EdwardSm

I cannot help but feel I am being held accountable for something I did not know existed or could happen. That may not be what is intended but that is the way it is coming across. It was one signature block, some people here have two or more. It had one link and others here do the same and put links in there's. I could have hosted the image but that would have made it static instead of updating live the way it was designed. I also suppose it can be argued no signatures are really necessary except for information required for tech support. I don't know if you guys are trying to help me or make me fill guilty but I can say that I am feeling guilty at this point. I do greatly appreciate the offer to make me a signature, that is very kind; however, it would be static and I could do that and would not want to bother anyone with a task I can do myself. That would be an abuse of your kindness. At any rate fact is I did not know this could happen. I did not know it was possible. I do not want to debate or argue over something that is all new information to me. I am not a computer guy, my degree is in the Humanities. It is probably best if I just step away for a while as I am feeling a bit unwelcome right now. :(

I can understand that; however, I never received a warning on my computer. I want to stress that this maleware has nothing to do with me or my computer. Even though I have been on and off the website my antivirus still does not detect a problem, only Chrome says something is wrong. The first I knew there was a problem with my signature was when Tom sent me a message. Had someone else sent me a message or had I suspected the signature image could cause a problem I would have been more than happy to remove it on my own. Honestly I still don't understand how something from over there (my VA) caused an alarm over here. I am not versed in how these attack things work. The little I know is stuff I taught myself. Point in fact I am still researching and asking questions on my own to try and understand what maleware is, how it attacks, and what the objective of it is. Until now I was under the impression it was intended to redirect you to a store or website to tempt you into buying products or false services because I never took an interest in this subject. My antivirus works and updates itself and that is all I ever cared to know. At any rate as I said above, had I known there was a problem here I would have been more than happy to remove the image. Now I have learned that somehow the two are linked, even though I still don't understand how. Point is now I have learned something new and found have something to read on those long hauls. :smile:

??? Who said anything was wrong with it? In my first sentence I asked how you thought it could be done. In the next few sentences I stated the only method I could think of and pointed out the flaws in that option. I finished by explaining that I was being careful and that no forum warning was needed because it was beyond my control. So, with that said what would you suggest members do, or what steps can members take, to be more careful? I have no experience in these matters and would appreciate any insight which could help me in the future.

I had this same problem last night. I don't suppose you use FSUIPC to calibrate your rudder pedals? I do, it is fantastic for calibrating them and my yoke and throttle quadrant. Since I have the registered version I create profiles. In my situation last night I had installed the ASA 900 livery for the NGX and forgot to assign it a profile. For some reason this was causing FSX to apply full braking power even though there was no brake message. All I had to do was assign the new livery to my B739 profile and everything worked fine. Just sharing because something there may prove useful for you.

How do you propose people do that? The only method I can think of is to ban all items which link to external sources. That would include Tom's TeamSpeak user bar which links to an external host. What about Shaun's Blue Skies signature? Another external link. Don't forget about the advertisements which are placed at the top, bottom, and side of the pages. They are links to external sources. Should AvSim ban all of them because any of those servers could potentially be attacked and sound a warning back here? Some things are beyond our control and I don't see how we can be more careful without barring any links to the outside. I was very careful, I used only one image. That image was automatically generated for me same as it is for the 200 members of our VA. It links back to the VA because every flight that a pilot makes updates the information on the image. I don't think anyone here at AvSim would purposely launch an attack against this site.

With FSInn it is hard to tell from just the one screenshot. The call sign in use was my next guess also. Next suspect could be that the FSFDT Control Panel is not starting or configured correctly. That panel will be down in the Windows System Tray. Did you install FSCopilot first with Admin privileges and then FSInn with admin privileges also? This is why I moved to SquawkBox4; FSinn when it is running works like a charm; otherwise it is a pain that seems to like being broken.

I believe we have a link back to them; however, I'm not an admin and I do not know what the investigation by our service provider has turned up so I'm not going to say it crossed to use from there. I will pass that information along though.

No, it was not intentional. My VA's website picked up something from another source which our service provider and admins are working on. Since we have signature bars and since I had the bar in my signature here it seems to have crossed over. The signature bar has my full name so using it satisfies the real name requirement of the PMDG section and advertises our VA so I use it here. Tim was kind enough to correct the issue by removing the block from my signature. Sadly we are a victim; however, the problem should be corrected soon. The warning I received from Tom was that there was a problem with the signature. It was not a warning against me here on the Forums. There was no need for that sort of a warning against me since it was something beyond my control. Although I have no first hand knowledge in these matters it is my understanding that because the image is generated from and hosted by my VA it caused a warning flag over here.

Is the UK server the only one you have tried? Here is the list of active server.

What is that last plane with the large wing area and rear mounted engine?

When I press a button on my yoke or even my VRInsight MCP II no button in LINDA lights up. Is something wrong? The buttons only light up when I put my mouse on them in the LINDA control panel.

No one can help me on this? :(

I just installed the COA repaint from the PMDG website using the Livery Manager and the pic below is what I get. I have tried removing and installing it several times. This is the only repaint it has happened to and the first time I have ever seen this. Just earlier this day I was using the SWA -700 repaint. I have owned the NGX since it came out. I have many liveries for, and own the, -600/700/800. I did install the COA WL to the proper WL version. Any ideas what is going on here? Edit: On a hunch I just removed and installed the livery again. This time I did not install it to the "WL" version of the -900. I installed it to the non-winglet version and it worked perfectly. When I go to spot view the winglets are on the plane. I will submit a ticket to PMDG.

Actually I was suggesting to use the Windows7 restore point; however, Rick's suggestion is superior by far. I forgot about that problem with the logbook. I use that tool to make regular backups of my logbook and there is another tool you can use to edit entries. Try Rick's suggestion.

Funny enough I just had a problem very similar to this. My FSX wouldn't even get to the point of playing the music. Honestly I never figured out what caused it although I have a very tenuous suspicion it was something with a Windows7 update. I fixed it by using the Windows7 restore point feature. I apologize for not being able to help much more than that but hopefully it will assist somewhat.

I know, but I really don't enjoy flying a pattern. I prefer to get out and maneuver till I feel how flight sim handles the model. Then turn right around and land or land at something nearby that can handle the plane; for example a grass strip. That was only my first flight with it. I will sit in the cockpit for an hour or so checking everything out and setting up my controls with FSUIPC. Anyway, I digress. Again, thank you for the excellent help.

Thank you, Rob, that is fantastic. It was only 86 lbs of fuel, the total trip was 15 minutes long and I only climbed to 2500' AGL. Like I said in my post it was a very short hop to feel the plane out. ^_^ I do see it likes to sit back though. I plugged in the values using my fuel and reducing baggage to 120. I was in the envelope at around 3,500 lbs and 52" CG Is that webpage something I can download or is it only on the webpage itself?

I found this on the T210M which shows max baggage is 120 lbs but is that with 6 pax and if you fold the aft seats down you can load another 120 lbs of bags into that area. So, it looks like my problem might be that station 5 and 6 weight 216 lbs in my example above. The manual seems to indicate it should not weigh more than 120 lbs though? That document also comes with all the info needed to calculate the center of gravity which is something I have never attempted to do.

I tried shifting the heavy people forward and the light people back; however, I did not change the baggage so I can give that a try. The weights are generated for me by my VA's ACARS (are optional) but the bags are not, I didn't know the max was 50, that seems rather light though. I couldn't find anything in the manuals about the cargo capacity; however, it does mention 3,800 lbs on the Centurion II Reference pdf and that is nowhere near that amount with the 86 lbs fuel. I'm pretty sure that 50 lbs max baggage is too light. I still can't find a reference for the M but I did find something about the B. The B only seats four though where the M seats six and the reference I found said the B has a max baggage of 120 lbs. The plane handles fine and everything; just that the visual model squats on it's back.

I mentioned in another thread that I have the C337 and love it. That is my favorite twin engine hands down. I picked up the C210 and made a few short hops with it last night. You will love that plane as well. Be sure to read in the forums here, down in the Carenado subforum, about how to apply the adjustment to the VC lighting, soften the brakes a bit, and adjust the flaps. Sounds annoying but you will enjoy the way it adjusts the plane and they are small, quick, and simple adjustments to make.

I have the 208 and the 210. Both are great planes and I enjoy them a lot. I am currently flying the 210 and have not flown the 208 for about 6 months. With that said I really prefer the 208 a bit more. Both are just amazing though. Not to become confusing; however, If I had to make a choice of only having one it would be the C210 for two main reasons. First, it comes with a self installer from Carenado so you can add the RealityXP 530, 430, or 530 and 430 of which I use the 530. The C208 does not have that although a member of my VA did write and upload to AvSim step-by-step instructions on how to add them. The second reason I would chose the C208 is because I am a line sim pilot. I prefer big and heavy at FL280+ any day of the week. So, when I fly low and slow, I am not looking to haul cargo; just make short hops. The C208 is a work horse and the C210 is more of a sight seeing plane but still has that hauling flexibility. I hope that helps to answer your question.

I am not if this is to be expected or not; however, when I load the 6 stations with weights for the pilot and Pax and load the cargo the plane seems to sit back as if it wants to tip and lift the front gear off the ground. Here is an example of my weights from one flight. Pos --- lbs. 1 ------ 180 2 ------ 140 3 ------ 204 4 ------ 214 5 ------ 102 6 ------ 114 Bags - 163 For fuel I had 43 lbs in each tank for a total of 86 lbs. It was a very short hop while I got used to how the plane handles. Speaking of which this is now my new favorite GA. I did apply the adjustments suggested on the Forums here for the night lighting in the VC, shockwave lighting for taxi and landing lights only, the flap adjustment, and the brake adjustment so they are not so strong. Oh, I also added the RealityXP 530 using the included installer. Sorry, I did not think to take a picture from the outside to show the tilt. Is this an acceptable load or have I done something wrong here? Is that normal for it to lean back when loaded?

I like the C206 although it is dated. I love the C337 though, amazing plane.

Thank you, Bert. I value your opinion and think I will pass on the C340. If you do not mind my asking another question; what do you think of the C210? The threads I read here tend to cause me to shy away. Especially Gregg's topic concerning the handling while landing.

Are you referring to the C340 II HD Series FSX/P3D version? I was under the impression it just came out last year.