Reader

Sometimes, the assumption that the default simulator is perfect is flawed. Here is the precise location in an entirely default FSX: There is no need to waste any more time in trying to determine the cause and a couple of excludes would remove those default mesh spikes.

A better question would be "is there any need for the accusatory tone of this topic at all". It could have been phrased, "I am having trouble with cancelling my subscription to Say Intentions AI". Instead, the very first post starts with "A cautionary warning". It turns out that the "cautionary warning" should have been "what follows is unresearched and based upon personal assumptions".

The solution, as explained earlier, is not to go offline, the solution is to not do such ill-advised things.

In the UK local and national government, members are required to declare an "interest" and in some cases, withdraw from a meeting, if that interest is a conflict. What a shame that such a rule does not exist on internet forums. It would be so helpful to know from whose agenda some of these comments originate.

For me, just under £24 is a small price to pay for something that was clearly and accurately described before purchase and which for me, in a nutshell, makes worthwhile improvements. I prefer to make up my own mind and I abhor the videos that appear almost immediately, promoting the unresearched opinion of anyone whose main purpose is to amass clicks and therefore financial gain. No one can know what hidden agenda may lurk behind their comments and they need to be taken with the proverbial pinch of salt. Similarly, the written opinion of someone whose main purpose is to justify having spent the money may well not be trustworthy. How things look is totally subjective and the forensic dissection of cloud types is something best left to meteorologists, though I am sure that there are as many armchair meteorologists as there are armchair pilots, both imagining that they are experts in the real-world field.

Anyone who opens spam emails is inviting trouble onto their PC and if they then open any untrusted links, whether in spam or not, the invitation is redoubled. The most likely "hacker" in that respect, is the PC user themself. MSFS may well run with the PC offline, but its main strength, the excellent scenery graphics, does not, not to mention live weather. My own view is that I will take the risk of a hacker getting past my router's hardware firewall, the Windows Firewall and Windows Defender, just to find out that there is nothing of value on my PC.

That's an interesting approach. If the PC is actually offline, then MSFS will not work and if the simulator is "offline", then that just means that the multiplayer part will not work. I wonder why a hacker would target a single and innocent flight simulator enthusiast on one PC at home, when for the same amount of work, the hacker might be able to extract millions from a multi-national corporation.

There are two "issues". One is that the simulator loads into full screen window, regardless of the user preference. This is what has been identified, apparently fixed already for the beta users and to be released with SU15, itself delayed. The second is that there are scenes from the recently released film, Dune: Part 2, that must be seen before the simulator starts. There seems to be no indication as to when, or indeed if, these will be replaced. The other topic reached four pages before the bickering on a variety of subjects finally caused it to be locked.

DX 12 here, all working as expected.

Or you mine, QED.

Thanks, praise accepted. Humour never does travel well, I did apologise first but it looks like you missed it.

Me too, I don't think that your problem is the Fenix installer. My screenshot My screenshot I know how to embed a screenshot as well. 😒 Sorry, couldn't resist. Your screenshot

He didn't, the first is: "I do not have this airport". The second is: "during beta testing". The third is: "Not strictly a payware addon".

With enough money, anything is possible. I would agree that 2 TB is unlikely to be enough space for flight simulation and would add that it is probably far too large for a primary drive. As the rest of the device is pretty much state of the art, maybe push the boat out a little further and finish the job properly with a 4090.