Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 19 of 19

Thread: Newbie Alert: FSX APPCRASH | UIautomationCore.dll

  1. #11


    Quote Originally Posted by loki View Post
    Microsoft owned Aces, and didn't give any warning when they closed it down. I don't think they could have just raised money somehow and separated (unlike Bungie). And not all of the former Aces developers went to Cascade Game Foundry. At least a few are now working on Prepar3D at Lockheed Martin.
    With an already existing install base (large), a mature product having gone through several RTM cycles, a growing audience and major room for expanding into new market niches, they could have had several VC candidates and more than one Angel lined up in a matter of weeks (not months)- especially with their ability to toss around the phrase "A former Microsoft Product."

    Personally, I would have jumped at the opportunity quite frankly.

    Quote Originally Posted by loki View Post
    What about all of the people who don't have a suitable high speed connection (reliability, data caps etc.)? Or those that like to run the sim on laptop so they can fly while away from home?
    The hard work would be done at design time in engineering and developing a streaming server technology that drastically reduces bandwidth requirements. The issue there would be in the creative problem solving related to compression algorithms, combined with the way the HyperG WebClient works with the CPU, GPU and Memory to finally render the frames to screen. It is hard work. It can be done.
    Windows 7 | 6 GB RAM | Dell Inspiron 620 | 64bit | Intel Dual Core i3 3.30GHz
    Intel HD Graphics | 2.08 GB VRAM | 27" LG LCD | 1920 X 1080 | 32bit Color
    Flight Sim: FSX Deluxe SP2 | Live ATC Sim: None (Currently evaluating PilotEdge & VATSIM)

  2. #12


    Quote Originally Posted by mgh View Post
    Could it?

    Perhaps potential funders felt the idea wasn't commercially viable and wiouldn't fund it.

    Did they even try?

    I would have jumped on it - knowing what I know now. But, that's a lot different than building the thing from scratch without having done one before. In other words, they would not have had a sizable "new" R&D budget requirement. At least not nearly as large as a brand new start-up without a full developed product concept. They would simply have needed a good round or two or Continuation Funding, not Stage Funding and not Initial Concept Funding.

    I'd like to see it happen, but hey - I'd have to locate my Snorkeling gear somewhere in storage before they'd (seem) to be interested. Besides, modeling Abramite Head Standers swimming against a 15kt undercurrent off the coast of BVI, is far more appealing, I guess.

    Like I said, I don't know exactly what happened, but it sure would be interesting to find out based on what I see in the flight sim world of today.

    I have some ideas. We'll see how it goes from here. Who knows. Velocity could become a reality.
    Last edited by SmallJet; 02-27-2013 at 08:46 PM.
    Windows 7 | 6 GB RAM | Dell Inspiron 620 | 64bit | Intel Dual Core i3 3.30GHz
    Intel HD Graphics | 2.08 GB VRAM | 27" LG LCD | 1920 X 1080 | 32bit Color
    Flight Sim: FSX Deluxe SP2 | Live ATC Sim: None (Currently evaluating PilotEdge & VATSIM)

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Getting warmer now


    Quote Originally Posted by SmallJet View Post
    Did they even try?
    How could they have tried? Aces was owned by Microsoft, who showed up one day, fired almost everyone and closed the doors. So some went and decided to work on a different type of sim, and others ended up at Lockheed Martin working on Prepar3d (sostill working on a flight sim).

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Denver, CO USA KAPA, KLMO, 35CO



    You have to remember that you're talking about software that was released almost 7 YEARS ago! ACES did the best they could with the computer technology available to the public at that time. Only with the advent of faster processors, beefier motherboards and years of work from FS enthusiasts has made FSX capable of running somewhat smoother than in the early days.

    A company is going to need a massive bankroll, legions of software engineers, and upper management with the foresight to stick with the project through thick and thin to realize the type of Flight Simulator you aspire for. Don't expect someone like Microsoft to do that, especially after the debacle with Flight. Seriously, it's going to take a company with that much financial muscle to attempt what you forsee... not ORBX, Aerosoft or any of the 3rd party add on developers; there are too many big egos in that consortium to feed.

    "I created the Little Black Book to keep myself from getting killed..." -- Captain Elrey Borge Jeppesen

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Mar 2005


    Plane & Simple, we Need a Microsoft Flight Sim 2014.. Wish Microsoft would reopen there Game Studio & let those people build a Brand New Flightsim 2014..

    Also I wonder how Prepar3D would be on Windows 8.. Anyone tried it yet on Windows 8 ? Does it handle any Better ?? Maybe Prepar3D will have to become the future replacement for FSX for the Newer model computers out today especially if it doesn't have as many errors if any than FSX has.. I've seen the graphics from it & looks pretty good.. Infact I've seen Xplane & I think Prepar3D would be great for replacing FSX on these newer Windows 8 systems then Xplane.. Still it would be great if Microsoft would come back & make another Flightsim 2014 though..

    Say they did come back sometime in the future & make another Flightsim not that they will but just for saying.. I hope if they did make another one, next time make ATC even more realistic sounding, & this time have it where on Final as tower is giving you the runway clearance to land he/she will ask you which gate your parking at & you can select your gate like you do now for GSX.. & then once you get passed on to ground freq. Your gate info once you contact them will have already been passed on to them & they'll guide you right to your gate that you selected & if for some reason AI plane is still sitting there you can either give them the option to put you at the next closest gate to one you selected or they'll put you in a spot out of the way where you can wait for your gate to open up especially if ground see's that there leaving soon via there beacon flashing..

    Also the other thing that I hope they would add in is Speed control upon Approach for lining traffic up for arrival runway like they do in real life & for those like me that Listen to Live ATC they tell the pilots at what speed to fly at upon approach, keeping the planes spaced out so you wouldn't have all these planes going faster than the other one & this way unlike it is now on FSX where during busy times I pretty much go for the other runway when they assigned me to one, I pick the other just so I can land, other wise they forever have you going around on the current version..

    Also on the New FS 2014 if there ever is to be one, I can see this also being added to the new ATC for FS.. especially for Busy airports, Being put in Holding patterns if Air Traffic is real dense or bad weather at the Arrival Airport or if you if bad weather happens at your destination airport while your still at the your departure airport, you could be put on a gate hold & you have to keep up with Clearance Delivery to tell you when your Gate Hold has been lifted. Just to add to the realism..

    Those first 2 things is what I'd deffantly like to see if they were to ever make a FS 2014 though.. I'm tired of the random gate ATC ground gives you when you contact ground & there not always your airline gate that they give you.. Its different for those that do vatsim because your talking to human but I'm talking about just flying IFR & using FSX's default ATC..

    I just hope for the best & that Prepar3D might become the next FSX in today's computers time until someone else or hopefully Microsoft can do another Microsoft Flightsim someday.. I've seen XPlane for those that like it, good for them, but I don't know I just didn't like what I seen from the videos on it.. I liked the looks from Prepar3D & just hope more people start making airplanes for it.. I know right now my Airbus X Extended from Aerosoft will work on it. PMDG but I don't use PMDG I use IFLY 737NG, I have my ERJ's from Feelthere that I need to be able to have them work on it, The E-Jets from Wilco/Feelthere, Captainsim 777 I hope will be able to work on it eventually..

    I really enjoy flying on FSX & maybe soon Prepar3D but hopefully it won't stop there & hopefully someone can make another Flightsim someday to keep us going in Flightsim community..

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Feb 2005


    Make sure the UIautomationcore.dll is the Vista one, v.6.0.5840.16386; it has been reposted in other sites that the .dll can get corrupted by installing PMDG software.


  7. #17


    Quote Originally Posted by coabill View Post
    Plane & Simple, we Need a Microsoft Flight Sim 2014.. Wish Microsoft would reopen there Game Studio & let those people build a Brand New Flightsim 2014..
    Why Microsoft ??? Do you still trust them ?

  8. #18


    Quote Originally Posted by SmallJet View Post
    I've seen many windows core automation posts listing one-off solutions - most of them resulting in a return of the same problem for the end-user.

    I've done a small amount of study on this problem (not having a large amount of time to dedicate to it) and I've come to the conclusion that the crash is definitely a run-time event within the shared-code container (file) itself. All of the aircraft model add-ons run as "additional code" added to the FSX file system. None of them run as independent .exe programs requiring either high or low level API calls between FSX. The uiautomationcore.dll is a mask that ensures compatibility between .Net user interface clients running in support of the Windows Presentation Foundation environment. Essentially, uiautomationcore.dll is a single source mapper for dissimilar frameworks that have different UI implementations.

    The uiautomationcore.dll is supposed to handle dialogue between both uiautomation providers (API in .dll form) and uiautomation clients (API in .dll form). I don't know what the exact implementation of uiautomationcore.dll looks like for FSX, but I now believe this to be a .Net issue at the potential source of the problem. Think about it. FSX users who report using the software for eons, all of a sudden have problems with uiautomationcore.dll after running a Windows Update, which they had not run for a long time. Well, the .Net Framework is in a perpetual state of "fixing" at Microsoft and continually gets updated through the Windows Update Service. It is possible that the uiautomationcore.dll is getting tweaked by various Windows Updates, [b]without any updates to either uiautomation providers (API in .dll form) and uiautomation clients.
    This could easily explain why there has never been any "official" fix for this problem. Microsoft can control its UIautomationCore, but it has no control over how third-party developers write to their respective Providers and Clients.

    While Microsoft does not list any .Net requirements to run FSX under Windows 5, Windows 6 or Windows 7, it does still communicate with components from the .Net Framework, namely UIAutomationCore.dll. I ran a search on my Windows 7 OS, looking for:


    I found them sitting under: C:\Program Files (x86)\Reference Assemblies\Microsoft\Framework\v3.0. So, I start scratching my head again. I then found this from another FSX user:

    An Unhandled Exception in the .Net Framework. This user was using FSX on a Windows 7/64bit box and had both SimConnect and REX version 2 installed and running (circa 2010). So, I start scratching my head even more, as I realize that FSX was initially released during the reign of .Net Framework 2. Aces Studios, ran development for FSX from 2006/2009. Most Windows 7 boxes out there have already been updated to .Net Framework 4.0, which was originally cut loose in April, 2010. Therefore, FSX is behind the .Net Framework power curve and has no ability to ever gain ground. The .Net Framework 4.5 was released last year, putting FSX even further behind the power curve.

    Windows 7, does include .Net Framework 2.0. That's a fact. The problem is that any application that uses the old .Net Framework 2.0x, must be able to recognize and distinguish the differences within the Operating Systems itself. This goes back to my initial theory, that FSX, might be having problems recognizing uiautomationcore.dll in some way, as the one which was being used on my box was version 7, from the 64bit \SysWOW64 directory.

    Hence, I have since changed that to be the 32bit version 7, from the \System32 directory. It is not the .Net Framework 2x equivalent, but it does move the .Net Framework version down two (2) versions and gets it closer to the 2x code. The hope is that there is enough stability in that version to keep FSX happy. The Vista version of uiautomationcore.dll might also be a way to push back closer to .Net Framework 2x.

    I guess this is all predicated on another one of Steve Ballmer's "excellent" bright ideas.

    The bottom line is that given the component interoperability path that Microsoft took, when it decided to move in the direction of .Net Frameworks several years ago, without continual base code management and maintenance, FSX is essentially a dying application. The further way .Net moves, the more faint FSX becomes in the interoperability rear view mirror. At some point, with the continual changes in Windows and its perpetual shifting of its .Net internals, FSX will become so unstable as to be rendered completely useless, as you won't even be able to launch it inside Windows in the years to come. As .Net gets continually updated and as Microsoft moves closer to "optimizing" Windows 8, expect to see more component level interoperability issues come up with respect to FSX and its handling of dynamic link library files.

    You are witnessing the death of a Legend. Pure and simple. Hold on for as long as you can - that's pretty much the only hope at this point. This patient is on life support, but the majority are not yet willing to pull the plug. I'll be happy, if I can get through my initial real flight training with FSX as my simulated procedures platform, as X-Plane simply does not have the required aircraft models that I need to get the job done.

    When it comes to FSX, Plug'N Play has turned into Patch'N Go.[/QUOTE]

    With all respect and working with the simulation community on FSX since 2006 and with Microsoft dealing with FSX issues back into Vista.
    Your explanation is the most informative clinically correct explanation, and here it is 2022 and the same conversation remains.
    Aces never did a fine job on FSX no matter what version it was , and as far as anything , it was the community and the developers , most of whom gained children lost hair and wives and a few friends over the stressful conception and repairing of the time consuming fix and repair daily .
    I want to say that weve lost quite a few leaders over the years since 2006, and truly knowing some and flying together on Gamespy Ive come to realize just how mwny great members are oput there, some really good people, and if you ever want to throw a memorial flight im memory of all of tose great people like Rory Kelly drop me a line.
    Would be nice to have a fly in site again.
    Thanks for such a great site, been here quite awhile now. Semper Fidelis

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    San Francisco, California


    You just responded to a 9 year old post!
    Mr Zippy Sent from my keyboard using "Whackamole", NudgeAKey + 2 Fingers

    No flight Sim installed until I get a new computer.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 3
    Last Post: 09-01-2012, 03:52 PM
  2. Replies: 4
    Last Post: 08-30-2012, 10:06 AM
  3. Replies: 2
    Last Post: 06-25-2011, 04:21 PM
  4. Red Alert! Red alert! C177NJ2.dll!
    By sanyok in forum DreamFleet General Discussion Forum
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 08-02-2003, 04:43 PM
    By UAFORLO in forum FS2002
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 06-25-2002, 02:19 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts