@Iconography thanks, I’ll test it. Hopefully it also fixes the issue with the TDS GTN750 always starting as the default GPS.

Stand down everyone. I figured it out. Well, not so much 'figured' but stumbled upon it. You know the saying 'If you throw enough s**t at the wall, some of it will stick'? That the method I used.

I've explained elsewhere that I was quite excited when I saw this feature in the MSFS 2024 SDK, until I saw how they implemented it. It requires wrapping all parts of the aircraft the receive dirt with high poly meshes, which can reduce performance. It's not just one mesh either. It's one for bugs, one for dirt, one for mud, and one for ice. This can double the exterior polygon count on some aircraft. More importantly for MSFS 2024, the LODs are strictly calculated based on number of vertices, so all these high poly meshes would cause LOD popping sooner, often before the camera even gets to the end of the wing. Performance and visual integrity is very important to me, so I chose to prioritize the overall user experience instead of the bugsmashing experience. MSFS 2024 is full of such compromises, unfortunately.

The issue is that the MSFS "Airframe Structural Damage" setting interprets an open door or window in flight as an instant catastrophic failure; therefore, most users know that they need to have this option disabled with addon aircraft, at least if they want to open a window. Since this is the same setting that causes high G-load to be registered as a crash, then we all just live knowing that pulling 12 G's in a Bonanza is not a great idea. I understand that might not be entirely satisfying, but I'm afraid it's the best I can do with the MSFS crash detection system.

Engine condition is stored in state.cfg, which is in your AppData folder for MSFS. The location differs based on your platform, so it's best to google it for the most accurate location. You should be able to make this change to get the effect you're looking for, but I still feel bad about your original problem, even if I'm not supporting the aircraft in MSFS 2024. It seems that many user are still able to use the aircraft in MSFS 2024 with no problems, so I do have to suspect that this is something local. The best guess I can offer is that the grey screens are the result of an avionics server crash. In order for this to only affect you, then it must be some 3rd party application or avionics running on your side. I know that's a bit of a broken record, but it's the best I have to offer. If you wanted to do some deeper exploring, the CoherentGT Debugger might offer some error messages that could be helpful in determining what's going on. I'm not sure if this will work without the SDK installed with developer mode running, but you can try entering http://127.0.0.1:19999/ into the URL bar in your web browser. If you get a bunch of blue links, please let me know, and I can tell you where to go from there.

@SadBucket I think the option (and I'm a great believer in options!) to simply remove by tablet is great for those that maybe think they have a ground crew for doing those things. That actually brings up something I don't know: do biz jet pilots remove the covers and things? How deep a preflight do they do? I had a buddy who flew in east Africa for the Red Cross for years and he told me about the flying but never once mentioned doing a preflight. I drove school bus for 30 years and my stories never mention the 10 minutes doing the pretrip inspection that we all had to do every morning. @Black-Square I guess I'm missing something when setting the park brake - I'll try that ASAP. edit: Got it!! A small possible wrinkle would be having to be within a certain radius of a removable element; it would lend more credence to walking around doing the preflight. Why be able to reach 20' to remove a cover? Okay, we can't jump up on the wing (can we?!) to remove the intake covers so there has to be a compromise. Have a great day. Bob

Some of the central components of this sim are actually out of the cockpit of the Baron that I flew. [image: 47f92613-787e-412b-a778-70911a36a087.jpg]

Clear, thank you for explanation. Next time I will try a less windy ramp to verify.

This sounds like something Just Trains Support could help with: https://www.justtrains.net/support

Ok thanks, I'm happy with that quick answer ---Louis cyyc

PMS sounds like a headache lately. I've been hearing people having issue's when the PMS is installed and not even being used.

@Black-Square I would much prefer a fleet of every model of the king air

@django1489 Not a problem and understandable. Nag away

Thanx for the feedback mate, good luck with your endeavour.

Hmm, it seems I misunderstood the OP here. It looks like he's using the nav 1 radio for ILS approach, while I thought he was using the KNS 81. I haven't had any problems with ILS approach using any other equipment aside from the KNS 81, so I don't have the same problem. @kityatyi my advice, if you haven't tried it yet, is if you have the PMS 750, uninstall that and try the ILS approaches again. Maybe try uninstalling the KLN 90, too. The PMS 750 in particular has caused me problems at least once in the past, even when I don't have it loaded into the plane. Another thing to try, if you use Navigraph navdata, would be uninstalling and reinstalling the navdata.

Sharing the short video I posted of a recent Starship flight, hope you enjoy it. FaceBook Video

@ThargorV8 @Black-Square With Vatsim and SI, GNA 340 works perfectly, just make sure you have the VATSIM "Monitor all" option on in the tablet options (I forget the exact name of the setting...). One thing I do want to mention is that I've noticed many addon liveries seen to cause the aircraft light's to appear brighter and a few other graphic anomalies despite them saying they are compatible with msfs2024. Frustrating, but I've been happy with the default liveries in the meantime.

simple answer, just use tds, its tremendously better than pms. 🫠

@lilycrose Thanks, good to know! I’ll dig into it a bit more on my end and see what I find. Really appreciate your help!