mrb32854

I just registered at EAG Forum and will post there, with more details on type of computer, height, weight, etc.

When I just stick to external view(s) and 2d-Cockpit, my average FPS stays way up there, between 40 and 60. However, whenever I go into Virtual Cockpit View, my FPS average goes down to about 20 to 35, and stays there for all other views (tower, external, 2D-cockpit). If I... - press the Alt-key real quick in external view, like chase view, or, - do a right-mouse-key press in external/chase-view and then press the left-mouse-key real quick, ....either of these acts like a kind of "reset" for the FPS-average, and it goes back up to 40/60. Basically, I have to completely avoid Virtual Cockpit if I don't want to kill my FPS rate. Any of you experience this with any other aircraft, and/or, if you did, any advice on what might be causing this and how to fix? I'm overclocking the video-card already (using Zoltec, but have tried EVGA, MSI, etc.), but, it doesn't seem to make any difference, i.e., Virtual Cockpit still puts the brakes on my average FPS, overclock or not.

Abacus got back to me today, finally. If you ever need an email at Abacus where somebody is on the other end, try "adam@abacuspub.com". At least that works for now....can't say definitely. Regarding "...if they're planes are worth it....", its an eye-of-the-beholder kind of thing.

Simmers..... Is Abacus kaput? I just tried to buy their "Light Mini Jet collection" online, and had problems getting the download-link/serial. Have sent them numerous emails to info@abacus, orders@abacus, etc., and tried their 616 and 800 phone numbers, both are disconnected. Also left a message on their facebook page. If anybody has any better abacus email-addresses to use, phone numbers that may work, etc., would appreciate a reply to this posting. If anybody has this collection and wouldn't mind sharing it with me for a nominal price, let me know. The file name is S843.zip, and its only about 35 meg. Thanks.

Some of you may remember a post I made a few months ago about the then new Nvidia 320.18 driver and its effects on FS9. I've confirmed since then with Nvidia that: 1. My issue that I raised at that time with them was replicatable by them in their labs, and it has made it to their formal development-team bug list. 2. It has been issued a "low priority" as its "....a ten-year old game....". 3. The bug still exists in latest 320.49, and "....may not be remedied for a while, if ever...". I tried my FS9 with 320.49 and the bug is there, still. Some of you may be lucky and are not having issues with the 320.xx drivers. If you are one of the unlucky ones, like me, I'd appreciate just a few kind words in a reply on if you've-experienced/are-still-experiencing problems with 320.18 and up, and/or have had to resort to using earlier drivers to resolve. See original post "New 320.18 Nvidia Driver toxic to FS9"? for description of video bug.

A P.S.......just did some flying.....got an average 20% DECREASE in FPS with 320.18. Rolled back to 314-series, FPS back up in the 40/60 avg. ##### on these drivers...guess one game's solution is another game's problems.

Just wanted to tell everyone that I got this driver to work....turned out that turning off the Lighting and Shading setting box on the "Display" in FS9 was the culprit.

Sesquastoo: Tried everything you suggested, and then some.....still getting same 4-tone effects with this driver.

Aware of the likely solutions, e.g., roll back to an earlier driver, and, that Nvidia is not going to burn-down the gates in a race to solve the issues in an old game/sim. Still, I like to find out if others are finding similar behaviors/problems as their experiences often can help me map out a solution, or, at least, a work-around.

Has anybody tried to update their FS9-PC's to the latest 320.18 Nvidia Driver? Seems to have a real negative effect on FS9, doing something to the elemental shading/lighting/reflection-rendering properties of the sim. - Default 172SP's and other default plane’s rotating-icons on the entry-screen seemed to have an overall shadow, with only the doors, float-struts, and seemingly random control-surfaces retaining their correct shading/lighting/coloring aspects, giving the planes an all-over haphazard two or three-tone effect. - This effect from the start-up screen’s rotating icon’s carries through to the 3d-game -world; all over normal coloring/shading is shadowed or otherwise darkened, and the same selective lightening for doors, struts, random parts of the control surfaces was evident, too. - Happens to non-default planes, too. My Aerowork King-Air had its normally overall bright-white finish dulled down to an almost light-gray. Only the doors retained their normal bright-white shine. Also, the ailerons, flaps, and one of the horizontal-stabilizers and elevator were a silvery natural-metal, being neither the dulled/light-gray or original white. A real 4-tone effect. Reverting to the previous 314.22 driver was a remedy, but, I’d be very interested to learn if any other users had the same or similar experience.

Sometimes, on maybe about about 2% or 3% of my cross-country VFR flights in FS9, for various reasons, FS9's ATC will kind of "hang". I don't mean hang in the traditional sense. The flight and FS9 in-general stay up an running, and the flight can proceed all the way to landing, but, during the flight, something will occur that makes the ATC stop calling or communicating with my aircraft. They don't try to call my aircraft, and I can't raise them in the ATC window, cause its hung up on, usually, "There are no messages...." and that's it. Does anybody have any recommendations on possibly how to fix this? Is there some ini/cfg file where a setting of some type can be reset? I have "TweakFlight" and FSPS's new "Flight Simulator Manager", but neither seems to have any settings that can be reset concerning ATC mid-filght, as far as I can see. The only way I've found to fix this is start the aircraft off at some airport, on the ground, i.e., basically start the flight over again. Any insights, suggestions regarding maybe someway that the ATC could be reset while in mid-flight would be greatly appreciated.

Beg to differ. Member "Hanger" had it right, e.g., " Something needs to be done...something BIG." As just one small example, dozens if not tens-of-dozens of small businesses out there could be royally screwed if they cut off activation for FSX. God knows, Microsoft has enough problems trying to compete in the open Marketplace. They are always looking for some way to leverage their monopoly(ies) to force us to buy their new crap when we neither need to nor want to. By the way, there are some other great up-and-coming simulators out their besides Lockheed's, albeit theirs is a fine product, too. Ikarus' "Aerofly FS" is a great new product with development potential.

You know, this aspect of them cutting off activation for FSX really brings up a much larger issue about all Microsoft Products that are out in both the commercial and non-commercial/entertainment-end-user worlds. Can a company just come along and arbitrarily (or even not necessarily "arbitrarily") just cut-off activation of products that have otherwise multi-year or longer reasonable/productive use-lives just because their so-called "support" ends? I'm going to engage my state's attorney general about this. Microsoft deserves it.

Gents: Then, its a credit to each of your personnal IT skills that you've made 64-bit work. Still, I know of lots of cases where it took, literally, months or more of seemingly endless tweek/tune/trial-and-error to get 64-bit to work in a stable/reliable manner. I'm not saying its impossible to get 64-bit to be as stable/reliable as 32....just much more difficult for the "average" person to want to have to persevere with it. I'm writing this on a 64 bit xt machine that I use for email only. My game box is 32-bit because of the difficultly I've had with getting 64-bit to be really stable/reliable. Maybe I'm just a dinosaur!! I didn't mean to take away from the point of all this...helping Nico with his FS9 issues. My apologies.

Nico: Definitely, if you're trying to run the graphics on your on-board GPU, you're going to have problems....the others above that mentioned getting a separate processing board are right on. You'd also metioned that you're running a 64-bit version of Windows 7?? I worked in a Fortune 500 Corporation's IT shop for over 10 years until I just retired last year, and, if you want to know why almost nobody in the industrial/commercial-IT-space runs 64-bit laptops/desktops/tablets, there's a big reason: Its inherently buggy!! 64-bit is still maturing...neither Windows nor the current crop of hardware out there is really 100%-64-bit, yet. Maybe another couple of years, but not now (it'll be YEARS especially if Microsoft's quality-control, or rather lack of it, keeps declining, i.e,. Windows 8 turns out to be son-of-Vista). I know there's some simmers out there who are running 64-bit and will testify that its real stable, but, my own unscientific polling would indicate that they are in the 10% or less minority of all simmers. My suggestion....switch to 32-bit Windows 7, if its at all feasible for you.