• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by FlyingAxx

  1. 1 hour ago, srcooke said:

    You may also wish to try the 2017 vcredist that works here without issue also.

    Thanks for the hint Stephen, I'll try this first before changing the 2015 packages.


    EDIT: The 64bit version did nothing, but the 2017 x86-package made it.


    1 hour ago, srcooke said:

    Did you actually try the version Tom linked to ?


    Not all 2015 SP3 vcredist were equal, at least one version from Microsoft would cause errors.

    If nothing works I'll swap the existent ones against those Tom linked to.


    EDIT: No more necessary.


    Thumbs up Stephen!!! Now I can uninstall PFPX again in order to place it where I want it to be.

  2. 2 hours ago, Tom A320 said:


    For a start you can take a look into this topic of the list of pined topics in this forum:



    Tom, actually I checked the installed version of (both) C++ 2015 Redistributables, being slightly newer than the ones that came with PFPX' installer. Unfortunately I can't say which application had dropped those files, however I usually try to check anything I'm installing whether it works or not. However, the only install that worked for me had been the latest 64bit package, unfortunately nothing changed.

    The error log says, that PFPX.exe is causing the crash and nothing a bout missing files.

    Furthermore everything seems to work, except the route "Find" function. When editing an existing route and running "Build" it doesn't crash, as well as after build the legs between manually given waypoints.

    Even more strange: finding a route from WP to WP out of the context menu works well (I think in principle the same function as "Find"). However, it can't solve longer distances sufficiently as it seems.

    After applying the latest hot fix the start-up screen looks <err> strange (I've cropped the screenshot):



    Both files mentioned in your topic 1 are not missed, neither appears NTDLL.DL  in Window's logs.


    Finally the fix for .Net didn't dig out anything requiring a new installation. My attempt installing the latest version failed because it appeared to be already in place.


    Any other ideas?


    EDIT: Finally I uninstalled it again and used for my attempt the given standard path. Now it told me that I installed the application the third time within 18 Month on a different device which is definitely not the case. It had been always the same computer, but different locations (allright, my Win7 install exists parallel).

    I think, it had been my final shot - for today.


    EDIT2: I've just checked the difference in behaviour compared to Win7: The button "Find" was orange coloured before I attempted to hit it. That's not the case under Win 7.


  3. I've just installed a fresh W10Pro on its own SSD (not partitioned) and implemented piece by piece my FSXA, again in a fresh install on a separate drive. In a parallel folder I've installed helper applications like weather (AS16 + Cloud Art) and others like TOPCAT and finally PFPX 1.28. Of course I implemented it as Admin and it runs with such privileges as well.

    Everything looked good, it came up (navdata had been updated via Navigraph), but the moment I tried to plan a flight it crashed when hitting the "find" button - reproducible. After that I uninstalled the application and tried it again without updating the database before my first planning trial. Unfortunately the result was the same.

    The Windows event log looks like this:

    System specs and all other requirements are more than met. The same version (still runs smoothly) under Win7Pro (system and program on different drives). I really need an idea where to look at. Of course I looked for the user rights, even if there should have been no restriction at all, and everything looks normal to me.
    EDIT: I've just checked the log against one of those being produced during the first attempt yesterday and the only difference, besides the data section, is the doubled path entry today. I think I'll try uninstalling and cleaning the system afterwards before trying it the third time.

  4. Okay, as it seems the CRJ filters runway lengths. Personally I would prefer a possibility having configuration possibility using such a function or not. As far as can recall, the old PMDG 744 had such a possibility for runways having a length of less than 3600 ft :excl:. I didn't find it during my first attempts because of a glitch in FSX I never saw before that might be rather interesting for developers.

    On 12/4/2017 at 3:36 PM, JerryJet said:

    I would go back to the source and ask Navigraph about it.

    I did and edited my recent posting in a sense as described above. It's absolutely a "feature" of the CRJ. I case of emergency, you even can land big birds (if you're lucky) on quite short fields. The best example is a IL-62 touching down at Gollenberg (where Otto Lilienthal made his first flights and unfortunately finally died). It was a planned landing on a 900 m grass strip (downhill, allowing to escape) in order to transfer the bird to its final destination, serving as a museum. 


    Here is a video (in German) - two attempts for trial before it happened:



    And now somebody should explain why short fields are filtered out. If the answer is "the original CRJ does it" I would be surprised, but would accept it.


  5. Even knowing EFB, I don't have it myself and can't say whether and if so how it uses AI-flightplans. At the moment I did not implement AI traffic (and didn't intend doing so). According to my limited knowledge those airports just know civil charter traffic, but no scheduled connections at all. However, in real life civil airplanes are allowed when following a filed and accepted flight plan as far as I can see.

    I'll play a bit with some data field the next days in order to understand better the whole file. Most of it is well understandable, but a few gaps are still there and those might explain a different behaviour of different aircraft using exactly the same data.

  6. Jerry,

    1. Regarding Wikipedia this airport knows dual-use (charter). However, it would be kinda crazy blending out airports that could help during emergency situations (even if Aerosoft's birds are hardened against any failures).
    2. Navigraph's data are okay as the same set works for Aerosoft's airbuses without any problem (the data format is identical as far as I can see, based on ARINC 424). And, I think I was clear that the airports in question are included in the dataset.
    3. I don't need volunteers on board, as the flight should take me empty to VCBI, a rather short hop, no need for extensive fuel as well. I just needed half of the runway length when taking off without any plan. 
    4. I wrote that I modified the airport, by using sat.-pictures as template, my runway has 5,115 ft available and I even manipulated the dataset, unfortunately without success.

    Did you try to call this airport in your FMC?

  7. Today I tried to set-up a flight from VCCG to VCBI and just got a "NOT FOUND" message for the departing airport (vice versa it didn't work too). I'm using up-to-date Navigraph data and checked them for faults without anything being obvious. Other smaller airports of Sri Lanka are showing similar problems. In comparison the same inputs made no problem in Aerosoft's Airbus series using the same data structure and actually the same data.

    I got the idea that the CRJ might filter airports with shorter runways and changed the related data in VCCG.txt and Airports.txt to a higher value (5200 ft resp. 5215 ft) that should be sufficient at least for emergency operations (Airbus didn't care even for 3500 ft as before) as these values are reflecting the airport as it is shown by Google (even if there is a contradiction between official figures, Navigraph, and what Google shows). That's what I've build (standard textures only, background and LC not shown).



    However, nothing helped so far. Other airports seems to work (e.g. VCBI, VCRI, VCCV, VCCC), but not VCCK, VCCG, VCCS). Even a changed dataset like the following one didn't make it (in both mentioned files, of course):



    There are no approaches, parking information or other gimmicks. Any idea?

  8. 1 hour ago, FlyingAxx said:

    Now I have to look for a local replacement...

    Well, I just installed the 4bladewheelcargo model of FEDEX (definitely done by Tom) and it works properly. Unfortunately I don't have a hint where I got the D-IVER from (the source had been just a guess). Actually, I'm not in the mood for hunting a glitch. Thanks for stepping in.


    EDIT: I just re-installed the D-IVER and it works now as it should. I've still no idea what happened. :banghead1_s:

  9. Hi Mathijs, it had been just one repaint obviously that came along with a 4-blade model. To be more specific, it had been the D-IVER, a repaint of Tom Weiss, I suppose (I removed it meanwhile). Strange enough, everything else worked, the outside model looked good, and I still don't know what the reason can be. After loading the bird, everything looks good, too, but when touching the prop lever it moves to the max. angle and remains there (there is no reaction following any lever change).


    Now I have to look for a local replacement... :unsure:

  10. Even after reassigning the lever for propeller pitch to the one of my throttle quadrant it doesn't work for me this way. It neither moves nor does the plane's behaviour changes in any way (at least torque should react somehow). I'm using the Saitek Cessna Yoke (including the throttle quadrant) which works well with other comparable planes. Of course I checked the calibration function of FSXA while having the Twotter loaded. Is there any setting I could look at specific to this airplane? The strange thing is that I'm quite sure that it worked for a while (as it still does when using the mouse or keyboard commands).

  11. 8 hours ago, mopperle said:

    this has already been discussed in the past.

    Sorry Otto, I did a search here and didn't find related threads.


    8 hours ago, mopperle said:

    So do it on your own risk,

    It works for me well with PMDG's data and it doesn't seem to be too difficult changing my already existent program code in order to meet at least the basic requirements. Of course I know that some additional birds can't take any benefit, however, due to to cycle changes I would never include all available changes into the virgin navdata files, but those that might be relevant for the area I'm planning to fly next. As the data structure of my old Flight1-ATR is quite similar (even if not as comprehensive) I think it's worth trying it even without any support.


    BTW, as you wrote I'm dealing with text files, the risk is just crashing the bird as at least the A320 & Co did from time to time by itself even when flying it from the books. I'm following this hobby now almost as long as MSFS exists and since AFCAD and later ADE made things more convenient, I developed the habit changing disturbing stuff related to airports myself. Often they are just misplaced, sometimes doubled, others are missing, renamed or what ever else. Meanwhile my self-made collection comprises a couple of hundred add-on airports, besides downloaded freeware and those I'd bought. It's part of the fun for me even if armchair-flying comes first.

    8 hours ago, mopperle said:

    but do not expect any kind of support.

    Actually, unfortunately I'm not surprised.

  12. Hello guys,


    From time to time it happens, that even bigger airports are not listed in FSX navigation data. To give an example, the Shigatse Peace Airport (ZURK) in Tibet, not included by default neither in FSX nor in P3D, is missing in both commercial AIRAC datasets I know about as well. The airport is added, I even dug out some data (even about commercial traffic - well, it's moderate), but I'm not sure whether it's sufficient to amend my navigation data base.


    As it is no rocket science adding those data manually to PMDG's airport and navigation files, the structure is relatively simple, but fully sufficient, I wasn't able to decipher the meaning of all data fields being used by Aerosoft up to now - even after comparing lots of different sets of various regions. :(   Even if I think that I got most of the meanings (but probably not all being really required) I'm keen learning to understand the rest. Unfortunately it's not urgent enough, purchasing e.g. ARINC 424, as I know more or less how SIDs and STARs are defined and I think it's not worth the money specifically as I don't know whether the required entries are really defined. What I'm doing is just for my own private use and not available elsewhere outside the aviation industry.


    What I'm doing is just running MakeRunways.exe, a little tool of Pete Dowson to get my FS data listed in XML format. It tracks all default airports and my add-ons, too (of course by respecting the priorities). A second tool, written by myself (with a little  help of my son) produces the required ISG1 and PMDG files, filtered by surface requirements and minimum runway length. This gives me the choice either using the produced files showing the state of my sim or just adding a growing set of elsewhere missing data, to be added manually each month (if required).


    A snippet:

    A,EDFH,FRANKFURT-HAHN,49.94867,7.26389,1649,5000,0,12400,0                                      (Transition ALT, I know, the first red one is an altitude as well, in the US it's set to TRANS ALT mostly, elsewhere different or even Zero)
    R,03,31,12467,148,1,109.300,31,49.93940,7.25475,1649,3.00,56,0,0                                (no idea what's behind it, the rest is okay)
    L,03,IHAE,EDFH 03 ILS CAT 1,109.300,49.96250,7.27754,31.00,1.5,49.94139,7.25878,1648,3.00,1     (no idea what's behind it, the rest is okay)
    M,49.93072,7.24537,1649,2,IHAE,31.00                                                            (why is a localiser-course defined with a (NDB) marker?) 
    L,21,IHAW,EDFH 21 ILS CAT 3,111.300,49.92871,7.24421,211.00,1.5,49.95641,7.26954,1595,3.00,3
    (same as above)


    Last remark: I don't bother about the empty entries following the parking spot's LAT/LON.


    Is someone out there, who could help me about the missing definitions (including you guys of Aerosoft, of course)? :wub:





  13. On 9/12/2017 at 7:27 PM, dcda said:

    Welcome back, Neal.  Come in an' have one on us.


    I only can support this warm welcome! Meanwhile even the Summer is leaving here. Luckily here the announced storm didn't really appear here (not comparable with those Caribbean monsters), but it's rainy and the temperatures will drop below my personal a-T-shirt-is-sufficient-border (yeah, I'm mollycoddled :unsure:). Usually it's for me the right moment starting the FS Winter-season.

    However, our ways may cross again.

  14. 16 hours ago, nealmac said:

    If you go into the DIR TO page on the CDU, it gives you the required descent rates you need in order to cross your waypoints at the correct altitudes. I'm fairly sure this is considered "cheating" by real world CRJ pilots :lol: but it helps me out a lot.


    Thanks Neal, seems to be a nice hint. However, the FMC looks like being even more limited than the one of the old ATR 72-500, supporting not only the written descent rate information in the CDU, but a path and speed command bar in the PFD additionally. Well it's not too hard calculating the TOD, but as shit might happen in any situation causing extra stress, or distraction by a super attractive #1 serving a cup of tea :wub:  (hehe, that's gender neutral) any extra help for pilots seems to useful.


    As the weather obviously becomes terrible during the next days, I wish you a pleasant last leg nonetheless!



  15. On 9/8/2017 at 2:00 PM, nealmac said:

    So I usually just fly with ever P3D is defaulting to.


    Neal, does this mean that you're not setting the actual date to be the one being set in your sim or is it ORBX requiring seasons to be manually set? Sorry for such silly questions - I don't use it up to now.


    Hey, meanwhile I'm trying climbing up the learning curve required for my new bird, the CRJ. Well, a manual flight, booting the flight with running engines, worked quite well, but today the flight example to Monterey had been a mess when descending. I've managed to do a really nice landing, but there was nothing about using the ILS-approach. I had to circle before in order to kill altitude and did a beautiful and soft visual finally. The whole action must be repeated more then once I'm afraid. BTW, I got a bit nervous because of my fuel consumption. What's your experience in this respect?

  16. 4 hours ago, nealmac said:

    I've been wondering what to do next,

    Hmm, I don't have any problem as I'm standing at the moment at Shigatse Peace Airport (ZURK, Tibet), waiting for the next Sunday in order to continue my even longer lasting RTW that some buddies and I started on July 17th, 2011. :P It's our second tour as we finished before a similar RTW trip by using FS9 as platform.


    Besides flying there will be also some other work to do as far as missing, misplaced, or poor quality airports are concerned. That's part of the fun for me as well. However, for mid-range distances I will try integrating my brand-new CRJ, the generous gift of Aerosoft, in my hangar of actively used planes. At the moment it's still packed in a container waiting for being finally assembled before putting it into service. ^_^


    The picture below shows two of us (well me and some lights above me) about 16 minutes after taking off for our first leg in 2011 at Puerto William (SCGZ) on our way to Rio Grande (SAWE).



    Actually, we took relatively small legs (if possible) and often small planes, but we even didn't visit all airfields along our route. There remains a lot to see, even if we tried to pick the rather spectacular fields and landscapes (e.g. the combination of hills and water).

  17. 20 hours ago, gazoeller said:


    On 1.9.2017 at 2:03 PM, FlyingAxx said:

    Yeah, it looks really nice, Mathjis. However, without having the bird I resisted downloading the livery. I posted yesterday my order number to Toby (and a second request -  independent from our tour), asking him forwarding it to you. As I already wrote above, I can wait.



    please read the PM carefully. There you can find where to send your order info.

    BTW I made the same mistake before. ;)


    Quite clear, wasn't it? :blink:

  18. 2 hours ago, nealmac said:

    The lack of an auto-throttle really forces you to work hard to manage your descent correctly. And trying to do all that while preparing for approach and landing.....well let's just say I've killed quite a few passengers over the last few weeks :lol: 


    Haha, killing virtual PAX can be one of the easiest tasks while climbing up the learning curve. However, regarding power management I have more than one FSX-pimped old bird in my hangar requiring the same treatment. One is the Embraer Legacy, an other example is F1's ATR 72-500. Both birds have well developed avionics, but no auto-throttle as well. Flying with 'steam gauges' is even more difficult. I'm thinking specifically about David Maltby and his wonderful freeware BAC 1-11 models. I used one of them once during this tour.

    Have a look:




    Err, yes it has some autopilot... :P

  19. 7 minutes ago, Mathijs Kok said:

    Here is the CRJ RTW livery:

    Yeah, it looks really nice, Mathjis. However, without having the bird I resisted downloading the livery. I posted yesterday my order number to Toby (and a second request -  independent from our tour), asking him forwarding it to you. As I already wrote above, I can wait.

  20. Each day a flight (in average) would make it soon. I've learned at the beginning that you're a master in catching up.


    BTW, nice contrails in the last picture, Neal! It looks as if you're treating your CRJ just a little bit. ^_^ Yesterday I decided releasing my "press order" and hope that the bird behaves well (better: as it should). Up to now I got no answer, but I'm not in a hurry, fortunately.

    • Like 1

  21. So you guys, we just had a small, but nice meeting at the apron of Paderborn. First we used real time and consequently approached in the dark. After Dale's arrival (who unfortunately had to communicate via TeamSpeak text because of technical problems) we switched on the sun for some final pictures.


    I started my flight at Innsbruck and followed a westerly route:


    Leg #133    LOWI-EDLP (Paderborn), B738, 340 nm, 01:15, KPT3J KPT UL608 TEDGO UN851 KEMAD DCT WRB WRB5H


    What I wrote down is just the planned time. In order to get some visual impressions I slowed down dramatically when meeting Toby not too far from Fulda - and I forgot stopping the clock after landing. Wx had been quite nice, even if the forecast wasn't promising.


    Here are some pictures:

    Flight preparations at LOWI (before 'synchronising the clocks - more or less):



    The light weighted the bird climbed quickly while still following the SID. I'm still turning over Innsbruck (now the clock is set to real time):



    Crossing Kempten VOR



    Now approaching Paderborn, the airport is at the left side.



    I'm playing a kind of fairground ride - all lights switched on (except landing lights) while Toby's P51 is passing.



    All are sitting in the dark (well nearly all of us) while waiting for Dale.



    Finally we switched on the sun in order to admire our line-up. From left to right: Dale, Gernot, Toby and myself.



    A last meeting before saying goodbye. 


    Some statistics from my side (just a very rough try):

    I counted 133 official legs and added quite a lot myself as I touched down at 274 different airports during this tour. I'm too lazy calculating the total hours as I would have to go through my logs. The total distance had been 71,758 nm and you might even add about 15% more as this figure just describes the great circle distance between the airport reference points (this counts up to roughly 82,500 nmi) and finally, I published more than 20 AFCADs exclusively here (including in some cases more than one version).


    However, here is a pictured overview of my tour:



    The famous last words:

    Thanks to Toby for organising the tour and holding together the participants.

    Thanks to all contributors sharing their stories and opinions and of course my special thanks to those who kept going until the last leg (and some are even still on the way).

    Thanks to Aerosoft for giving the initial idea, making available the server space, and keeping the spirit alive, even if many participants got lost during the tour. The rest of us had a lot of fun.


    I wish you all the best.



    • Upvote 4

  22. 18 hours ago, nealmac said:

    I do believe I'm the first one to use the new CRJ on this tour lol

    This can easily be true. However, it looks like a nice bird.

    Well, I have a fleet fitting for almost every civil purpose already, and until my final decision what to do in future I'm not going for any investment. Even my aged FSXA still looks not that bad if comparing the pictures here around. The only mess is really the 4 GByte restriction. Even my old rig doesn't cry badly for an update and I think it could be helpful waiting for reports how AMD's new flagship processors can handle the one or other sim-product.