Just deactivate AES via the 'AESHelp.exe'.Next, delete the folder 'X:'Microsoft Flight Simulator'aerosoft AES'-Thank's, and I'll try that right now. But.does that scrub the AES footprint.or do I have to track down all elements of the install, and do those manually?

• Aes 2.45 Credits
• Aes Download Fsx

I wonder why there is no uninstall file created to remove all of the installer's content within the FS9 folder upon initial installation? If there ultimately is one.I for sure can't locate it., lol.Post Edit: I found that you have to manually remove all files of this program by hand. For instance, you need to remove the AES entry manually from the Scenery.cfg file, and you have to also remove the VISTAMARE modules from the Module Folder. They SHOULD have created an uninstall file that scrubs what the.exe file creates in setup. Thank's, and I'll try that right now. But.does that scrub the AES footprint.or do I have to track down all elements of the install, and do those manually? I wonder why there is no uninstall file created to remove all of the installer's content within the FS9 folder upon initial installation?

If there ultimately is one.I for sure can't locate it., lol.Mitch'erJust curious, as a possible purchaser,why did you want to get rid of it??P.S Not to highjack your thread, just curious as I was thinking of getting AES in the very near future. Just curious, as a possible purchaser,why did you want to get rid of it??P.S Not to highjack your thread, just curious as I was thinking of getting AES in the very near future.-Rest assured, you are not hijacking the thread.

I just needed help to fully scrub the program, as I found it not to my taste. I have GSX for FSX, and found it to be most excellent, in that it is seamless. Whatever aircraft I use (commercial) the program correctly parses it, and all services interact as they should with that particular airframe without intervention, or set up needed by myself. With this program, I found quickly, that you had to for the most part, to mess around with config screens, to have services correctly align with the airframe's openings.

Too much setup and hand's on tweaking for my taste. Again, for myself. This might not even be a concern to you and other users.:)Mitch. Rest assured, you are not hijacking the thread. I just needed help to fully scrub the program, as I found it not to my taste. I have GSX for FSX, and found it to be most excellent, in that it is seemless. Whatever aircraft I use (commercial) the program correctly parses it, and all services interact as they should with that particular airframe without intervention, or set up needed by myself.

With this program, I found quickly, that you had to for the most part, to mess around with config screens, to have services correctly align with the airframe's openings. Too much setup and hand's on tweaking for my taste.

Again, for myself. This might not even be a concern to you and other users.:)MitchOk thank you for your info, Ill have to look into it more as I thought it was an 'install and good to go program', im not much a fan of playing around with cfg's. Thank's, and I'll try that right now. But.does that scrub the AES footprint.or do I have to track down all elements of the install, and do those manually?

I wonder why there is no uninstall file created to remove all of the installer's content within the FS9 folder upon initial installation? If there ultimately is one.I for sure can't locate it., lol.Post Edit: I found that you have to manually remove all files of this program by hand.

For instance, you need to remove the AES entry manually from the Scenery.cfg file, and you have to also remove the VISTAMARE modules from the Module Folder. They SHOULD have created an uninstall file that scrubs what the.exe file creates in setup.Mitch'erI forgot about the scenery.cfg. Sorry about that!I agree with you.

It seems a little nonsensical to me not to include an uninstaller. Especially considering the base program is a demo for customers who may find it's not for them.I've recently completely disabled AES for all of my doors except the front main entry (it's used for gates at supported airports). GSX has taken over everything else.

If credits for payware airports were cheaper, default airports were shown some love, and more folks were allowed to develop giving more supported airports in AES, I'd be a lot happier. At time of writing, activating three FSDT sceneries in FSX costs me $16. That's over $5 per airport:( Also, the animations are pretty ugly. I forgot about the scenery.cfg.

Sorry about that!I agree with you. It seems a little nonsensical to me not to include an uninstaller. Especially considering the base program is a demo for customers who may find it's not for them.I've recently completely disabled AES for all of my doors except the front main entry (it's used for gates at supported airports). GSX has taken over everything else. If credits for payware airports were cheaper, default airports were shown some love, and more folks were allowed to develop giving more supported airports in AES, I'd be a lot happier.

At time of writing, activating three FSDT sceneries in FSX costs me $16. That's over $5 per airport:( Also, the animations are pretty ugly.-Yeah.I checked out all my.cfg files, folders, etc.and deleted what I needed. Thanks again for you help! Much appreciated! So I got OT for one sentence.

It's nothing to 'get confused' about. No one said you did. I was conveying that for my purposes, AES is getting less attention from meWhat is with all of the FSX v FS9 BS in this forum? The attitude in here surely makes people not want to contribute. I offered my advice on getting rid of AES, and then I gave a short opinion of the program.

It's irritating I have to recap to keep some from 'getting confused'. Smart alecWow, someone woke up on the wrong side of the bed Zach. There was no FSX V FS9 comparison, there was mention that there is no comparison of AES and GSX for FS9 as GSX is not available for FS9, how is that BS comparisons???There were no smart Alec comments and if you are so irritated then don't post here anymore! I on the other hand was genuinely confused by the GSX mentions related to uninstalling AES in FS9 and actually went to see if FSDT had released for FS9 and I missed it! So relax, get off your high horse and don't create an FS9 v FSX BS issue where there was none! The only poor attitude in here is yours right now and if you are so irritated by people 'getting confused' maybe you need to take a step back from the forums for a while.The only person who got bent out of shape was you. Wow, someone woke up on the wrong side of the bed Zach.

There was no FSX V FS9 comparison, there was mention that there is no comparison of AES and GSX for FS9 as GSX is not available for FS9, how is that BS comparisons???There were no smart Alec comments and if you are so irritated then don't post here anymore! I on the other hand was genuinely confused by the GSX mentions related to uninstalling AES in FS9 and actually went to see if FSDT had released for FS9 and I missed it!So relax, get off your high horse and don't create an FS9 v FSX BS issue where there was none! The only poor attitude in here is yours right now and if you are so irritated by people 'getting confused' maybe you need to take a step back from the forums for a while.The only person who got bent out of shape was you.-Actually, it was I that made the first reference to GSX within this thread. I did not though, comment about it as though it was also a runner-up, and available for FS9. Rather, I was posting that because of the way GSX.RUNS.and how it handles 'services', I much better liked its approach, rather than the manual entry of data for.cfg files that AES requires. If AES ran the way that GSX (for FSX.) runs.then AES would have been purchased and retained.

Aes 2.45 Credits

That was the only reference for GSX.just the way that particular program worked as 'run and forget'.Mitch. Actually, it was I that made the first reference to GSX within this thread. I did not though, comment about it as though it was also a runner-up, and available for FS9.

Rather, I was posting that because of the way GSX.RUNS.and how it handles 'services', I much better liked its approach, rather than the manual entry of data for.cfg files that AES requires. If AES ran the way that GSX (for FSX.) runs.then AES would have been purchased and retained. That was the only reference for GSX.just the way that particular program worked as 'run and forget'.MitchYes Mitch, I understand you made the first reference but regardless Zach's post was not commensurate to the rest of the thread and IMHO was uncalled for.Now to your point.If you are going to use FS9 you have two options.

AES or nothing. So comparing it to GSX is irrelevant as it will never exist in the FS9 world. NO BS FS9 v FSX comparisons there just apples-apples. So now that we can dismiss GSX entirely lets again look at FS9.

Configuring an aircraft for AES takes all of 30 seconds. Not to mention most a/c already have intelliscene.cfg files available for download or some even come with the AES files included. So if you are really not willing to put the tiniest bit of effort into configuring the few aircraft that you fly to reap the benefits of AES then I don't know what else to tell you other than HUGE mistake. What separates AES is the very specific procedures at each gate at each airport.

Aes Download Fsx

Those are all configured by the author Oliver so literally the only thing you have to do is download or configure the doors on your AC and you get all the benefits of AES.You are doing yourself a huge disservice again just MHO. I could understand dismissing AES because of the pricing model opposed to the fact it take the tiniest bit of effort LOL. I have not 'Thought' about AES since the last new aircraft I bought for FS9 so to me it is run and forget.Just my.02I will not get into the AES V GSX debate as that horse has been beat to death in the FSX, FSDT and Aerosoft forums and as you can't use it in FS9 discussing it here is really pointless (again, just my humble opinion) I will comment on your decision to uninstall AES though, I personally think that is just silly:).