PeterDowson

Thanks I'll try those. I'm getting to the point where I feel like throwing the PC concerned at a brick wall, very hard. I've never had such an intractable problems before! Pete

Okay. There appear to be two errors from .Net, one during Windows initialisation (I think) and the other when EFB's display unit has finished initialising: This is the first: Event Type: Error Event Source: .NET Runtime Optimization Service Event Category: None Event ID: 1103 Date: 23/04/2013 Time: 11:29:37 User: N/A Computer: ZEFB Description: .NET Runtime Optimization Service (clr_optimization_v2.0.50727_32) - Tried to start a service that wasn't the latest version of CLR Optimization service. Will shutdown For more information, see Help and Support Center at http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/events.asp. And this the second: Event Type: Error Event Source: .NET Runtime 2.0 Error Reporting Event Category: None Event ID: 5000 Date: 23/04/2013 Time: 11:57:01 User: N/A Computer: ZEFB Description: EventType clr20r3, P1 aivlasoft.efb.displayunit.exe, P2 1.3.8.22257, P3 51557a24, P4 castle.microkernel, P5 1.0.3.0, P6 483a52e4, P7 1a, P8 a4, P9 wm0dlcln0ffelnnyquiwrcmeautrmmw2, P10 NIL. For more information, see Help and Support Center at http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/events.asp. Data: 0000: 63 00 6c 00 72 00 32 00 c.l.r.2. 0008: 30 00 72 00 33 00 2c 00 0.r.3.,. 0010: 20 00 61 00 69 00 76 00 .a.i.v. 0018: 6c 00 61 00 73 00 6f 00 l.a.s.o. 0020: 66 00 74 00 2e 00 65 00 f.t...e. 0028: 66 00 62 00 2e 00 64 00 f.b...d. 0030: 69 00 73 00 70 00 6c 00 i.s.p.l. 0038: 61 00 79 00 75 00 6e 00 a.y.u.n. 0040: 69 00 74 00 2e 00 65 00 i.t...e. 0048: 78 00 65 00 2c 00 20 00 x.e.,. . 0050: 31 00 2e 00 33 00 2e 00 1...3... 0058: 38 00 2e 00 32 00 32 00 8...2.2. 0060: 32 00 35 00 37 00 2c 00 2.5.7.,. 0068: 20 00 35 00 31 00 35 00 .5.1.5. 0070: 35 00 37 00 61 00 32 00 5.7.a.2. 0078: 34 00 2c 00 20 00 63 00 4.,. .c. 0080: 61 00 73 00 74 00 6c 00 a.s.t.l. 0088: 65 00 2e 00 6d 00 69 00 e...m.i. 0090: 63 00 72 00 6f 00 6b 00 c.r.o.k. 0098: 65 00 72 00 6e 00 65 00 e.r.n.e. 00a0: 6c 00 2c 00 20 00 31 00 l.,. .1. 00a8: 2e 00 30 00 2e 00 33 00 ..0...3. 00b0: 2e 00 30 00 2c 00 20 00 ..0.,. . 00b8: 34 00 38 00 33 00 61 00 4.8.3.a. 00c0: 35 00 32 00 65 00 34 00 5.2.e.4. 00c8: 2c 00 20 00 31 00 61 00 ,. .1.a. 00d0: 2c 00 20 00 61 00 34 00 ,. .a.4. 00d8: 2c 00 20 00 77 00 6d 00 ,. .w.m. 00e0: 30 00 64 00 6c 00 63 00 0.d.l.c. 00e8: 6c 00 6e 00 30 00 66 00 l.n.0.f. 00f0: 66 00 65 00 6c 00 6e 00 f.e.l.n. 00f8: 6e 00 79 00 71 00 75 00 n.y.q.u. 0100: 69 00 77 00 72 00 63 00 i.w.r.c. 0108: 6d 00 65 00 61 00 75 00 m.e.a.u. 0110: 74 00 72 00 6d 00 6d 00 t.r.m.m. 0118: 77 00 32 00 20 00 4e 00 w.2. .N. 0120: 49 00 4c 00 0d 00 0a 00 I.L..... I clicked both links for more info and all you get from those is "sorry no more info ...". I'm now going to try just once more to uninstall .Net2 and reinstall it ... Regards Pete

I'll take a look. There was so much info in the main report (the same as that pasted by the OP in this thread) that I didn't think anything extrra to all that could add anything useful! No, that should not be needed. There's obviously something corrupted on my system, but I just don't know how to figure out what, and reinstalling didn't help. I was just hoping to avoid reinstalling everything, Windows upwards. Finding the right drivers is always a problem (they didn't come with the Z-Box, everything was preinstalled, and there's no CD. But I do have another Z-Box so I'll backup that and restore on this). I'll let you know how I get on. It won't be today in any case. Right ... in any case, I'd rather you spent the time adding the option for automatically loading the current FSX plan when it changes! When I get back up and running that'd be the single most useful enhancement I could wish for -- it is very awkward selecting and loading the correct plan on my little 10" touchscreen on my cockpit wall! Regards Pete

I don't know -- I wish I knew. I don't have windows updates automated on that PC. ON the other hand, on my FSX PC running the Provider, the updates are always applied. But that's onWin7, not XP. So I think you are telling me I need to reinstall Windows too, from scratch, on that PC? Ugh! Surely you must know the dependencies? Is it only .Net 3.5, nothing else it needs special? Pete

I don't see a solution mentioned. This error was reporterd twice in November 2011, then January 2012, and twice this February. I searched all those posts but saw no solution posted. And now I have the same error, all of a sudden, after perfect running for many months! I was using version 1.3.7. On this PC it is only the Display Unit -- my server runs esewhere. I have tried uninstalling EFB and installing, again DotNet3.5 (it offered repair or remove, I opted for repair), and then downloaded and installed the full 1.3.8 version. I confiured it all okay, no proglem, but then after its "initialising" splash screen it comes up with that very long list of "component activation" failures. I am using WinXP on a little ZBox PC, running XP SP2, the display being a Liiliput touch-screen. I will try to find the logs you mentioned and will send them if i find any. [LATER] No logs other than a zero byte file called "DisplayUnit_log.txt". Looks like the problem occurs before it gets to actually log anything. Please help. i do miss the help EFB provides! Regards Pete Dowson

Okay. Just wanted to make sure it wasn't forgotten! Thanks! Pete

Hi, Long long ago I did ask for two features in EFB. One was the automatic differentiation between FSX and FS9 format plan loading, which is now released in 1.3.7, and the other, which would really help me immensely, was for an option to select the current plan loaded into FSX -- the name and path to which can be read from SimConnect. The problem is that I have some many plans in the FS plans folder and it is not easy to scroll rightwards through them all in EFB AND click on the right one on my 10" touch screen in the cockpit. The one i want to load is already auto-loaded into FS, thanks to actions I've carried out beforehand. That is used by all my other plan-needing programs, all except EFB. I realise I may be in a minority, but I seem to remember we did agree that is wasn't so hard and would make it into a future release. 1.3.7 is the first release to add features for quite a long time. I am still hopeful. Regards Pete

I tried both AFX and ADE and they both give identical results. Now I have a different problem. The gates 11-21 (odd numbers) are no longer included, even though they are visually there and have piers. This is definitely a scenery issue, ref thread http://www.eiresim.com/forum/index.php?topic=874.15 in Eiresim's forum. Eiresim don't seem to be bothered as the thread ends in Nov 2011. One solution suggested there which worked for one user was: Sounds a bit dodgy to me! Pete

Thanks. AFX did it too -- when you opt to save it in FSX format. I'm about to test it in EFB now. Pete

There is an update, so I've downloaded it. There's a separate download each for FS9 and FSX, so I got them both. The AFD file is the same in both, so I don't hold out much hope! It seems that if you cannot fix EFB to read this BGL correctly I'll have to wait till some good person makes a new Alicante. I will report this to Eiresim, but if it is only EFB which is messed up by it I can't see them being at all sympathetic Maybe I could try loading it into AFX and converting it? Pete

Yes, but it is the one installed by the Eiresim FSX product and it is working for all other purposes, except for EFB. I don't have FS9 on this system and haven't purchased any FS9 add-ons since FSX came out. Nevertheless I will certainly ask about it over in their support forum. Maybe they have compromised and made a dual FS9/FSX product. Maybe there's an update. I assume there are no other Eiresim Alicante users with EFB otherwise someone would have been sure to mention it. Regards Pete

I do that after every scenery update, at the same time as I re-run MakeRunways for the programs which need its data (like radar Contact). I also re-ran it again after getting this problem, to see no improvement. I flew on to Palma (LEPA) and everything was fine there. I've no problems with any other airport. I think there must be something being misinterpreted by EFB in this one specific AFD BGL. Regards Pete

Yes, absolutely. I always check this stuff. I use a program (can't remember the name of) to do an initial check after adding any new scenery, and in case of a query like this I check my "MakeRunways" log file which lists all the active AFD files it finds as it gets to them. The only other LEAL active is the default one in the FSX APX files, and all of its stuff is deleted in the usual way by entries in the one supplied by Eiresim and attached above. That is certainly the only active one and is the one used by the other applications I have. Somehow EFB is misinterpreting something. I've not seen such in any othe airport with EFB, so far. Regards Pete

Seems one message only takes one attachment. The BGL should be attached to this one ... ... No? I'll try Zipping it ... Ah ... doesn't like raw BGL files, it seems. Okay now. Pete

I've just flown into Alicante and parked at Gate 19. there are assorted AI around too. But the ground details shown in EFB don't match: 1. Whilst taxiing in it sohwed me off the taxiway, to the South. 2. It shows me at a different 19, out on the tarmac instead of at a jetway, as I actually am (at 19). There is no other '19' listed when I analyse the AFD file. 3. Similarly several AI at gates appear displayed by the same distance. It looks as if it has the coordinates all wrong, somehow. 4. It shows some AI scattered outside the tarmaced area. Not sure what they were. Maybe they were there -- on grass?? I attach the AFD BGL which is active and a picture showing the strange results in EFB. Can you work out what is wrong from these, or do you need more? Regards Pete

Okay. Last gasp before I get some sleep before travelling tomorrow. I had a look at the BGL with AFX. It has two ILS entries for each runway! One with the correct name and wrong frequency, one with the wrong name and correct frequency! Here: 16 LOC+GP+DME IABB 111.50 156.7 ILS/DME 16 28 LOC IDW 108.10 275.2 LOC 28 10 LOC IDE 108.10 95.2 LOC 10 10 LOC+GP+DME IABA 108.90 95.2 ILS/DME 10 28 LOC+GP+DME IABD 111.35 275.2 ILS/DME 28 16 LOC IAC 108.10 156.7 LOC 16 I've no idea what they are trying to do there. Must be some reason. Anyway, I've corrected it here with AFX and will test it out when I get back. I suppose the only oddity left is why my scanning picked up one set whilst yours picked up the others. Maybe to do with order. I don't remove frequencies unless I see a "delete frequency" entry. Regards Pete

It gets worse. All three ILS frequencies are labelled correctly, as IAC, IDE and IDW, but all three are 108.1 in the EFB! How weird is that? I've just found an update on the Eiresim site. Not sure if I've already installed it, but just in case I'm going to try that ... ... No, already installed in any case. I also tried the previous version I had (I tend to make copies of scenery folders before updating, just in case things get worse! Anyway, I re-did the EFB data with the culprit BGL renamed .BGX so it wasn't operative, and the EFB got all the original (and different) frequencies from the FSX default BGL, so it is certainly something about that specific BGL which your scanner doesn't like. Mine seems to think it is okay (MakeRunways provides the data for my Radar Contact ATC program amongst other things). The PM CDU seems to get its frequencies fronm the Navigraph AIRAC data. The BGL has been sent by now. Until next week, then ... I may try fixing the IDs too when I get back. Regards Pete

Yes, that's a bit odd. IAC is the ID given in the default FSX scenery, as shown in this MakeRunways decode: Runway 16 /34 centre: N53:25:42.4093 W006:15:20.8301 242ft Start 16 : N53:26:12.1473 W006:15:42.3822 242ft Hdg: 156.6T, Length 6786ft Computed start 16 : Lat 53.436989 Long -6.261987 Start 34 : N53:25:12.6389 W006:14:59.2765 242ft Hdg: 336.6T, Length 6786ft Computed start 34 : Lat 53.419907 Long -6.249585 Hdg: 156.610 true (MagVar -5.800), Asphalt, 6786 x 200 ft Primary ILS ID = IAC Primary ILS: IAC 111.50 Hdg: 156.6 , Flags: GS DME BC "ILS/DME 16" *** Runway *** EIDW0160 Lat 53.436989 Long -6.261987 Alt 242 Hdg 162 Len 6786 Wid 200 ILS 111.50, Flags: GS DME BC *** Runway *** EIDW0340 Lat 53.419907 Long -6.249585 Alt 242 Hdg 342 Len 6786 Wid 200 and IAC is the current name according to the latest Navgraph data. The other two are also different -- IABA for runway 10 (should be IDE) and IABD for runway 28 (shouldbe IDW). Not sure what Eiresim were thinking of, but there were some real world changes going on in Dublin at the time they were working on this and I'm wondering if they were anticipating changes which never then happened. i wonder how your program gets IAC from the default and not IABB from the higher level added scenery? Same way it conjures up 108.1 maybe . I should check what IDs it has for ILSs on runways 10 and 28 ... Yes, I'll send it now. After this I am away till next Tuesday. Thanks! Pete

I'm using EIRESIM's Dublin 2009, and the BGL is "EIDW_ADEX_ADE.BGL". I've checked that with my "MakeRunways" data extractor utility, and here's the data for Runway 16/34: Runway 16 /34 centre: N53:25:42.6684 W006:15:20.6114 242ft Start 16 : N53:26:10.9163 W006:15:40.9227 242ft Hdg: 156.6T, Length 6798ft Computed start 16 : Lat 53.437084 Long -6.261907 Start 34 : N53:25:13.8699 W006:14:59.8221 242ft Hdg: 336.6T, Length 6798ft Computed start 34 : Lat 53.419956 Long -6.249543 Hdg: 156.730 true (MagVar -7.000), Asphalt, 6798 x 200 ft Primary ILS ID = IABB Primary ILS: IABB 111.50 Hdg: 156.7 , Flags: GS DME BC "ILS/DME 16" *** Runway *** EIDW0160 Lat 53.437084 Long -6.261907 Alt 242 Hdg 164 Len 6798 Wid 200 ILS 111.50, Flags: GS DME BC *** Runway *** EIDW0340 Lat 53.419956 Long -6.249544 Alt 242 Hdg 344 Len 6798 Wid 200 This is also the information which Radar Contact uses and the Project Magenta CDU, and everything else, except Aivlasoft's EFB. Even the default FSX airport (Scenery\0501\scenery\APX46130.bgl) has the ILS correct. And there are no other BGLs containing the EIDW runway data or ILS frequencies. The older version of the EFB is on a PC with only default sceneries. So it isn't necessarily a version difference as I originally thought. It has problably got this wrong for a long time, I've just not done the runway 16 approach in a while (usually 28). I don't even understand where it is getting its 108.1 frequency from. There's are other airports in the UK with such an ILS (Belfast, Dundee, Guernsey to name but three), but certainly nothing very near Dublin. Is there a log saved by the scenery scanner in the Provider? Judging by the beeps it makes there are a couple of errors it finds when scanning. Maybe this is related? I've never been able to read the on-screen log, goes by too fast then its all over! So, how can we progress this? (I'm not in a big rush -- away from tomorrow until next Tuesday). And thanks, Andy. Isn't the PlaySims scenery a version of the EIRESIM one too? Regards Pete

Hi, There is some strange but in EFB version 1.3.5. build 19677/19675 which wasn't there in 1.3.1.16555/16553. I thought at first it must be a data error, but, no, the same data update for both these versions produces different resluts: EIDW ILS runway 16 is 111.5 as has been for many years. And this is correct in the AIRAC data and in FSX and in version 1.3.1 of the EFB. BUT the current update (at least) shows it as 108.1. I've no idea where it gets that from at all. Here are screen shots to show this oddity. Both are using AIRAC 1206, the first is from version 1.3.5.19677 and the second, the correct one, is from 1.3.1.16555. Regards Pete Dowson

Okay. I assume I'd need to reproduce the problem to get the correct logging? Or are the log files cumulative? Regards Pete

I have the DataProvider loading either before FSX or by FSX. The display program is on a client PC waiting for connection, and they connect up fine when both are running. However, about 50% of the time, and according to its displayed log, the DataProvider attempts its SimConnect connection whilst FSX is busy, either loading aircraft or quite often loading my PFC cockpit driver and checking the connections. Something then doesn't work -- maybe it times out or something, I don't know. But it's displayed log then never shows it is connected to FSX, and of course the display program, although active for everything else, does not show my aircraft position nor AI traffic, etc. Of course by the time I discover this, FSX has taken over the screen on the FS PC, and I am in the cockpit. To fix is I have to go and switch to the Data Provider on the desktop, close it and restart it, when it always gets a successful connection to FSX. This of course resets the display unit so I go and load the plan again ... Since it obviously CAN always connect to SimConnect on being closed and restarted, could you please consider simply retrying the connection every so many seconds, without the necessity to close, restart and reset everything? Thank you. Pete

Ah, I don't have any problems either -- except with UK2000 Heathrow will full graphics and full AI traffic and typical English weather! Then everything makes a difference! That's my benchmark. I've managed, eventually, to get it up to 20 fps minimum, averaging 30 there, and that's with the GTX 580 (3Gb memory) overclocked and the i2500K at 4.9GHz. Almost everywhere else the frame rates are ridiculously high. Regards Pete

Ah, I don't like having more that one monitor for FSX with bits spread over. It definitely affects performance. . I have 7 PCs and 11 screens other than the projection making up the full cockpit experience, all using a combination of WideFS, SimConnect and individual network linkages. Pete

of course not, otherwise it would be stated on the download page. It was just the way you described it (or the way I read it ...) which brought me to the idea that you might have installed all the service packs after the other. Only because of this I suggested to do a clean re-install before you start from scratch. So, since it wasn't that, any idea why the SP4 update failed so badly? Or since this was presumably a one-off, can we simply ignore it and hope it doesn't happen again? Regards Pete