator, it just is not. FAA demands that the aerodynamic is correct or very close. You can not learn how to handle an airplane via software if it not behaves correct. Could not resist, have had these feelings for many years after my first training in a Piper. And later when I got X-Plane. FSX is just does not have realistic behavior in the air, no matter what brand on the addon. Worst are those included, like driving a bus in the air. PMDG have done a great job with this plattform that have a lots of limits and pushed it very far. I will stay with it. But I consider to get the latest X-Plane for the aerodynamics and only fly the small ones. And if PMDG makes a version for it I WILL get it and move over. Until that day I will defend FSX and PMDG because it is so very good at giving a great Flight experience. Happy flying

Did a quick check of ESSA (Arlanda sweden) 19L/01R is a CAT3 so they must be aligned. Did not find anything special about 19R but it is using the exact same app-course as 19L.

rocketfs: OK I missed that it was an offset localizer, 222 and the runway is on 225. So it is correct, only for CAT1 manual landings. But I have seen a lot missaligned where it should be aligned. So FSX is wrong in many places. I will check ESSA if they have some offset or LDA there, maybe Aerosoft is right. :Worried: But it was both 19R and 19L ??!! Also HiFly: I agree that letting the computer fly it for you the fun is gone. I only used autoland when I learned how to fly the NGX. Now I only use ILS to get a stable approach config then I turn of all AP and manualy fly it down the whole way. If it's really bad weather I turn of AP when I see the runway. Same on takeoff, manual to minimum accel height and turned to first waypoint.

Don't forget to move the Localizer Antenna too. Just a visual thing. It is just at the narrow end of the ILS beam, place it at the same spot when you move the ILS. A little black bar about same length as the runways width. If you change the magvar file for a newer one it only fixes new courses for the Navigraph data. Also you must change all airports for it, there is a magvar parameter in each airport. What it does I have no idea or how it affects navigation. In real life magvar is important, remember that from my flying time in a small Piper. Hopefully it is a thing for some future feature that never made it before they closed FSX develop team down. I updated mine magvar file but I did not notice any difference, nothing anyway that messed up my flights. Everything looked/worked exactly the same as with the old one to me. !?? Anyway I have not gone down deep into FSX, magvar, Navigraph and all that to make FSX work 100% with real charts. FSX is not a real simulator, just a very very advanced airplane game. A very good one too for that price, also the PMDGs planes. But I do not expect them to be 100% like a real flight, to many limits in FSX. I think we would have to pay a little more to get that. A few $100 000 maybe. FSX is anyway the best when it comes to the look of the world/scenery and panels.

I think I have fixed it. Have not tested in FSX but.... I started up FlightSim Commander and checked KJFK and you are right the 22R was missaligned. Started ADE and moved down the ILS to the end, adjusted the headin and Compiled and saved the output to Addon/scenery. Ran FSCs Database manager to update its database. Started FSC and the missalignment was gone, perfect aligned as it should. From what I know if an ILS is shows up in FSC it works in FSX, have never evers seen a ILS in FSC that does not work in FSX. I will do a test flighs later today, my Yoke is disconnected and put away. I am working with a ASP.NET project for a company right now. Need room on my desk.

You are on the right track. Move the beam down to the end and place it like the one to the right for 22L, it must overlap and placed in the middle. You also have to change the heading to 210.71 , same heading as 22L. This should fix it, have done this several times with a lots of airports, including Aerosofts Arlanda Sweden, 19R and Left was wrong. The ILS beams was not placed on the opposite end properly. When I did that they where aligned as they should. Try fly it with some smaller plane like the Carenado Twin, I use that one when I fix alignments like this. If it works OK with those it just MUST work with the NGX. If it does not pick up the signal puzzels me. Do the above fix one more time, must work. I will also do a try to see if I can align it properly. If you have FlighsSim Commander you can also see how you are doing, zoom in to the airport and you can see the missalignment/aligments of the ILS. You must run the Database Manager first after editing so it picks up what you have done.

Would be nice if you could add some sound settings for the FO, cabincrew and ground somewhere, maybe captain too. In the cfg panel maybe?! Just an suggestion for next release or fix.

FYISame in the 800. I have the "start in 2D cockpit" setting on but I use EZDOK, the cameras you know and it always start in the VC. Nothing I will remove, it's to great. But I can live with the complaint, FO starts the engines anyway.If I turn up the sound in the main panel I jump off my chair when the cabincrew or FO talks to me. :Shocked:I run WinXP 32 and can't find any sound settings you show in your screen dump.By the way I have never ever had any of the problems a lot of people have (have a look in PMDGs forum.) with FSX and the 737NGX, just runs perfect. Including your FS2Crew.Think it is because I run a 32-bit heavy thing on a 32-bit system.When I bought FS2Crew I uninstalled NGX and re-installed everything, first 8-900 then 6-700. Then first SP1C for 8-900 and then 6-700. Then I installed FS2Crew. And when you released your SP1 I uninstalled FS2crew andre-installed it. The thing is that I reduce the texture-size for the liveries in the NGX from 16Mb files down to around 1.3 Mb files. No difference in the look from outside, so to be frank I do not understand why they have 4096 * 4096files. Should offer the smaller ones as download. Maybe you can see the difference on very big screens/projectors, I use only a 24" LED. So re-installing everything from scratch takes some time, much is moving files around by hand.I will do a total re-installation of everything someday, but not now. I want to fly. I'll let you know when I have done it and if it fixed it.

Yesterday I used the UK voices and me the captains voice was very very low. Later I in flight before TOD I changed to the EU set and it was a little better. Also these cabincrews are always screaming into my ear.One more thing is that the FO always says "Are you sure" about if the fuel lever is cutoff during Pre-flight. This happend so far in the 700. Will do a flight today with the 800 and see if it is the same problem. Might be some problem withPMDGs SDK. I am a programmer so I know a lot about SDKs. But not this type of programming, maybe time to test a little now with the 737 :smile:No problem to start engines anyway, so no big deal.Otherwise it works great and I will use FS2Crew a lot.Thanks for a great and fun addon.

I have seen this in many planes. In Carenados twins it also drops 5-10 fps. So nothing new and not the NGX. I always park the mouse at the bottom(running in a window) or take up the FMC somewhere in the middle. After some fiddling with the MCP during Climb or App just move it on top of the FMC. Nothing to do, seen this for several years in these more hifi airplanes. By the way iFly 737 have I thrown into the bin forever, after running PMDGs for a while I fired up iFlybut after 20 min I aborted the flight and deleted it. Junk compared to PMDGs. PMDG really is the State of the art and I have already put money a side for the 747 Ver2 and the 777.

It is in the installation, Operations manual vol 2. Look in the PMDG menu in windows. Chapter 11, do a search in the pdf reader for 'flight management'. Starts at pdf-page no 793There is no tutorial in the manual, instead do the NGX Tutorial 1.

Here is a great site for conversions from to a lot.Menu to the left.http://www.convertworld.com/en/length/

In Carenado C340 and RealAirs Duke B60 I lose around 8-10 fps with the mouse in VC. So it is a FSX problem, the other less complicated VCs it is around 4-5 only.And in the 737NGX it is the same for me, loose some from 25-30 to 18-20.

I used DWC and Prevent CloudRedraw, no cloud popping at all. The OVC just stayed there all the time during descent.I put a little bad Topic title but here it ishttp://forum.avsim.n...or-have-a-look/

Today after some checking of differences in ASE and AS2012 I changed some settings and did a flight between ESMQ (Kalmar) and ESGG (Gothenburg) because I saw it was OVC003 and OVC006 in both places.And this is what I've got. OVC006 at takeoff from ESMQ I almost right away lost sight of the ground, was in a grey mess until 7-8000 and broke out of the clouds. No picture from that because this problem havemostly been seen at approach.Just before entering cloudsDiving into the messJust before disconnect AP and ATStill OVC and SnowStill OVC and SnowSo what did I do. Simple!WxOptions.General DWC Checked Force ATC Checked Force Destination Checked Dynamic Rate 0 Everything else UnChecked = not active Cloud Options Prevent CloudRedraw Checked The other two below UnChecked Wind Options Have disabled everything about Thermal on the right side. All slides all way to the left. Visibility Fog Layer Checked Use Stratus for Fog UnChecked Enable Visibility Checked and set to 15000 Thermals Cleared totaly, just made it empty.So to me it looks like that when I removed the use Stratus for fog and Enable Stratuscumulus something happendYesterday I had clear wheather in CYVR with AS2012 and not with ASE so I played around with all settings and compared ASE and AS2012 about differences.And I found these new settings, stratus for fog and Stratuscumulus, so I just removed them. Nothing like that in ASE that predicts OK.So it would be great if someone could test a little to see if I really found a workaround or if it just was pure luck with the weather today.

In AS2012 try to tick and untick Prevent Cloud Redraw and wait a while, things will start happen. I also removed the tick in the boxes about "not using Cumulus for low visibility."Far better look for low visibility.