Agrajag

It worked.

THANK YOU. That makes perfect sense. Will try it shortly, but expect it to work. I've been installing and re-installing trying to get everything just right so when I launch the sim it's in vanilla state where, later, it's likely this file is set to Custom for most of us by then.

Has anyone else had an issue with FS2020 ignoring changes they make to the UserCfg file? I do this to turn off Fringe and Sharpness and to set Shadows to 4k instead of the "max" of 2k and it's always worked before. However, I just reinstalled the sim after upgrading my PC. Now, when I go into UserCfg.opt to change settings they get saved and stay that way, but the sim pays NO attention to these changes. I can tell because Chromatic Aberration is still there in the hanger and Shadows still show as set to 2048 instead of 4096. I used PROCMON to verify that I'm editing the correct file and that FS2020 is READING it. So why is it not processing the changes? Thanks.

I just rebuilt my system and had FS installed on my D: drive (which I kept intact) and when I reinstalled FS on the new system it seems like it forced much of it to C:. So I changed the UserCfg.opt file to point it to D:. Now everything SEEMS fine, but I noticed I had some visuals that were wrong (chromatic aberration, vinette and such that are set in that opt file) and so I changed them. The problem is, the game is ignoring those changes, so now I'm wondering if there's another UserCfg.opt file somewhere that is being read. This is the Store version of Deluxe. Is there some log or something that might point me in the right direction?

All of this looks great, but the BIG elephant in the room is how FS2024 will change the ballgame. Perhaps, for example, FS2024 will allow for something like Beyond ATC and/or FSLTL to control the traffic, which would be a game-changer. If Beyond can get the procedures nailed down entirely, this will be an evolutionary step and a totally welcome one. I've been on VATSIM forever, but like many here, it has proven that it can (as designed) never provide the experience we all hope for it. The reality is much more likely to be a lot of time flying on UNICOM, which is hardly enjoyable or the desired hope. Many people can get around that by only flying during events (which are often a chaotic mess) or during specific times at specific places. ALL of us have had the issue of setting up a flight from say, KLAX to KSEA where there's coverage at both only to have KLAX go offline just as we're about to connect to them and then, upon getting airborne, watching in disappointment as KSEA goes offline as well. Nothing is more disappointing that than. SOMEDAY, my hope is that there can be a hybrid system (and I have hope there will be). Imagine flying on a network and there's just 100% coverage that is realistic and works and then, along the way, there's human ATC that shows up now and again. The human controller, instead of passing you to UNICOM, sees that you have an AI system and just passes you off the right next frequency. You sign off and then pick up at the next frequency with the AI until you land or catch another human controller online later in your flight. THAT would be incredible, and this feels like a possible first step.

Yeah, the plane is the Aerosoft plane and I got it from the market. Silly me thinking I wanted to support the effort of everything being in one place and, of course, getting screwed in the process. However, that said, it seems I still would do better finding an outside app. And, it also seems (now that I turned on your suggestion) that I really need this additional app as the CRJ doesn't have a checklist at all that the sim sees. It has its own in its EFB and it's in no way interactive.

Peter, Are you saying I am able to remove or add items to the in-game checklists? For example, the checklists rarely refer to things that are critical for me, like calling for the jetway, when to call ATC on VATSIM, and many more. In the CRJ these are in the EFB. I am not aware of any means to edit these lists to my liking, but what you mention is certainly work my looking into. The co-pilot thing is nice, but I find those things annoyingly robotic and repetitive. I'm still waiting for someone to treat these processes the way they should be, with varied voices (so that the feel isn't that you always fly with the same person) and a matrix of dozens if not hundreds of phrases that, when combined give the feedback a much more natural cadence and feel. The challenges you mention I understand. It's a pity the current design state is such that these things are buried in complexity.

While waiting for MS to re-enter the game I moved over to X-Plane for a few years and while there I found this wonderful little app called xChecklist (https://forums.x-plane.org/index.php?/files/file/20785-xchecklist-linwinmac/) that you could build out your own checklist for any plane you wanted and it knew about all the systems. If a checklist item was already set it was already marked as checked and you just moved to the next item. You could set it up as one long list or break it into multiple phases of flight. Whatever you wanted. Each item would need to be checked before you could move to another phase. I would never miss a step with this. On FS2020 I have a nice sheet I use, and it's perfectly tailored to just the right amount of depth for me and the CRJ. However, it's just a Google sheet so there's zero validation, etc. Is there anything like this for FS2020? I've seen a few checklist products, but they all seem a) locked in that there's no personalizing so it's a case of doing every single step the app wants, period, b) overly done like requiring speech recognition which would be a major hassle when it fails on something like VATSIM, c) robotic, d) not automated so while they can step you through things they really have no sense of the current state of the systems in question.

Two items: 1. There appears to be more to this than just what's been discussed. For example, there's a PHANTOM railroad that runs across a runway in, Miami, if memory serves. Upon further investigation with alpilotx, he noted it was OSM data put there for historical purposes. Thus, it's a train route that shouldn't be showing at all as it hasn't been there in ages. He believed, at this time (and maybe this has changed) that he wasn't excluding specific types of data (as this was, I believe, marked as historical. 2. Could someone provide a short tutorial on how to exclude these in WED? I tried and, I guess maybe it's now age, but it just didn't make any sense to me. I had a great one just yesterday. If you try to fly out of JFK, you can't leave the terminal. 100% of the terminal is surrounded by an elevated road, with supporters, that traps you. It runs all along the taxiway. That was fun. I've also had scares of oncoming traffic while rolling down runways. Pretty bizarre when you're not expecting it.