simtech95209

Very well done. Excellent juxtaposition. MSFS is almost "As real as it gets"/ Good job, thank you...tp

Casey, not sure what link you're using but their download site is not the same as the "discussion" one. I always use this one to sign into and can post a question in any forum. You perhaps would use the Boeing one.. https://tonymadgehjg.proboards.com

 

If you're registered, sign in is in the upper right hand corner..Super people there. I'm sure they will be able to help you sort that livery out.. Let us know how it worked out...blue skies...Terry

Jorgen,

 

Excellent information... thank you for sharing...Makes it so clear what many have been saying all along... Terry

Like many others here, I, too, have and use FS2004, CFS and FSX regularily. I've accumulated hundreds of addons that won't be available to MSFS for many, many years. I have enjoyed FSX since the beginning but unfortunately have never been able to run the program sliders "full right". I want to be able to do that. MSFS looks glamourous and in time the bugs will be taken care of and at that time I will take the leap then and try it. Until then, the absolute best reason for MSFS's existence is that it forces me to get a machine to run it and in so doing, I will be able to experience FSX in all of her intended glory: radial engines, helicopters, Concords, Orbx scenery, PMDG, FSLabs and A2A aircraft and all of the other wonderment I have missed. Thank you MSFS for lighting the fire...........Blue skies to all..........Terry

Jorgen, glad you got back airborne.. Thank you very much for sharing this extremely rare situation. This might ought to be put into a sticky.. Great find....tp

Just a note about the questions being asked about the differences in scenery and airports between FSX and the new Flightsimulator (MSFS). In addition to the Discovery Series that was mentioned earlier, YouTube is your friend. There are several postings of comparisons of same airports between the two and a couple include XP11. Interesting viewing.. Also, The Chinese equivalent to You Tube, Bilibili.com, also has more postings that one would suspect some Alpha testers obviously ignored the NDAs. Lots of interesting tidbits. Also noted that in the new FS FAQ, it stated that the basic and deluxe version can be upgraded, however, it will be more cost effective to buy the one with the features you want in the first place. For instance, (and these prices are for illustration only..not the actual upgrade price) if you buy the standard version for $60 you can upgrade to the premium content for $75. you've now spent $135 whereas you could have just bought the premium in the first place for $120.

 

Also mentioned in the Microsoft posting, the disc version will be only available to European customers. Not sure if that's to do with download speeds in Europe or exactly why. All other locales will require the internet to download.

 

Interesting times indeed.Seeing how closed Beta is supposed to start by the end of this month, Seems an awfully short time for Beta testing though unless perhaps on August 18th is the start of the open Beta and the RFM might be later in the year. Fair winds........and blue skies..Terry

Chuck, thank you for an in-depth examination of the issues the OP mentioned. Your visual explanation was very good, easy to follow. I, for one, d/l this same aircraft and have the same values as your original BUT, I don't seem to have any issues that others have mentioned. I even filled the tanks and seats to the max no jumping around. The only issue I have is that I haven't been able to check each mag. They seem to be either both ON or both OFF. This is a good stable platform that takes me back some 40 years ago IRL. It's a very good representation of a flight school staple. Anyone on the fence, an excellent low and slow beginner airplane....Terry

Gentlemen, you spoke very wise words . Yes, the application at the end of the details in that link did involve a REX weather module. This is why I stated I suspected something other than FSX. Today I began another session fresh and zoomed up to 185K in the upgraded UFO and the XF-103 with full ramjet and turbojet without interruption, no issues. Perhaps I'll purposely leave it on overnight in order to try to duplicate the problem tomorrow. Again, thank you for your suggestions and intuitions..tp

Ok, gentlemen.. the plot thickens. First and foremost, thank you to all who responded and I'll address each comment. In my research I found I had .Net Framework 4.8 installed. The original FSX-A used 2.0 in the XP and Vista era and when Win7 rolled out, the .Net package was updated to 3.0 with the supposedly included 2.0 version that was a patched version. I tried installing the original 3.5 and I could download, but it would not install.... sat there did nothing...Further reading revealed that Win7 already had that version incorporated. Hence dead in water. In preparation for the .Net 3.5 install, I performed a clean boot and when the package did not install, I abandoned that task and started FSX.

 

Lo and Behold, the XF-103 went all the way to 83K feet in a flash and 3.1 Mach.:confused: It went so fast as to have had a compressor stall and the engine rolled back to off. That's where I am now.

 

CRJ: The details relate as best I remember to the JIT debugging issue, but I don't remember the application. Hence I tried to get the error to pop up and fail... still trying...Good post, I'll definitely get that info when it fails again.

 

Mallcott: Yes, I'm very familiar with SFC/ scannow....thank you..I hadn't thought to run that but did so following your suggestion, however no errors were uncovered.

 

Pomack 249: the UIAutomation.dll version is 6.0.6001.18000. Thank you specifically for that link that was like jumping into the rabbit hole of FSX and Framework issues.

 

Chuck: I use almost exclusively key presses to change views. My poor ten year old laptop has two sticks of 4GB. However the OS only sees 2.96 for applications after the OS overhead. The drive I'm using is Samsung 750 evo. I know I'm due for a new one and hopefully that will happen shortly.This old Dell has been a real work horse.

 

f16jockey_2: According to this https://answers.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/forum/all/microsoft-flight-simulator-x-crash-to-desktop-with/a85dda2f-8de3-4d86-ac21-327c985a6881 the original FSX required .Net 2.0 to be run in XP.

 

To summarize where I am: It works at the moment, but I tend to agree with CRJ_Simpilot and F16jockey2 I believe another program is causing it to crash. I frequently leave the sim and laptop running for days allowing it to go to "Sleep" and then returning to FSX to continue/ There's no telling what open apps are still playing havoc in the background. I'll keep looking and if I have more info, I'll update this thread....

 

Many, many thanks to all who offered their suggestions. In the interest of someone else facing the same issue later, If I find the culprit, I'll post it here.........Best to all and be safe.....Terry

Yes, I looked at those and they dealt with SQL listings and not FSX. There are a lot here @ flightsim, but they seem to deal with scenery and some addons, not just plain exceptional performance issues. I'm not running any addons except LRM (landing rate monitor) .

Value was either too large or too small for an Int 16. FSX pauses, after several "Continues" will return to normal.

Basics: FSX-A on Win7 32bit. I replaced HDD about two years ago and 95% time FSX works fine. But particularily after the XF-103 , Milton's X-3 and the latest UFO update when performance goes off the charts, the FSX pauses with this error. I thought I had the necessary Framework versions.. now I'm not sure what I'm missing. I've been unable to find anything relating to FSX and Framework errors on google although there are some Framework errors dealing with scenery modules for FSX. I basically have a virgin scenery install. The problem manifests itself when I put the advanced designed aircraft into exceptional flight profiles like high ROC, exceptional acceleration, etc. Does anyone have any insight into how this can be corrected. It's very distracting to be rocketing skyward and then FSX pauses and I have to deal with this. I'll try to post the full error.

 

 

Thank you in advance of any ideas.. I know there's a wealth of info in FSX land. Terry

Many thanks to all who responded. I really appreciate the insight.

Dogdish: I saw those keys before but the only affect I can get is the Ctrl-L...Lights on/off

I can't get any movement with any of the other keystrokes.

 

BlueSox14: You're correct the effect seems to be the fx_landing... but all the other a.c work fine.

 

PaulCraig: My gut told me this was the case and I was hoping that I had misremembered this tidbit from long ago. It makes sense since (??) other a/c using the fx files are working ok.... Thank you again for all who responded..It's a good d/l excepting it's limited to daylight operations.

I downloaded Bob Chicilo's update to SCS's Tu-124 for FSX available here http://tupolevtu-124upx.zip and it's a pleasant airplane to fly. However it does seem to have an interesting issue I can't resolve. When the landing lights are illuminated, the beams go out sideways under the wing, rather than forward. This applies to both the landing lights and taxi beams. I've researched Google, FSDevelopers, and various other forums and no joy. The "bulb" locations appear close to being correct, it's just that the aiming is 90 degrees off. Anyone have any ideas how to remedy? Many thanks in advance..........Terry

GDALE..As Mr. Z stated earlier, what happened when you depress the "H" key??. I found that the default Mooney loses power in icing conditions and the only correction is the H key; not prop deice, not pitot heat..nada. It's not mentioned anywhere except it's the toggle for "Alternate Air" in the key assignments. In fuel injected engines, that's what's required IRL.

Please let us know how that works for you..

Thank you, Mr. Z I apparently overlooked that induction...my baddddd,,,,,,,,,,

Don, do you have Windows system sounds or is it only FSX sounds that are gone.?

Yes, my views are clear when not looking through the VC. But, thankfully that wonderful engine sound is back in all views... Thank you for trying the other 2D panel...This panel is fine, just that at middle of the day, the glare is extreme and my poor video card only sees shades of grey...:(

My little video card is maxing out with the glare. If the sun is up, I can barely see through the windshield of the VC. 2D is ok..that's another reason.... Time for a new 'puter...

 

Interesting observation:

When I changed views using the coolie hat, when the view changed, engine sounds returned in that view. When I returned to front view, engine sounds quit....Perhaps there's something in the sound.cfg...

 

Operation Success!:o.. Sure enough, the engine sounds were tagged to be present in outside view (code 2 only). I changed to a blank signifying sounds present at all times.. Works all the time.... Thanks for your support Mr. Z..BTW, how did the panel mod turn out? I just might have that IRIS airplane on the back lot somewhere...

Mr. Z.. so true..however, my peripheral vision isn't what it was 30 years ago. I'd hate to prang a new airplane in the hangar.;)

I'm am very grateful for the P-40 that A2A has offered and it's a terrific plane. There is no 2D cockpit provided, but there are some instances where are prefer just to use the minipanel afforded that pops up cycling the "W" key (like short final in unimproved strips) However, when I do so and leave the VC where the sound is fine, I lose the interior sounds. Outside view is no issue, and in the VC is ok.. Can I correct this anyway,?? Thank you for any and all suggestions... Again... this is a super download...

Running FSX-A boxed and a couple (only a couple) of aircraft engines do not respond to the corresponding throttle or mixture lever.

 

For instance, pull the mixture in the VC or 2D panel on #3 engine and #1 dies. Pull #4 lever and #1 dies. Is there a way to correct this or is this locked into the model? Thank you for any and all suggestions..... Terry

il, it works fine now thanks to your prodding..I appreciate it..tp

il88pp, IRT starters, The engines were already running when the flights started. This being a turboprop, I didn't see what the state of the starter would have on either idle rpm or full throttle. So I investigated your third idea of the saved flight. My default flt. was starting with another ac and I loaded up the C-133. To check your idea, I loaded a different saved flt, changed the ac to the C-133, an Wah Lah.. the #2 engine corresponded with the others. I repeated the scenario with my default flt, and when the C-133 came up, all engines were in sync. I don't know why, but it works and I thank you for pointing me in that direction. I would have never thought to change the flt. Now even the original default flt. is working correctly..Thank you for teaching this old geezer a new trick...

Mr. Z, I downloaded M. Pook's update. I'm using the version with the Royal Canadian AF. I may have to go back to my original download and start over. I'll give that a try... but I did try his *.air file and confg with no joy.

 

I just loaded up MP's plane and you're right... the engines are in sync. Not sure what it is. I didn't leave that one in the hangar as it seems to have weak reverse thrust.. takes forever to slow down on the runway, I'll keep at it..Thank you for the tip.. It has a nice nostalgic panel...

I have noticed an issue I've not been able to solve. It only involves the #2 engine of Piglet's C-133 not tracking the rpm, and power of the other three engines. This occurs through the range from idle to full throttle. I am using FSX-A boxed and Logitech Extreme 3D pro with single throttle control. Not only does the engine gauges reflect this situation, but the #2 prop animation is slower than the other three as well. This phenomenon occurs either with throttle control on joystick or using keyboard. Reloading aircraft, using different *.air, and ac.config files do not change the situation. I'm using FSUIPC 4.959 unregistered and doesn't affect any other "simobject: aircraft or boat or helicopter". Would anyone have any ideas? I appreciate any and all suggestions.... Thank you in advance.............Terry