TheRedBadger

That works, thank you!

I do a lot of digging all the time, but it seems like there's no longer an option to just search for downloads  . I had to guess where a particular file might be based on the letter of the alphabet it might start with :U .

Ahhh but that's just it! The simulator for some reason prioritized reading the entries in this UPS aircraft folder which had no textures inside! Hence /sometimes/ the aircraft appear painted because of prioritization.

Solution: make sure you don't have any other aircraft with entries of other aircraft repaints inside your aircraft folder.

Possible theory here why this bug happened.

I noticed I had a UPS 747-400GE AIA model in my aircraft folder. Inside the file, I didnt' see the aircraft.# entry, but instead I saw entries for all the WOAI aircraft I have installed. Perhaps a duplicate entry in the sim caused it confusion? But I didn't think that would make textures blank....

Carlos, for those that may find converting a bit out of their depth, can you not upload your paints for them to use?

 

Col.

If the original paints are from somebody else I don't think that would be proper as the original author retains the rights to it. He could try to get permission though.

Heh, actually I sure could. I know the FS9 community would appreciate it. I'm just a pretty epic procrastinator. I've got a /ton/ of FS9 converted AI files... I certainly would need to check with the author. Most are from Kyles Ai Works, though I'm pretty sure that's not all as many of his things are also for FS9. Juergen, UTT, hmm..

I know biggest ones I've done are Jetblue, frontier, norwegian... and a few miscellaneous repaints. Fair warning the quality is not as great but it's an 8/10. You'll love having it.

Let me see what I could do. I'll probably contact them first, look for which files actually need to be uploaded, and then upload when once I get the chance.

Ok I've reached out to them, now I wait.

Sorry, the name of the .mdl file INSIDE the model folder is what should be named in the aircraft.cfg file, e.g:

 

B747GE.mdl

 

model=B747GE

Yup, it's accurate.

I think it's just one of those scenarios where that one particular file, for whatever reason, has something within that makes it corrupted somehow.

I once couldn't get the sound to work in one aircraft until I copied all the text in one file onto a different one with the same name, and it worked. Weird eh?

Could it be that the model= entry name in the aircraft.cfg doesn't match the actual model name in the Model folder?

Hmm, no, they all indicate =GE which matches what's on the name of the folder.

I have a lead... and a "trick".

I looked at an Air France AIA_744GE aircraft that is installed separately from WOAI (new textures so I just use a new model rather than inserting them into WOAI), and it appears that this time it /does/ appear just fine in the sim. It's still very bizarre that the sim ignored my previous attempt when I changed the model.

I also tested dumping the KLM textures into this aircraft with the AFR textures and voila, it works.

I have no idea why when I install a fresh new aircraft the sim ignored the textures, but when I use a technically also new aircraft (found in my backup) with existing textures, they work just fine. I checked with Lufthansa as well and they work as well.

99% safe to say it's the model, but then why didn't a freshly installed, perfecty working model from the manufacturer's page didn't work? And TECHNICALLY the original model I used came from a WOAI package: I just stripped all the airlines so I could use it for new textures. Why it won't work I'm still very curious about.

Anybody with the same problem: hopefully you have spare aircraft of the type you're having trouble with, check if those ones work. There's somethings I never understood with FS9 that had the WEIRDEST of fixes to solve when everything looked just fine.

A couple of things could be happening here:

 

This 747GE (with General Electric engines) could be an FS2004 or earlier model which can only accept .bmp format textures.

 

- or -

 

This 747GE (with General Electric engines) could be an FSX native model which can only accept .DDS format textures.

 

- or -

 

The liveries you've tried are actually for a 747 made by a different developer such as The Fruit Stand, AI Malcontent, etc.

 

- or -

 

The liveries you've tried are actually for the RR (Rolls Royce) or PW (Pratt & Whitney) version of the 747.

 

- or -

 

Any combination of the above!

 

AI traffic liveries can be an absolute minefield at times.

Thanks for replying!

The baffling thing is it’s a WOAI-installed model and I haven’t touched any of those models or airlines in ages. The sim just decided it was going to discriminate against this model and make all those textures blank.

1. Hmm, the files are definitely BMP. I thought the initial KLM files were corrupted somehow because they were the only ones where you can see the actual textures instead of the default bmp image. But all textures are definitely affected, like Lufthansa, Qantas, etc.

2. It’s woai and it’s always worked up until now. I downloaded the FS9 model directly from AIAardvark and it does show up, but any textures are blank. I did check to see if it is FS9 and not accidentally a different model.

3. Checked, they’re AIA.

4. Checked, GE.

I also checked to make sure the textures are named properly as there is a format they must follow but to no avail.

I almost feel like I have to “trick” the sim into making it accept the model. I don’t know how I’d do it here, hmmmm…..

You'd be surprised.

You can actually convert FSX DDS files into FS9 BMP ones. I've done so many, although it's a bit addicting sometimes converting every single one, like JetBlue or Frontier... See here.

https://web.archive.org/web/20181020034931/http://kaese2002.blogspot.com/p/blog-page.html

Oh, and if there's no alpha channels available, you can skip the "import alpha" part, and then last step, save as DXT1: no alpha.

I can't get away with anything can I?

This one is so random and pretty annoying. One day I realized a blank 747 at ORD. After some waiting I found out it was a KLM, so I tried a number of things, including modifying the texture to see if it was corrupted. No fix.

I then attempted to just replace the textures with ones found online and... nope! Same issue.

I checked the "syntax" or the spelling of the .cfg files making sure nothing was spelled incorrectly, even copying and pasting the text after texture= directly onto the texture file, but still no success. I then hypothesized what if it was the model that was having issues?

I check out FRA which has lots of 747GEs and yes, it seems that all paints associated with this particular model appear to be blanked out.

I checked again the syntax, making sure there were no bad fltsim.# entries, but no, they're all in order.

I then decided to replace the model entirely with a new one online, directly from AIA, pasted all the textures back, pasted all the fltsim entries back in.....

Still blank!!

It's so annoying, it's as if the simulator has a bias towards this aircraft and that is something I cannot really change or troubleshoot. Has anybody ever had an issue where one particular ai aircraft, no matter how much you troubleshoot, blanks out all the textures for that given aircraft? I'm out of ideas right now. This would be incredibly overkill to have to reinstall the sim from scratch because of one lousy ai model.

Hi Carlos

 

Something you could experiment with to see whether another file interfering would be to temporarily put your AFD file in a newly created scenery file structure and put that in your Scenery Library so that it loads after everything else.

 

If that doesn't resolve the issue then there could be something drastically wrong with your AFD file but I think that's unlikely.

 

I would also recommend you consider moving to using AFX or ADE - AFCAD2 is dark ages stuff for FS2002 and can break things in FS9.

 

John

I suppose the problem is still unresolved, but I did a go-around and just did my edits on the sole, original AFCAD file which worked.

Heheh, well the problem with ADE is that often times with certain addon sceneries, it ends up breaking things. I lost a chunk of concourse C of FSDT's ORD when I used a compiled file from ADE. I tend to start with AFCAD, then test out ADE to see if everything works just fine.

Hi,

 

Loading up your airport ICAO in AFX will show all active files. I've had it happen several times that an old version I forgot about was still active as well...

 

In FS9 the aircraft radius (not wingspan) is defined in the .mdl file, not the .air file, IIRC in meters.

AFCAD2 and AI-Aircaft Editor (and probably others...) can make those changes to the .mdl file.

In ADE options one can choose to use ft. or m. for parking.

 

Also, parking spots have an order index, which can be seen and changed in ADE, or AFX.

If you create a new parking spot it's index is added to the end of the line. So that spot will be filled last, but still taking into account the aircraft radius and airline code...

 

[ATTACH=CONFIG]230923[/ATTACH]

Screenshot from ADE1.65 manual.pdf

 

When I redo an airport (with ADE), I always reorder the parking spots in the index table, from small to large. Then depending on the airport, I can reorder same radius spots, gates first, then ramp. E.g. all my B737/A320s will fill the gates first, and only then the ramp spots.

 

 

Regards,

DDP.

Thanks, though I identified the problem as not being related to parking at all.

Could it be that your default APnnnnnn.bgl file, which contains your default KJFK airport and it's basic Afcad data, is somehow positioned at a higher scenery priority level than your Afcad (or ADE file), which you evidently keep editing but to no avail ?

 

In your scenery.cfg file, ALL these default scenery files should be positioned down near the bottom, i.e. have a very low scenery priority, in any case (far) lower than any scenery file which contains your edited Afcad file.

 

Hans

Actually not. I could try experimenting later, though for the time being this problem has been "patched".

Appreciate ya'lls input.

Check that you don't have any other airport BGL file for KJFK in that folder or any folder higher in the Scenery Library listing.

 

If you have FS installed into any Program Files folder your OS may be blocking that.

It's in the C: drive. I did a search and no other AF2 files exist for JFK in the FS9 directory.

I wonder if there's something corrupted about this particular AFCAD file, because I could've sworn I had crossing runways before, and the original JFK af2 file only has one set of parallels active. If that's the case a new AF2 or mod of an older one will have to be made...

Carlos Si,

 

Could it be that you are having problems with the difference between wigspan meters (specified in FS9 AIR files) and parking position sizes specified (in feet) in Afcad files ? E.g. An AIR file wingspan of 25 (meters) should fit into an Afcad parking position of 83 feet.

Conversion factor is 1 meter = 3.2808 feet.

 

Not sure though if ADE parking positions are also specified in feet because I've never used that program myself but I've did have the same experiences (with Afcad) as you are now having, but very long ago.

 

Regards and good luck.

 

Hans

Actually I'm certain it's an afcad issue; I compared and contrasted the new and original files, and the simulator only honors the original one based on which aircraft are parked anywhere (example: UPS continues to park in the original spot instead of the new assigned areas). Plus reducing the size of the a321 to 24 makes them park back in terminal 5 with the rest of the bluejets.

New information: after so much trial and error it appears that for some reason, the simulator is not even acknowledging the edited afcad file for KJFK (it's FSDT btw). When I remove the original file from the scenery folder, the aircraft revert to the default FS9 locations regardless of where the edited version is at (either in addonscener/scenery or in FSDT/scenery).

It's not a priority issue; FS9 is IGNORING the file and all my changes, plus no a321 can park where the parking is below 25 (highest is 24 for Jetblue). This can't be the case with the other FSDT scenries is it? Id on't think so..

Starting from scratch ain't very appealing :U ... if that even works.

Heheh, well this is driving me insane.

I recently updated my JetBlue traffic. I go to JFK and all the a321s are parked out by the cargo ramps.

Parking radius: checked (gates are 25m, aircraft radius for these is 25 which I verified)

Gate code: checked (JBU)

Parking type: checked (GATE)

Other observations: a321s WILL park in 25m spaces, they just don't prioritize it.

They only have JBU and GATE in the entries respectively, but no matter what happens, they stubbornly decide to go park over by the ramp.

I just don't know why. Where they park is empty, NOT a gate, NOT designated as "JBU". It is also much larger than these aircraft and AFAIK, they find the smallest spot available.

AI don't go by radius in the air file, do they? I have never observed that. Only with user aircraft and often times it'll just say "N/A" in aircraft editor. I have other FAIB a321 neos and ceos and I haven't yet observed this, unless I haven't paid enough attention.

I've noticed that anytime I make changes to an airport with AFCAD, the runway designators become "blank", which results in parked traffic disappearing after they get their clearance since there is "no runway" available, technically. Landing traffic is fine as it is leaving the runway.

I am pretty sure it is linked to changing the runway order in the runway list as the last 2 times I did do that. There's no way to prevent this from happening, is there? Seems tedious.

This couldn't be a Texture Bandwidth Multi issue I suppose?

As you state you reinstalled Fs9 that could mean TBMulti has been reset to 60.

Try setting to 300 -400.

It's probably not this, but worth trying anyway.

Andy

TBMulti?

Thinking again about the 'reset'... is it a memory timings issue?

 

My current PC works fine when left to its own devices. My previous one (somewhat dated now), if I ever reset the bios, chose to configure RAM timings by SPD which hammered the FS9 framerate. It could be that your RAM timings have been slowed right down.

 

D

That may help. I'd have to look into how to adjust that.

So after a bit more trial and error, I have found that through the windows resource monitor application, it is possible under the CPU tab to check the box next to fs9.exe, and thus be able to monitor a few of the ongoing process and files being used by the game. However, it does not show the full picture as from what I can see, only the players aircraft files, and a random selection of .bgl and other game files are shown. Nonetheless, I though I should post this here as it does at least provide some insight into what fs9 is doing as it runs.

Thanks for the post.

Unfortunately I've mostly thrown in the towel on this and am considering a new computer. It's disappointing because I KNOW the sim was able to handle what I've asked it to do recently wayy way better before I reset the computer. I don't know what exactly triggered such low frame rates (I even tried updating the drivers to no avail), but this is a needless problem.

I'm a little torn because I have massive expenses to cover and an adequate computer is going to stretch me a bit, but I digress. I have to make a good decision on this.

Update on the problem.

Did a reinstall (TWICE because abad update caused problems, and the system recovery caused new problems..), the only frame rate heavy sceneries are the FSDT ones. All others run smoothly. I don't know what initially caused all addons to be affected initially, but doing a reinstall has so far resulted in no problems.

I have to try other "intensive" airports to see if this is unique to those FSDT airports.

Correction........ OTHER airports may have the problem if I move the sliders up (EWR's Imaginesim)

I was really really hoping this was unique to FSDT since I can better pinpoint the problem on some install or who knows what. I seriously could have sworn the frame rates were much better before and this was with several of the sliders maxed out (scenery complexity max, dynamic scenery normal, etc.).

I can assure you DFW never disappointed me, but so far it has... same with ORD.

Also I notice that jetways drop out much closer than before; before it'd be a good... 10 miles and things like jetways would be visible (and AI). Now just several thousand feet and they're gone.

Maybe it's a system degrade when I reset the computer? This was originally a Windows 8 computer, though we did switch the motherboard out if that makes a difference. Maybe I need to update my video driver? Apparently that's a thing.

Aaaaand nevermind. Windows says I have the best already... I updated the computer today and caused a mess. I really don't feel like installing one.... arrgh.

I've no experience with the "4GB patch", sorry.

One issue I have had to deal with in the past is when 3rd party scenery overwrites default textures without asking … all the enabling and disabling of add-on features won't help if the problematic file is in the default texture folder! Examining the texture files by date can give clues here.

It's possible for one item within a library to cause problems, but only (apparently) under certain circumstances. I've spent time in the past dis-assembling library files and recompiling them in various combinations to isolate a rogue feature … probably would have been quicker to re-start from scratch, but you know what it's like ;)

Remember, if you disable the texture files for a scenery or library folder, FS will then revert to the default texture folder in it's search, so if "weird" things happen, you may find you've got the same texture filename being used in two different circumstances!

Perhaps. Though the issue only seems to be addon sceneries (textures) and not anything default. I don’t recall FSDT actually overwrites other files. I think from experience when installing it outside of FS9 first it only has scenery and texture. Nothing in Fs9/textures.

My standard SLC addon also experiences a hit despite the install being entirely located in addon scenery.

The 4GB patch in my humble opinion excluding the problem you and I have experienced is a bit of a toss up. Having used it before, I can't say it either hurts or enhances the performance of fs9. Though I have only just returned to flightsim this year, and thus my memory may have become a bit hazy over the past several years. However, I wouldn't see any harm in giving it a fair shake.

 

A quick note on my thread which was shared through here. In the instance of my performance issues, the issue is not that I cannot define what is happening, but rather why it is happening at all. Everything according to the information about my install and system is indicating all is well at the moment. Thus, I can only hypothesize why such fps loss takes place, as unless I am wrong there is no way to view in game/sim console or crash logs in order to look at what fs9 is doing behind the scenes as it runs.

 

 

 

If you do find out anything about this though, please do let us know! :)

Guess you had no luck either eh? My next bet is to reinstall the sim (clean), then just backup the addons before dropping into the sim. I could’ve sworn when I loaded those sceneries the first time, they were fine. Wasn’t after some addons that it decided to act funny. But I’m speculating. I /could have/ sworn… I just hope I’m not convinced that resetting the computer again is my only solution. I’m not wanting to do that again.

I tried the FPS file. Didn’t do much I’m afraid.

It’s not the aircraft but I do have so many dropped into the sim… again it shouldn’t be a problem as the trigger is addon textures, not even volume of aircraft.

Thanks y’all

On my system at least, with a built-in video card, I could re-allocate some of my 8GB system RAM for the video card to use. I seem to remember updating from 512MB of video RAM to 2GB and it made a big difference, but if you've already got 2GB of RAM on your video card that's unlikely to be an issue.

Would you suggest the 4GB patch? Would that reallocated ram still be in use by RAM in general when the video ram isn’t being extensively used? I think the sim is only getting no more than 2 given what I Observed yesterday. Peaked at 1.3 I think.

EDIT: I don't know if that's a viable solution. With the simulator running and a couple of google windows (which I consider to be a light amount..), it's using up 5.8 GB when the simulator is "active". Still, with 2 GB available the simulator isn't even using that available amount. I don' tknow how much it would "choose" to use if more was allocated to it.

And sure I could just.. not use Google in the background (it does take up a good 2 Gigabytes... somehow), but before I "change my ways", why is it that this wasn't as much of an issue before and now it is? I read that other thread but it doesn't appear to give a real solution or hint as to why he's experiencing that problem.

As a matter of fact, I further confirmed it's any addon because without the static object libraries installed... SEA was running smoothly (the scenery is technically just a fancy afcad which does use some jetways from a library. Without them, it runs flawlessly). This must be texture related, but what... why does the simulator not have a problem with its own textures but does take issue with even just one little jetway? Much worse, an entire payware airport.

I could blame the paywares being technically installed outside of the addonscenery/scenery folder, but according to this dude, his Melichar Hawaii scenery (that I have also used before) gave him problems, and I assume that one was installed where they are usually installed, in the addonscenery folder. There's one more test I need to conduct actually, when I get the chance (scenery without ANY textures...).

Also I noticed his specs should be very close to mine if not exactly the same. Same GPU and CPU, W10 64. I don't think Ihave as much RAM (definitely not 32GB). I do keep my FS9 install outside of programfilesx86 (it's in C:/FlightSimulator9)

Thoughts?

If you're using an on-board video card it's possible the amount of allocated RAM was reset to "standard" when the machine was "reset". I remember changing my machine from whatever to 2GB made a big difference at the time, but I forget exactly how I achieved it.

I could see that as a possibility. I never changed those settings (if they exist) and I know I’ve reset the computer before. I know there’s a 4GB patch for the sim, I don’t know if it’s what I need or if I can actually allocate that much to the simulator. My computer has 8 GB of ram available, the sim was using just 1.3MB last I checked at its peak, yesterday (that was 70% of the ram which is odd that it wasn’t 35% of 4). I have a 64-bit system.

Actually this is “regular ram” right? We aren’t talking VRAM are we? Because there I think I only have 2 GB (or half of whatever FS2020 needs).

Tested it a little more. Even from a relatively far distance (10 miles), the simulator gets slow anytime I'm looking at scenery, no matter how simple it may be (a small, local scenery, or a big, payware DFW-esque scenery). Tried default IAH and the sim works just fine...

Added the afcad for IAH without the scenery and texture folders and it still works fine. I feel this has something to do with any type of addon textures, but I don't know /what/ it is...

-Removed all static object libraries (no use)

-Re-installed the texture folder in the main directory too, but no use

Did you or do you have any new anti virus etc installed? Being that it seems to be most of your airports, is there anything running in the background that’s hogging the cpu?

Sometimes the antivirus will do it.

Or can check the task manager and see if anything is running high.

 

It may not be it but it’s good to eliminate the easy stuff first.

Nah no antivirus at all. Size does matter as my AUS scenery is ok, but not JFK or SEA (which definitely shouldn't have been a "low FRF" airport).

Nothing unusual on task manager. The usual google pages and discord running, but nothing out of the ordinary. The sim used to run just fine with those active.

Setting the mips to 1 doesn't make the sim any better. Obviously I could just set all the things to 0 and the sim works fine, but the problem is I know my computer has been able to handle much more before without issue.