dho112

Off "piste"? A fencer?! :)

I've had that anomaly before, but when I exited the program and restarted, it was fine... I chalked it up to some weird perfect storm glitch, that hasn't ever happened again (months)

I just watched that Nova documentary on the crash of AirFrance 447 after it had left Brazil... And how the cause was discovered to be all three Pitot tubes freezing solid after weather radar had failed to see a massive thunderstorm behind a much smaller one and they flew right into it. Apparently the plane simply lost it's mind and thought all of a sudden it was going 0 knots and knew nothing about the air temperature and pressure altitude, and so it simply fell out of the sky into the ocean as each of the major flight control systems and computers shut down one by one. From the ACARS data, the flight crew had to deal with 24 critical flight system failures in 4 minutes, all in the middle of a major thunderstorm. I can't even imagine the stress... I always wondered why they get those tubes blazing hot enough to sear flesh in an instant if you touch them while they are operating, now I know They showed a demonstration of how pure water at high altitude can "flash Freeze" when it comes into contact with any impurity... That was amazing, and frightening...

I fly with service-based failures on all the time. I realize that this does not mean that something HAS to go wrong in that period or even if you fly far beyond the 250 hour service period, but I was just curious about something... Have you ever had a catastrophic failure in flight? as modelled by the sim? Engine fire, Flame out, Critical decompression of the main cabin or flight deck, primary hydraulic failure? I mean, without having the particular catastrophe "scheduled" in either the specific failures page or the random during a set time period... I was just wondering... While on a flight to Punta Cana, Dominican Republic from Miami, I was reading a book in front of the computer, with half an eye on the screen and suddenly an alarm went off and I almost jumped out of my skin! It was actually just my iphone alerting me to an appointment the next day, but still, it really got my heart rate going for a moment :) I can't even imagine what it must feel like initially for real pilots to have the serene engine drone sound in the cockpit suddenly shattered by a loud bell or alarm klaxon while over the open ocean! At least until their training kicks in :)

William, Thank you so much for that link! I really feel like I am on the right track now as far as getting things dialed in... The external frame limiting is something I probably would never have looked at had I not gone thru the steps of even plodding thru older information on my way to newer information... And there is a wealth of advice in that thread that really clear many things up! I'm one of those users that just knows enough about antialiasing to be dangerous around a video card console. I just plug stuff in and hit the broad strokes of config. It seems more and more though like FSX is so much more about the fine details in getting it setup correctly, much like flying the 737ngx... Thanks again!

Actually, implemention and integration was my problem, as the system was running for a while not recognizing the second gtx590 for quad SLI, and a driver issues were causing problems as far as sound... Things of this nature :) For me and FSX these errors had to be overcome (not so much the quadSLI issue) but things like internal framelimiting and 3d settings and configurations ) in order to unlock frames that my machine was "witholding" which I think is also a problem for many as much as hardware capability beyond what is recognizeable by the software. In fact, I would wager that implementation and integration mistakes (driver issues, hardware configurations, software settings etc) are just as common in machines with specs perfectly suited to the software being used like one intended for FSX. FSX and PMDG is a fairly recent discovery for me, and A-10c and Blackhawk are titles I spend more time with as well as other combat simulations which take more advantage of more of the capabilities of my machine. It also does double duty to more responsible and lucrative efforts with the work I do in AutoCAD, Revit Architecture and 3DS Max and the other two monitors on either side of the main are never on for FSX, but shooting the LOWI approach in bad weather is far more exciting than a virtual walkthru of a renovated Victorian :)

No failures in 60 hours? God I HOPE that's normal! :) Serviced based failures I don't think mean that something is going to happen anywhere in that service interval, it just means that you've turned on the POSSIBILITY that something in the service list MIGHT go wrong :) the other choice being the jet is immune to failures. If the simulation is modelled accurately, even with service based failures on, you might never see a problem bigger than a burned out light bulb in 1,000 hours of flying, and if you had thousands of people flying the sim on different computers, you might only see a catastrophic engine failure or structural failure at the same interval you see such things in the real world on the news... Of course if catastophic failures are your thing :) just schedule one via the failures page or set failure interval to something really short :)

I noticed that the dates on the website were from pretty far back, but as far as the instability issues, I haven't seen any as yet... If I do I think I remember there was a conservative mode as an option to the tweaks, and I'll try that if it turns out I have to... Trying not to get too excited about the whole thing, just staying realistic just in case :) Its hard to tell because there were about 14 or so changes listed... I'll grab the original file and sift thru line for line but for now I'm thinking the external frame limiter and one change that involved turning off antialiasing transparency, which was previously turned on globally... That one I can actually check quickly as it is just a single toggle in my Nvidia console... I'll post the results on that one change later after dinner... I'm not looking at this as a miracle of performance more than I think its just rectified grievous errors I had in my setup that were keeping me from performance that was "reasonable" for the equipment that I have...

Alright, after JUST posting to Daniel Choen about how there are no magic bullets that give you quantum leaps in FSX performance, and how it is actually a longer list of a dozen or two small things done correctly that add up to performance (i.e. loading FSX in the right place, Sliders set correctly, config tweaks, hardware, etc etc...) I am now eating crow! The specs of my machine are in my signature, and its no slouch actually... but I would always stare in longing at youtube videos of FSX footage that looked so much smoother than mine... epsecially on things like approaches to large airports etc... I realize that when you build a machine, as I did, with high spec parts, its actually the implementation and integration of the parts that leads to performance in such a way that someone who spent half as much as you on pieces could end up having a machine much faster than yours using the highest end parts if things like drivers were not working well together, or conflicts or errors in installation cropped up thru configuring dizzying array of settings (especially on high end video cards) It actually took me several weeks to even get my high zoot motherboard (Asus Rampage III Extreme) to even RECOGNIZE my quad SLI NVidia video card setup! But I digress... I plodded on with about an average of 16-19fps at KSFO with medium- very high slider settings at 2560x1440 resolution and just chalked it up to maybe higher resolution just killed FPS, along with being a computer building dork, that messed something up on the integration, and never got anything over 30FPS even flying across open desert at FL370 with no weather. Enter the venetubo website (Bojote is his name isn't it?) and his FSX.CFG optimizer program... I had run it once before after I had already dove into the FSX.cfg files manually once making piecemeal changes seperately that I had read about perusing AVSIM forums... But this time I ran it after a clean install of FSX and all the add-ons and after running the config tweaker from hsi website, there seemed to be about a dozen more "Changes" that it made that I didn't see the first time I ran it... along with ONE very critical one I did not see before... This time is said that I had my FPS limited to 40FPS in FSX (which I always do), and that there would be a SIGNIFICANT increase in performance if I used an external FPS limiting piece of software and set FSX internally to "Unlimited" (I had set it too unlimited before and not really seen any improvement" Well, I downloaded the tiny FPS Limit software from his link and ran it, then I set FPS to "unlimited" within FSX... Saved, closed, started my TrackIR5, reopened... picked my 737-800WL NGX Delta jet, the cockpit appeared, I waited for it to fully initialize, moved my head around to scan the cockpit... Then I had to pick my jaw back up off the desk... I took the track IR headset off and placed it down... walked out of my office room to get an iced tea, thinking during the whole walk to the kitchen that it was some cruel glitch and when I came back it would all be back to reality once everything stabilized in FSX including Ultimate Traffic 2 loading up all its jets at KSFO and starting them taxiing... I came back, put the headset back on... panned around the cockpit again... Hmmmm... Shift-z 30 frames per second... Hmmm... I kept watching the counter... it was flicking back and forth between 27-30fps even when I was staring in the direction of what must have been about 15-20 jets parked at SFO (I checked using the external views... which were now so fast and fluid that using my old muscle memory from the way it was before, the view flicked all over the place like pilot induced oscillation) "Ok" I thought... this will all end soon and something will kick this back down again... I started up FS2Crew went thru the ENTIRE cold and dark setup procedure, took off on a short flight to KLAX, still everything was so smooth it was like being IN a life action video... Now at FL350... clouds were set to max viewing distance... again panning around and again, almost incomprehensibly smooth... I hit Shift Z again... now the counter was flicking quickly back and forth between 30 and almost 60FPS! Which I found confusing until I remembered something I read in the FPS Limit program read me file; that the FPS limit was locked by default to 30FPS, and what line to go to to change that... I'm still a little stunned at the moment... To be certain, this little development represents a huge breath of new life in FSX and PMDG for me... so I haven't as yet made the change to the line locking it at 30 FPS, to be honest I don't want to jinx it, its working so SO well right now... I think for the first time in my computer building experience I have finally built and implemented a machine that actually performs to the level that is actually appropriate! Thanks to Bojote!!! I'm going back to his website right now and kicking CASH his way thru his paypal donation link!!! I'm sorry, I just had to share this... p.s. I have NO affiliation to the venetubo fsx.cfg tweaking website whatsoever!

AS2012 is a much more capable and complete weather simulation add-on, while REX looks better... I actually use AS2012 with just the default clouds... Many actually go all out and use the AS2012 weather engine, and the REX clouds and get the best of both worlds for twice the price :)

Although up to date computers now deal with multiple drives with far more efficiency than in the past, the reasoning behind installing FSX on a seperate drive that does NOT have the operating system is because the operating system will often have to access parts of well, the operating system :) on that drive, probably during a moment where you're right in the middle of needing that Aerosoft KSFO texture list to load on the approach :) It's less of an issue than it was 5 years ago because of advances in drive management and protocols (not to mention the speed of drives and technology) but still again, a small probably incremental improvement that doesn "hurt" performance :) The optimal situation? Go out and get a decent SSD drive :) and dedicated it to FSX They can be had for cheap these days if you get a 32 or 64 gig... and that should be plenty for FSX and every addon you could imagine... write speeds can "sometimes" be outdone by very expensive high rpm Sata3 drives, but nothing reads faster than an SSD, even a slow one :) and while you're playing FSX its all about the read access speeds :) In addition they are VERY small and generate next to no heat, if those things are an issue they are very nice to have, and even if you don't have space or heat issues :)

Daniel, I TOTALLY feel your pain about the reinstall! When I did it I had of course FSX Sp1 and two, FS2Crew, AS2012, UT2, FSUIPC, PMDG NGX, and its Sp's and three or Four scenery airports... It takes a while to do, especially when you have to find/redownload licenses and key files! :( But FSX performance is never a quantum leap thing, even if you buy a new computer two generations newer sometimes... Its always incremental steps, and no one that has blazing FSX performance did it with 2 or 3 things; they typically get it with 30 or 40 little things, of which optimal installation is the key! :)

My understanding (from the tech guys at work) is that Windows monitors the Program Files directory (both x86 and non) in ways it does not monitor non Windows default directories. This, for things like indexing, permissions, security, and restore data specific to Windows. It's very much like having virus detection turned on on your computer only for certain directories, and it impacts files accessed in those directories with overhead that files outside those directories don't experience. One thing I noticed immediately after installing in a non windows directory was that loading times of the VC cockpit went to virtually zero, compared to having to watch it "draw itself" previously.

Hello Edgard, I have that same characteristic, along with the additional issue of the throttle handles in the VC jittering at idle throttle as well. I have CHProducts ProThrottle, Fighterstick and ProPedals, and I think this issue has more to do with how Windows7 "sees" the throttle, than how PMDG interprets it... I tried everything to correct the problem with the throttle including every combination of calibrating it in Windows, in FSX, and in both, of trying every setting of control sensitivity and dead zone in FSX, even trying to "cheat" the calibration by not advancing the throttle to the extremes in order to try and get more "throw" to hit the stops more fully once calibrated. The only thing that actually worked (but not fully) was going to the CHProducts website and downloading their latest calibration and driver suite, which it says on the download page is not necessary as Windows7 has full capability to see and calibrate all features on its own. After I did this, I was able to get more throw of the throttles in the VC than I could ever get calibrating with Windows or FSX. and the jitter problem was almost eliminated at full throttle and greatly reduced, but not gone at idle. Are you using Windows drivers or Saitek software to drive your throttle? Have you tried not moving to the stops when calibrating? it might have different results with your equipment... Good luck!

Hi Bryan,Thanks for the speedy reply! Always a great sign that the author is really dedicated to providing the best :)Just some more information to clarify for others who might be reading. I have a Logitech 6.1 system and it has variable sound levels for the subwoofer as well as the individual front channels (left, right, center) I made sure that it wasn't some wildly out of spec volume setting on my end because I know that the FA and GC talk in the center channel and I hear the copilot in the right channel, so I ran the test where it plays a chime sound on all speakers to calibrate their volume and all of those settings were in place when I hear the really loud flight attendants and ground crew and the soft spoken pilot and copilot... Just endeavouring to eliminate as many variables as possible :) Again though Amazing product!I'm checking my PMs right now, thank you again!David

Thank you Fabo, That was actually my intent when I use the term "memorize" I should have stated it with the more accurate for me, "I want to be able to flip that switch because I know what I want the plane to do, not because a note on a piece of paper told me I was supposed to" :)I find that the most engaging thing about 737NGX, amplified by the add-ons like fs2crew and the others of note, is that for the first time in Flight Simulator, I WANT to understand how and WHY the plane flies, and what I need to do to make that happen, instead of the previous where I just wanted to jump in a cessna, use the cheat quick keys to start the plane, and then proceed to see how close I could buzz the tower without crashing into it...By understanding (in a way memorizing) the checklists I find myself actually talking in my head about what just happened when I flipped a switch, and imagining fans starting to turn and how electricity is flowing, and where the fuel is being routed depending on my actions in the cockpit. I find that very engaging, and there is, dare I say, a real feeling of authority and empowerment in understanding what's going on around me by connecting my actions to inevitable consequences :)For me, 737NGX bridged that gap from fun "game" to fun "simulation" and I get as much if not more satisfaction flying a perfect approach by hand and then perfectly taxiing to the gate, then I ever did crashing perfectly into a tower :)I think that an enthusiasm for real life, is what PMDG strives for in their simulations, I might just be speaking about how I see it, but because of what they've given me, I strive now for perfection in simulation with the things I should do, instead of the things the program allows me to do... :)p.s. I actually do go thru the checklist though but after I've thought about what step I just did :) It tends to be far from mindless :)

I have the same problem as above... It seems as though the pilots and co pilots voices change volume. Moreso, the flight attendants and ground crew volume is about 5 times louder than the pilot and copilot! When the ground crew speaks I have to reach over and turn the volume down significantly, then back up again so I can actually here the pilot.When the flight attendant delivers coffe or food, the knock on the door is so LOUD it makes me jump out of my seat if I have the volume turned up enough to here what the pilot and copilot are saying...The really odd thing is that seemingly the different phrases spoken by the pilot and co pilot are extremely variable sometimes you sau "ok, that was clear" then the next thing they say makes you say, "What was that?" :)Its a great implementation and it adds a LOT to the sim, but those screaming flight attendants and yelling ground crew are kind of off-putting :)

Hi Jack,Yes, I've done that, but I don't know if its because I have a good monitor or a bad one *laughing* but when I turn the brightness up so that I can just comfortably see the switches in the overhead, the rest of the cockpit looks like its in a fog or haze, it makes me want to send a mayday, "Smoke in the cockpit" :)Additionally it seems to me more realistic that if ALL the lights go out on a pitch black night, I shouldn't be able to see the overhead at all :) and if I set it so that the brightness setting makes them visible at night, then its kind of a cheat that makes a primary cockpit lighting failure kind of a non-issue emergency :)

Hi Ryan!Thank you for the quick reply! Rendered light as in a light sourced effects I don't think are even necessary :) I don't know if I am correct in this assumption, but it doesn't look at all like the MCP or Front panel knobs and controls are light sourced, but use what looks like a level selective graphic file "switch" that is it seems that as the cockpit gets darker and lighter in "steps" as the sun goes down for example you see at certain times a little "blip" and all of a sudden the panels and switches get a darker or lighter shade of color as it switches graphic files... Also when you turn up say, the MCP flood lighting, you can see the swtiches step thru the progressive light and lighter shades of what I assume are graphic files applied to them in steps depending on what the instensity knob is set to... Is that right? It makes the knobs and switches and toggles that don't have guage illumination far easier to see at night... The pedestal is a better example... at night, when you turn up the flood "one click" all the knobs and buttons and switches etc go from black, to partially glowing, its obviously a file switch of the object graphics... Couldn't you do this kind of thing for the objects on the overhead? except in a much more subtle orange glow from the gauge lighting variably dependent on that setting since there is no seperate flood?Since the real 737 does not have spot lighting illumination on the overhead I would never want it added as it would not be authentic, but would it be possible to have the toggle switch, knob, dial etc objects and the panel itself have a "at night with gauge lighting on" version? Just as there are versions of the panel for day and night? The night panel with gauges on would have the flat portion of the panel have a subtle orange glow from the ambient gauge lights (not the fault and alert lights as those are normally off) but just the areas and objects that would be lit by gauge lighting that is normally always on at night?I realize that its probably not a simple thing to implement, but it looks as though its been done already in a variant form on other panels in the cockpit. By the way, I think what you've done with this sim is absolutely spectacular! What I was mentioning about the lighting is more a niggling thing than a deal breaker by far :) Since its a simulation, I could see how flying at night with the dome light on always is not a big deal, but in the real aircraft, would they do that? Also the dome light is VERY bright, so bright that you could turn off all the night illumination on the controls and you'd be fine, but it sure makes it hard to see anything outside the windows without squinting :) and that is just in the sim, in real life it must be 10 times worse to fly that way :)I can see the overhead fairly well at night if I turn the gamma up on my monitor, but it ends up making the rest of the easily viewed at night cockpit look very hign contrast and washed out, not at all realistic looking in my opinion...Have a look at my screen shot above of the overhead at night in NGX, does yours look that dark? or is it just me?

Absolutely Al, this makes sense to me... No lights, everything is good :) But I wasn't talking about hitting the overhead with an HID headlight :) Just a variable source that would illuminate the surface like the pedestal at night... A light indicating a fault is CERTAINLY something that has to grab your attention on the overhead, but conversely, if you can see that fault indication light in the daytime, why would softly illuminating the overhead at night make anything more difficult? and actually make things easier and more clear since you could more quickly see the position of an errant switch or knob more quickly with soft illumination, instead of feeling for all of them?

Think about it :) There is emergency floor lighting in the cabin of the aircraft that gets stepped on about 1000 times more often than a flood in the floor of the flight deck... Do you actually think that the engineers couldn't make a floor recessed light fixture that could withstand a blast point blank from a pistol for cheap if they wanted to? :) The arguments against a floor mounted flood for the overhead are more reasonable concerning things like papers or your flightbag getting placed on top of it, but getting broken because you step on it? That's fairly off the wall since they make recessed runway lighting that you can runover with a 747... I'm absolutely certain that even a brain dead engineer could place a flood somewhere on the floor where it didn't get blocked by anything shining upward. It wouldn't even need t be placed on the floor or even close to the floor, you could place a low intensity directional spot in the rear over the breaker panels, the overhead is pitched such that a light even shining from ceiling height toward the panel would do a good job of illuminating it.I've been in the cockpit of an Airforce A-10C at night (just sitting in it as a guest) the pilot on the ramp outside of the cockpit explaining things to me, he flipped on the cockpit night lighting and it was composed of two directional spotlights that were aimed at the front panel from behind your shoulders... It did an amazing job of bathing the front panel in useable light without casting any reflections on the cockpit front or HUD glass... This could be EASILY done for a 737's overhead panel I think :)I'm not sure how you CAN'T understand how gauge lighting couldn't illuminate switches and knobs in close proximity... Think about it... If all the overhead gauge lighting was on, and you held your hand up next to one of the illuminate areas, are you telling me that you can't understand that your fingers would be illuminated? or anything close to the light source, like a knob?I'm not sure how to take your statement, "part of flying is fumbling around to find what you need" Could other real world pilots confirm that? If that was true, why illuminate any swtich or knob in the cockpit at all? I would imagine a more pragmatic approach would be, illuminate everything for night flying as much as possible and allow the pilot to reduce that amount until they are comfortable and not washing out there night vision. To tell a pilot that you must be able to find that switch in the dark is recommended, but to not have the option ever, to be able to see that switch at night to boost situational awareness is kind of ludicrous, imagine an emergency situation where the pilot would have to take the time to touch each toggle and knob to check its position, rather than simply being able to quickly scan it visually to confirm its position without having to take their hands off the flight controls. I'm no pilot, but I think if something was on fire somewhere on the plane, 5 or 6 seconds you could have saved can be a really long time.Also keep in mind its not a question of finding a light switch in your house in the dark after you've been there 5 years... Its a question of how much more difficult it would be to find that light switch in the dark if the house was on fire and you were frantically looking for your kids, your wife, and your dog all at the same time and in the middle of an earthquake.Read Ralgh's post below... I think there might be a silent majority here...Sorry to sound so snarky, not meaning to, just working at the same time as writing this and I can't devote as much mental resource to social graces like I would normally do :) I would even forego the idea of an overhead flood, if they made the ioverhead panel more realistically lit when the guage lighting is on, that would be more than enough! such that right when the gauge light are turned on, the switches, knobs, and toggles are swapped for a "gauge lights on night" version, with the completely black versions of course retained in case of lighting failure.This is what I mean... If you look at the pump switches, and the electriic hydraulic switches and even the pack and equipment cooling switches you can see what I mean by ambient guage lighting. What is actually "weird" looking to me is how NGX does it with the switch right next to an illumination source being absolutely inky black, like it is not even there... That defies the laws of physics :) It's like the knobs and switches are little black holes sucking in all the light... and you end up having to determine their positions at a glance by seeing how they block out their background... a very odd effect which doesn't seem to be at the same excellent level as the rest of the cockpit effects...compared to...

Just out of curiosity... I've read other posts asking about how to turn on flood lighting like the panel lighting for the overhead, and replies stating that flood lighting for the overhead isn't present on the real 737 either, and I was just wondering what the reason for that is? i.e. not possible to light the overhead with a flood without causing bad light reflections off the cockpit windows, very detrimental to night vision even at lowest possible setting etc etc...Even with the gauge lighting on the overhead on at maximum, the lack of "ambient" or "spillover" lighting from it makes seeing many of the toggle switches and knobs almost invisible at night, and every now and then I'll have to flip on the dome light (that's hard to spot at night too :) ) to get a good visual on the panel... and I'm certain that switching on the dome light at night while in flight is a sure way to wash out your night vision for a few minutes in real life...I think it would be a great addition in a patch to NGX to have the overhead panel exude an orange glow version that simulated the effect of having the gauge lighting on at maximum so you could better see the non illuminated knobs and switches that were marked only by printed and not illuminated lettering. I think they do a version of this for the MCP and front panel when you turn the panel lighting on for them where the knobs and switches have several levels (different graphics) of illumination as you turn the light intensity up...

I think they can simulate hypoxia in the sim by having a graphic of a drop dead gorgeous flight attendant coming onto the flight deck when you call her to ask for sandwiches and coffee.

Wow! I think maybe you sleep in your Captain's hat too?! :)I figured that since I've flown all of my SIDs and STARs by hand, following the Flight Director cues pretty closely, that that isn't too bad for someone new to NGX and sims of this kind especially since a lot of it can get a bit overwhelming at times... I'm still in the process of memorizing the cold startup procedure as I follow the checklists... Maybe I should blame Vroute Premiere because I followed its recommendation for fuel loading for the first time over my own calculations :) I left that part out because I like to give people I've never met more than a fair shake before I get snarky, but that's just me :)I think I'm going to try TopCat next...I finished that around the world flight last night, touchdown at SFO on a bright sunny morning. All the passengers I took with me still alive and happy! :) For now I think I'm so enamoured of this simulation that I'm going to fly the KSFO-KLAX route over and over and over again until I can do it in my sleep... I can guarantee you that my only fuel mistakes in the future will be being overweight with fuel at the top of descent :) Is the jettisoning of fuel simulated in NGX? I mean via aircraft controls and not just resetting fuel values in the FMC MSFS menu? Or do you always have to opt for an overweight landing?

I am nearing the end of my around the world NGX 737-800 excursion which is indescribably fun!I've been meticulous about not only my procedures, and flying the aircraft correctly, but also in flight and fuel planning. I think that the backdrop of an around the world flight, landing in many different exotic (virtual) destinations is a great inspiration and learning boost that almost forces a person (or at least me :) ) to do everything right... I'm not exactly certain if I'm going a bit crazy or not, but I swear when I landed at Narita International in Japan at 3:00am in the morning the first thing I thought as the wheels touched down and the speedbrakes went up was, "God I hope they have nice hotels here! I'm beat!" LoL!But I digress! Anyway, I was on a flight from Jomo Kenyatta International HKJK to OKAS Ali AL Salem in Kuwait, a distance of about 2000 miles, and a leg in the journey that I spent some time calculating fuel usage for... Before I had hit the descent, my fuel situation was already critical, and believing that the plane would have significantly less fuel usage on the descent into the destination airport I rolled the dice and decided not to attempt my alternate, which was 80 miles closer.Long story short, I touched down in Kuwait on fumes and the commensurate virtual cheer from the flightdeck and my imaginary First Officer, but the funniest part was that about 10 seconds before touching the idle/cutoff switch during the gate shutdown procedure, I ran out of fuel and the engines stopped! LoL!Maximum fuel savings for Delta! :)