jgf

MIPs will not affect what you see at close range, they merely reduce graphics resource requirements as the objects get farther away (where you will not notice reduced detail/resolution). Without MIPs the full size image is loaded regardless of where it is used - imagine the resources required to display all the scenery tiles visible on the screen using 2048x2048 images; MIPs allow the distant textures to be rendered with 32x32, or smaller, textures. Same with aircraft, a dozen AI without MIPs are using a lot of resources. The image degradation referenced above is what happens when repeatedly processing a DXT/DDS image, just like a jpg file it is compressed every time it is saved, and each compression causes loss of quality. Thus when painting aircraft always edit the original image and save as a new DXT, never edit and save the DXT.

Two ways. You can edit the sound cfg or ini files (whatever FS2020 uses) and increase the level of the internal engine sounds; or you can edit the wav files themselves and increase their volume (this is tricky, if the level is already near max any further increase could clip the signal and produce horrible distortion). A third alternative, especially if only the one aircraft is using this sound set, is to lower the level of all the other sound files til they balance with the internal engine sounds. You may then want to increase the overall system volume.

It's been several years since I dabbled with Kerbal but, fwiw, the physics behind it are quite good; I assume they attired it in the cartoonish graphics to broaden the appeal.

The FS2004 world is a cylinder, when you get close enough to either pole you "warp" to the corresponding point 180deg across the pole, heading in the opposite direction. I believe this is somewhere around the 10th, maybe 5th, parallel; so we cannot recreate a polar flight. For the OP, some FS2002 scenery will work in FS2004, but the farther from the equator it is the less likely it will work well, and it is doubtful it will work at all in FSX (coordinates and elevations will be too far off, it may appear but not where expected, runways may not be properly oriented, navaids could be incorrectly placed ...issues with the latter can even cause CTDs). "Conversion" as such is doubtful, you could use all the scenery objects to create a new scenery just for FSX.

Have you checked the Windows event log? Also there is a little utility called Who Crashed (https://www.resplendence.com/whocrashed) that might give some insight.

For some reason i find landings much easier from the 2D panel than the VC, and when flying airborne Trailways there's nothing to see anyway (let the AP take it, go to external view and scan around). But there are some aircraft, and most helicopters, that just don't feel "right" without a VC.

I use aircraft as old as FS98 in FS2004, mainly for AI and static AC. Comparatively low poly models mean less fps hit, and it seems with each new FS version the variety of available aircraft lessens. I doubt the MSFS crowd will get to fly WWI aircraft or experimental planes or Star Trek shuttlecraft.

Yes, this is still going on; the site does something to files/procedures that triggers a malware warning on download. My d/l manager receives the file, holds it in limbo somewhere, and tells me it has a virus; it passes all virus scans, even online, so I just click on the error message and "allow". Happens with Firefox and Brave.

Quite relative. (There was a time I didn't think a Porsche Turbo and a Lamborghini was spending a lot, now I'm a retired geezer getting a senior discount on a 10meg internet connection.)

Xbox? I've not had a console since the days of Atari. Desktops only for me.

Obviously, "new" equals "better". And if that requires diplexed Crays in the basement and an internet connection which would impress the NSA, so be it. Hopefully they are as happy in their world as I am in mine.

You might also like the old Canadian TV series "Mayday", currently being shown on Quest TV but I believe also available on DVD. Each episode covers an airplane crash and the subsequent investigation; the oldest I've seen is the 1955 collision over the Grand Canyon, more recent are incidents early this century.

It is just like building models. If you build a model of a WWII German aircraft, you put a swastika on it. That is not an endorsement of anything, it is merely historical accuracy.

In my case - any landing you survive is a good one.

Lol, a twenty year old Toyota will get you to the grocery store as well, and more economically, as a new Porsche. Yes MSFS is beautiful, but compare the system requirements, not to mention the requirement of a constant high speed internet connection, and the aggravation of constant "upgrades" (which seem to cause as many problems as they cure, and are not optional). And from what I've seen, there is no need to learn navigation or systems, MSFS takes you by the hand and points out everything for you. But there is room for everyone, I enjoy FS2004 as much as you enjoy MSFS, we both win.