Kwakadilly

You cup cake pilots never want to have any fun!

ahh, didn't even think of this. When I landed and pulled into the gate everything was magically ok. Thanks!

I'm sure this is an FSX:SE/ SimConnect issue, just unsure as to how to avoid/ fix it. I was taking off and clicked the middle of the nav display to better see my SID as I flew it. Once I got to a good point I turned on the AP and clicked the nav display again to put it back into the VC screen. After that I lost my ability to bring up 2D popups by clicking, no ability to turn knobs, click the warning lights, etc. I have to switch to the 2D cockpit and panels to change anything. I had this issue when I first installed and I noticed a readme that came with the T7 installer saying to go and install all those other SimConnect versions. I did that and it seemed to fix it for both planes. I have done several flights so far without issue. This flight though, it seems like something broke while I was flying. Is there any way to fix this or prevent it from happening? Kinda of annoying that I have to go to the 2D to do anything for the next 3 hours... Thanks! EDIT: Windows 10 and FSX:SE are in use here, FSX:SE and PMDG products are a fresh install. No old panel states are being used either.

This is the solution, why is the thread still going?

whoa, great site. Looks like a promising VA. top 10 gotta be

Yeah, now I am unsure. I walked away and just came back, everything is 30 FPS. I may have been over an in development scenery from a friend that was being rendered and causing the problem. False alarm? I'll just have to do some testing with it

It seems like the contrails are causing an FPS issue. I've been using the product with no issue (granted I have not seen the rain or snow effects), and have seen the contrails in a more faint rendition (like the contrails were not as prominent because the air was warmer, maybe?), however as I cross over the northern United States where the air temperature is much colder the contrails are a lot more visible and as such are causing my sim to lose a significant amount of FPS (runs at 13fps when viewing the contrail, 30 fps when not). I noticed that when I was inside of the aircraft in the VC I would have better FPS than when I was outside and the contrail effect could be seen, which is the exact opposite of what normally tends to happen. I went and checked my FSX.cfg to make sure no other addon changed any settings, and it was fine. I am left to believe it is the effect since this was never an issue prior to using them.

In other words, the 200ER will be here as soon as the NGX SP2 will be here. That is disappointing, especially with such a large demand for it. Maybe I am missing some background piece of the PMDG development puzzle, but in my opinion it would make good business sense to plan, and build, all the variants (to a reasonable extent) of the aircraft you're making. Ex T7 = 200ER/200LR/300ER, B737NG = 700/800/900/900ER/BBJ Variant(s) etc. Just my opinion though. Robert, have you guys ever thought about doing some sort of research poll or questionnaire to find out what aircraft people want to see in the future (where the demand is, basically), what of the projects you're working on are most important to your customers, etc?

Well, I'd say that if they're waiting to fix stuff in the T7 SP before moving to the 200ER, maybe they want to get the NGX SP out before they move on to other things with it. Just a guess. Thanks for the replies, I guess I missed it in the manual.

So, unless I missed it, does anybody know what the current plans are for the 200ER? I know there was a poll a while ago asking what people were interested, and the 200ER was the overwhelming winner. So is it being worked on now or are we going to have to go without one of the most popular versions of the T7? Just curious, couldn't find anything recent on it.

I have to admit, they did well. I stopped flying the 200LR because my VAS would be at 3.0+ upon loading the aircraft and would OOM if I flew into a payware scenery such as LAX. Now with SP1 and the 300ER my VAS is sitting at anywhere from 2.4 to 2.7, and it only goes up to 3.1 if I arrive at a demanding payware scenery. In my book, they fixed it and I am happy!

I wanted to come back and update this, I have figured out what caused the issue. It was a Windows update. After this I decided I might as well install and try out my Windows 8.1, I didn't really like it for my gaming PC so I decided to go back to Windows 7 last night. This morning I made sure I had all the Windows updates installed before trying FSX. I installed FSX and it just closed at the splash screen and never actually opened up FSX. After trying all I could think of and reinstalling over and over I decided I might as well try to install SP1 (I know, bad since I haven't loaded up FSX at all yet) and see. After I did that FSX would crash and give the FSUI.dll error so I started wondering if it was a Windows update. I did a system restore back to the stock Windows 7 with SP1 and none of the updates (well I uninstalled three .NET Frame work updates that I still had installed), reconfigured Windows with all my settings and installed FSX. It worked like a charm. The fact that updating Windows seemed to have caused my sim to die before, and seems to have caused it this time tells me there is an update that screws everything up. I suspect this is a popular CTD because a lot of people have Windows update set to automatic, or they installed it unknowingly. I wish I could say which one exactly, but I'm not sure there were so many. If I can figure it out I will post it.

Thank you for the response, I did not install SP2. I've been running FSX since June without issue, and I had it open running that day. I then realized I had a lot of Windows Updates so I did that and that is when FSX stopped working. I did try what you suggested and more and nothing worked, so I guess a reinstall is in order. Thank you!

I have FSX Acceleration installed. Today I did some Windows updates (112 of them, only the required ones) and following that my FSX stopped working. Every time I launch it I get a fatal error and event viewer says the error is fsui.dll. I've tried everything I could possibly find around the internet, and I've seen a lot of people who have had this issue but none of the thread state how or what fixed it. When I use the suggested AppCrashView tool it does not show these crashes in there for some reason. Here is what Event Viewer shows...any idea on how to fix it? Faulting application name: fsx.exe, version: 10.0.61637.0, time stamp: 0x46fadb14 Faulting module name: fsui.dll, version: 10.0.61637.0, time stamp: 0x46fadb59 Exception code: 0xc0000005 Fault offset: 0x00073ea4 Faulting process id: 0x1640 Faulting application start time: 0x01cf31c5fe638aea Faulting application path: C:\FSX\fsx.exe Faulting module path: C:\FSX\fsui.dll Report Id: 5181f656-9db9-11e3-8eb6-000000000003

But it was fine for Tabs to imply that I am stupid, uneducated, and have no clue what I am doing without knowing anything about me (mistake on his part). Right. Insult for an insult. I never did or said anything about him or PMDG, I am simply (and politely) putting my problem out there and trying to figure it all out. He was the one who asked, prior to that I kept it to myself and said nothing more than I was anxious for SP1. PMDG CAN fix this, but they refuse to look into the issue and offer up a solution like allowing us the ability to lower the resolution of the screens etc like the NGX does (I think I heard that was coming tbh), allow us to lower the res of the terrain display, give us the ability to remove the electronic checklist or remove RAAS (removed manually) etc. PMDG knew full well the limitations of FSX and they knew that the plane was complex and would use a lot of VAS yet they decided to release it this way anyway rather than look into alternative methods such as having a lot of the systems run external from FSX as Majestics Dash does and FSLabs A320 will. They released the plane without the ability to remove VAS hogging features that we can do without if we have to. It is on them, like it or not. This is obviously going no where, so I'll just go back to patiently waiting for SP1 and testing different theory's and fixes.

Oh brother. For the record I do not have 4096 textures on anything other than maybe the repaint or FSDT textures, I don't have 100% AI traffic because I don't use AI traffic I am on Vatsim and only see a plane to or here or there, and I have no photoscenery or mesh (I know somebody that has around 7-8 photoscenery's installed and they don't get OOM with the T7 so it isn't that) and my water uses low res textures and a low quality setting. I have 25 scenery's installed, that is including my FSDT and FB. Further more when I fly the T7 over the Atlantic (no autogen, no anything) the VAS can creep its way up from 2.4 to 3.2 yet when I fly another aircraft (QW 757 SP3) from New Jersey to San Diego the VAS stays in the same ball park and never creeps up despite crossing all these different airports and terrain. For the record, I know PMDG is more complex, that in't the point, the point is all of my other aircraft maintain a VAS in a certain area including PMDG products but the T7 will creep up over time, and it isn't what is on my system either, you've got somebody a few posts up saying the VAS creeps up on a vanilla FSX. So since I am so uneducated please tell me why this is, what makes the T7 continue to eat up large amounts of VAS over time when no other product does. What on the T7 eats up that much VAS over time? Perhaps it is a fsx.cfg setting that doesn't mesh well with the T7? Maybe it is the high res terrain (that we don't even need in high res), or perhaps it is the electronic checklist we can't disable or remove if we'd rather follow a paper check list. Maybe it is the...who knows, I don't because I guess I am uneducated and have not spent a lot of time researching VAS since the release of the T7. Post #68 proves it is something with the T7 if this happens with a stock FSX. But hey, it works for some people, and it works for PMDG so I guess the rest of us that paid you $90 must just be uneducated people that are trying to push FSX beyond its limits and there is no point in trying to dig deeper into the issue and find a solution, after all you've got my money so who really cares anyway? Lets just respond to them by acting as if they aren't as smart as PMDG. I use 1024 textures for everything except water which I use 512. I may try a lower texture resolution on some of the sky stuff. I don't use AI traffic, I fly on Vatsim so the AI traffic I do see is very limited and sometimes not at all present. 2.4GB is just fine, I just don't understand how the VAS will climb randomly over the Atlantic. I'm curious if it may be the FMC, I did a lot of work in the FMC over the Atlantic because I had to prepare positions reports. I didn't feel like using the position report page so I was flipping between the legs page and prog page a lot. Maybe that is it..to much messing about in the FMC..did you do anything in the FMC?

Yes it would be! Perhaps a thread of its own for those with OOM problems, list system specs, scenerys installed and post a few pics of your FSX settings? I'm testing out that fix you posted, not sure if it did anything or not. I'm flying LLBG - KEWR. The VAS was at 2.4 at take off and cruise up to when I entered my NAT. I didn't check it from then until now as I get ready to hit my ToD and VAS is sitting at 3.2, I'm sure that will go higher as I'm closer to KEWR and my JFK scenery loads in. Pretty much though, my VAS climbed from 2.4 to 3.2 while I crossed the UK and the Atlantic Ocean...weird since I didn't ever go external and I have no scenery of any kind in Europe or North Eastern Canada.

That is just silly to sit here and say it isn't PMDG's fault when their T7 uses more VAS than their NGX and every other aircraft on the market (that I own, and that is alot). Since I switched to FSX when the NGX came out I have never had an OOM error or CTD until purchasing the T7, and since others reported OOM issues with the T7 I know it isn't just me. Furthermore, to say I should buy a low quality scenery such as BP or use freeware for a single aircraft when FSDT KLAX was released and purchased by me far before the T7 was released, and works just fine with every aircraft except the T7, is absurd. I'm going to try this OOM thing 777simmer posted and see if that helps or not.

The VAS is my issue, I refuse to uninstall or turn settings to low just to fly a single aircraft when no other aircraft I own (including the NGX) needs this to be be done. To be specific, it's really only an issue when I visit scenery airports such as, but not limited to, FSDT KLAX or KJFK that the problem keeps me from flying it. If I fly from a simpler scenery or an AFCAD to another simple scenery or AFCAD it is just fine. Because it is the T7 and not a 737 it becomes hard to fly at all since all the scenery airports are the airports the plane generally flies out of. It's a shame this is the case because the T7 is an awesome aircraft that I think PMDG did a great job on aside from the VAS. I'll admit, part of this problem has to do with the scenery developer creating a scenery that uses a lot of VAS, however it doesn't make sense for me to uninstall and not use a scenery I paid a lot of money for just because I get an OOM with a single aircraft. I've flown multiple back-to-back-to-back legs between FSDT, Flightbeam and FlyTampa scenery with the NGX and had no VAS issue, so from where I sit the T7 is the problem. It is my hope that SP1 gives us code, or something, that is more optimized and lowers the VAS. I don't have a lot of scenery installed, probably more AFCAD's than anything. I have a well optimized fsx.cfg and my settings aren't turned way up either, just enough to make things look good without being over the top. VAS remains a mystery to me because no matter what I try I can't seem to lower the T7's enough to be able to take it where I want to freely, but no other aircraft has the issue. If you have any suggestions or ideas that may help, feel free to share them. I'd love to be able to fly this thing more often than when I fly a cargo haul. FWIW, I actually did a few tests with the T7 and the NGX when the T7 came out to see what the VAS difference was and if I remember correctly I found a 200-300MB difference on my computer. That is with the VC res turned to low the RAAS removed and the terrain radar turned off. I don't think a ton has to be done to lower the T7's VAS and it doesn't have to be lowered by a whole lot either. By the way, thanks for asking, I appreciate that. :good:

I for one would like to be able to fly this expensive aircraft, so you could say I am a little "anxious" about the SP1 and would like to see if it enables me to fly it more often or not. When you pay $90 you have every right to demand a service pack and a well functioning product. It's no different than Battlefield 4 (in which case people spent over $100 for it and Premium) and what is happening with it.

I fully agree with you!

I've done two flights so far, currently enroute on my third. I got a FSUIPC VAS warning departing FSDT KLAX and the entire flight to EDDP I sat on a fine line of almost getting an OOM. Departing EDDP for VHHH it was high-ish due to weather, but it backed off when I got out of it and was fine. Departing VHHH it was even lower and as I cruise over the pacific now it is sitting at 2.2 GB. I suspect when I arrive into LAX it will shoot up and I'll get another warning. That said, I have no real issue with anything until I get into a demanding scenery, like FSDT KLAX (Flightbeam KIAD was perfectly fine for me, but I think they've just mastered the art of optimized scenery). I think the issue is a texture thing maybe. I'll try changing some settings to see. I'm curious what the difference would be if I could lower the resolutions like I can in the NGX..

Has PMDG said why they decided to do the DC-6? They complain about MD-11 sales being low and I assume they think selling a DC-6 will end up better than the MD-11. I'm not bashing the DC-6, that will be a cool change of pace and something different, but from a sales point of view I don't see how they are going to get very far with it. Retro planes, in my opinion, don't seem to sell as well as the modern mainline aircraft because everybody wants to fly their VA or their favorite airline. How many airlines are flying the DC-6 these days? With that said, maybe we haven't heard about it very much because either A they want to hype the 777 up, or B they pushed it to the side and aren't focused on it, or C all of the above.

Cool, but unfortunately it isn't very good. You put goldstar textures under the door and the textures are not exactly high quality, or accurate. Also there is too much dirt, it is a brand new plane. http://i.imgur.com/Gn3gYPN.jpg http://i.imgur.com/yLiEmrO.jpg http://i.imgur.com/XVT61RU.jpg http://i.imgur.com/APvUkY9.jpg