FlyingAxx

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. 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.

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.

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.

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 . 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. 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. .

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.

Jerry, 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). 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. 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. 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?

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): A,VCCG,AMPARAI,7.336944,81.630278,159,11000,13000,6000,0 R,07,70,6000,151,0,0.000,0,7.334809,81.623718,159,3.00,50,1,0 R,25,250,6000,151,0,0.000,0,7.338509,81.632950,159,3.00,50,1,0 There are no approaches, parking information or other gimmicks. Any idea?

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.

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...

That's what I did first. Additionally I deleted the assignment and added it again by moving the respective lever - I think I wrote it already. For all other birds (not only the default ones) it works. I think I'll uninstall the bird and reinstall it again.

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).

Sorry Otto, I did a search here and didn't find related threads. 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. Actually, unfortunately I'm not surprised.

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)? Thanks!