Osirith

That's what I mean in my previous message. Setting up a whole e-sales web site or publishing a software on a large simulation shop is time consuming. Accepting paypal paiement is easy, but believe me, if you don't automate anything, I predict that delivery will be slow... Need to take paiement emails into account, generate some type of install key, send email with product key and links to download, etc... Again, even with a simple paypal solution, will either take weeks to be online or will be totally manual with related customer dissatisfaction... Don't misunderstand my sayings : I am really happy of Steve's amazing work so far and will buy the fixer as soon as it is available. But I will probably not be alone and manual sales is time consuming. Chris

Good news, but... If the sale process is not yet chosen, it could take months... Depends if Steve choose a lightweight/Paypal sale (but still need some delivery method/Website/protection/whatever) which could be implemented in a few weeks, or choose a more robust existing internet shop...

Been reading this thread for some minutes, but I am actually flying PMDG 777 on a big Windows 8/64 PC, and I don't bother to worry if the config will stop working after final earth cataclysm or before... I guess I will be tired of FSX/777 before that... Also, I still own very old PC games running on W95 and that are still able to run on my W8 PC... Just need to apply right parameters or to load the tweaked version (and yes, you have official Internet sites providing that). So i will not worry too much about the future...I will be delighted to use a newer flight sim, but it could still wait some more years if we have addons publishers like PMDG or others provinding quality stuff... Returning to my 777, approach phase is near Chris

Installed 777 on my Windows 8/64 PC and it runs with no problem. Completed the tutorial flight yestarday evening and I did not encounter any bug or problem. Trim wheel setting ok (I manage all my USB peripherals for FSX inside FSUIPC, I just assigned two joystick buttons (Warthog throttle) to Elevator Trim Up and Elevator Trim Down functions in FSUIPC. Chris

50 % downloaded.... At current download rate, still 40 minutes to go.... Probability is... I will have a very short night B)

Entering correct parameters is not difficult to do, at least for PMDG aircrafts (I did it for all 737 NGX variants in a matter of a few minutes, both for TopCat and PFPX, and will not need to redo it again for all future uses). See http://forum.avsim.net/topic/417842-topcat-pfpx-737ngx-weights-how-to/ So for me it's not a major problem (except if you cannot afford to spend less than one hour one time to enter those numbers). After those few minutes spent, my estimated fuel and flight duration calculated by PFPX is now exact when I compare numbers after landing. Less than 1 minute shift and very minor difference in fuel consumption. Was with 2 different flights with 737 NGX, flight duration was roughly 2 hours each time across Europe. But I totally agree that it could have and should have been done by the programmers, not by the users. I am still puzzled about why they did not do it... Of course PFPX will not replace any weather engine. It is not such a product. It's a weather server to be used only by PFPX to grab weather data for planning... I am an ActiveSky 2012 user and just set PFPX parameters to use ActiveSky data. PFPX do far more things than other FSX flight planners. Etops, alternate runways, fuel policies, etc... If you don't know, don't want and don't need to use these you can pass using it. If you have an interest on those, you will not find another planner providing such functionnalities today. Chris

Hello, i am quite an add-on addict... Last ones purchased during the summer were (from oldest to most recent) : 1. FTX Global : already own GEX for Europe, but the worldwide coverage and some nice graphical improvements made it a very satisfying purchase. 2. IRIS F-15E Mudhen + Metal2Mesh extension : One of the best modern fighter(bomber) jet available (and I also own F/A 18E from VRS). external and VC graphics are top notch, and realism seems very good. I have not spent a lot of time flying the beast yest, however. 3. FSDreamTeam Vancouver (CYVR) : slowly building my library of worldwide airports add-ons... Was missing something in this part of the world (closest add-on I own being FlightBeam KSFO). CYVR is a nice addition. 4. PFPX + TopCat : I will need time to tame this monster quite pleased overall with the level of details and the ease of use, but the sheer volume of functions is almost overwhelming... Already planned a flight from Munich to Dubaï and the result is really satisfying. 5. FlyTampa Dubaï. Here also, I had a big coverage hole in my detailed airports for this part of the world. Dubaï will best be used as soon as I grab the PMDG 777... Also eagerly awaiting : - Steve's DX10 fixer : I am a -DX10 only- FSX user. Need to cope with annoying display bugs on some addons, mostly FTX Global night lights (removed for now), some airport lights and vehicles, etc... Can't wait this awesome work that will probably fix most of all remaining problems with DX10. - PMDG 777 : mostly flying PMDG 737 NGX and Airbus X Extended so far... Switching to the 777 should allow for longer range trips and some interesting challenges learning how to master this impressive bird... Would hope for : - PMDG quality A380 anyone ? (sigh...) Chris

Runs fine on my W8/64 config since several months. Only problem that I encountered (and I am not alone on this one) is the possible total loss of detection of USB joysticks after some random duration. Seems to happen on some "old" games, and FSX is one of them. If you have this problem (seems to not happen for every Win8 user, I have a quite complex USB config with Warthog Hotas, rudders, and many other USB devices), you can easily solve it by using FSUIPC to declare and calibrate joysticks. I did not have a single USB bug since then, and everything runs fine (my FSX config is quite complete with AS2012, REX+OD, PMDG 737, RC4, etc...). Chris

Interesting viewpoint Todd, but I have to disagree... You are probably right saying that flight sims users base had declined in the last few years. But... It's mainly true for the 'basic' user that will search for a flight sim in a PC game store or internet and will not find anything new... Who is buying RadarContact stuff ? certainly not the basic flight sim user... The passionate users, those that fly using VFR, that love to prepare flight plans and take hours to learn how to start the cold and dark cockpit of a liner, are still using flight sims even if they are not up to date software... And those users WILL buy a new version of Radar Contact. If you were right, one can say that software publishers like PMDG, OrbX, FSDreamTeam, etc... will already have stopped any business... And they are launching new products and planning others ! So I have to disagree about your explanation... JD just could have other priorities in life now, I just hope we will hear from new versions or interesting alternatives in the next months... Chris

Well, that's probably very difficult to affirm as one would need to test one nVidia and one ATI cards with equal power, on exact same hardware configuration, and exact same FSX config... Almost no one could afford money and time to just do that So i could not say that I have equivalent, better or lower perfs with an ATI card, but I sure can say I am able to use FSX at 2560x1440 at 30 fps with high settings and DX10 mode (and of course, it drops to low 20 with very dense scenery, traffic, etc... but it's CPU-related).

Hello, I am the proud owner of an Asus HD7970 Matrix Platinum graphic card, and am very happy with it, FSX included. It seems there was a time when nVidia cleary had an edge, including about driver quality, but I am not sure there is really such a difference today. I did choose this card in December, 2012 since this was among the best power/price ratio and also because it uses 3Gb Vram. You will find more tips and tricks for nVidia but you will find the equivalent for ATI, don't worry. Chris

Well, maybe it's not statistically significant yet, but we already have almost 50% pollers saying that they use DX10. Among them, one third say they ONLY uses DX10. I am one of them. I have been using DX9 for years, now after comparing both I will never get back to DX9 (using DX10 since a few months). Smooth, more FPS, better lighting system and colors, no memory problem, no crash, etc... I can live with the few remaining problems (missing textures for some add-ons) until Steve payware fix that also... DX9 users, if you feel that you have a better option with your settings, it's your right and be happy with it. But a growing number of FSX users thinks otherwise. Chris

Hi, after reading all those posts I think I will pass on this add-on... However, I downloaded the demo version, which is of course only a partial scenery compared to full payware version, but I was still positively surprised by the acceptable quality of the demo. Many buildings in south and central manhattan, nice visual result, and almost no FPS drops on my system. Here is a pic :

The loose metal plate was the cause of the previous train accident in France near Paris a few days ago, not in the Spanish tragedy.

I am the proud owner of an Asus HD7970 Matrix Platinum (ATI card then) and I am using DX10 exclusively for FSX since several months. The "magic" to correctly uses DX10 is Steve's fix, and for us ATI users, install and use (free) RadeonPro tool that will enable AntiAliasing options and VSync switch for FSX/DX10. I will never go back to DX9. As said, better quality, better colors, better framerate, better smoothness, and rock solid stability. No crash or OOM anymore, and compatibility with addons increases month after month. Steve's next tool should at least allow to get rid of remaining incompatibilities, but I will expect main addon makers to create by themselves compatible products. Regards, Chris

(Quoting myself) Another simmer on FTXGlobal support forum has found the file used for the 3D Lights. Seems to work : go to (FSX Directory)/Scenery/Global/scenery/ and rename file 3D_Light_NEW_DDN_1_5.BGL to 3D_Light_NEW_DDN_1_5.BGL.bak It will not be loaded anymore and voila! the black squares (and related night lighting, of course) is gone. To switch back, just rename to .bgl.

Hello all, quite pleased with the product overall, but very disappointed with the lack of DX10 compatibility for 3D lights. As told above, there is a growing number of simmers (including me) that exclusively uses DX10 for quality of graphics/colors, smoothness, increased effects, and overall performance and stability. Many recent FSX add-ons are fully compatible. I have some difficulties to understand how ORBX could have missed such testing... Now searching for a way to just get rid of 3D lights, and waiting for a fix, as I do not want to get back to DX9. Did not play with DX9 since months... Chris

Installed and all is ok, EXCEPT night lightings during the day : I mean, everything is ok with night lighting during the night (far better than UTX ones), but during the day, each and every light spot shows as a black bitmap on the ground. Compatibility problem using DX10, or some other install/param problem ?

Started download 4 mns ago, flashget tells me it will take 31 mns more... Entering wait state

Hello, I am running W8 on my main PC since December. Most of the "new" stuff in it is totally unnecessary on a PC, I agree, but once you are on the "classical" desktop, it is exactly the same as W7 (and with some learning, the global search replacing the Start Button/Menu is faster to use). About FSX : I saw absolutely no difference running W7 or W8. And same conclusion for all the PC games I use on the same PC. So you will see no advantage nor constraints to use FSX on W8.

I still need to redo a test at LFPG. I suspect that UT2 traffic is much heavier there and Aerosoft scenery takes a heavier toll on frame rates. Also, my californian flight today was with good weather... So I am not sure to have grabbed a large amount of frames with the new overclock setting. Anyway, going from 4.0 to 4.6 Ghz should in theory at least gives 15% more fps. Which means 1 to 3 more frames...

Hi Charles, not enough time to did benches, however I pushed the CPU to 4.6 Ghz and it's seems totally stable. Tried Prime 95 for 15 mns, max temp reach was 70°C (158 F) which seems not too bad. Aftwerwards, did a complete flight from KLAX to KSFO, starting with Cold & Dark cockpit, and temperature never reached 70 (There is a visual and sound warning at this temp). Frame rate was very good, never below 20 on ground with 75% UT2 traffic and some specific scenery.

Update : Airport Vehicle Density should is set at Low and Road Véhicles is set at 20%. Cloud Distance is set at minimum (60 nm).

Not sure about traffic setting inside FSX. I guess 100% should be close ? Not sure either is UT2 is more resource-hungry for managing traffic (for example, it uses actual jet routes, no straight lines from airport A to airport B) And no. I do not own any ORBX scenery (except a few freeware samples), not Carenado planes, nor RealAir Duke... So far, for FSX I only bought PMDG 737NGX and VRS F-18E airplanes, and next on the list will be PMDG 777 (cannnnnn't wait, seeing today screnshots).

Not sure while not in front of the PC, but Airport Vehicle Density should be set at Low or something (below Medium) and Road Véhicles should be between 10 and 20%. Also, Air traffic is set at 0% inside FSX, and 75% inside UT2.