Hi all I went to the imaginesim.com website and to my surpise they are working on making a klga for fs9 and fsx, if you guys work there or have photos to help out that would be really cool since that would help them alot.I own my hometown airport kewr from imaginesim so Im very happy theses guys have the gutts to put out this airport.http://www.imaginesim.com/future01.htm

After how this guy did KEWR, I don't need anymore framerate intensive sceneries in the New York area. Remeber this guy was SimFlight's main designer not that long ago. You know the one responsible for KDFW (the worst performing scenery in the history of FS). Shez's scenery will have to do in this area until a group like Fly Tampa answers the call. ImagineSim would have done better to do KMSP. It seems no one wants to touch that airport, oh well...

>After how this guy did KEWR, I don't need anymore framerate>intensive sceneries in the New York area. Remeber this guy>was SimFlight's main designer not that long ago. You know the>one responsible for KDFW (the worst performing scenery in the>history of FS). >>Shez's scenery will have to do in this area until a group like>Fly Tampa answers the call. ImagineSim would have done better>to do KMSP. It seems no one wants to touch that airport, oh>well...>Chris, I understand what you mean, but I really believe nobody else is going to even touche the new york airports, do to the impact that it has in frame rates. My system is old so my fps are around 14 fps with ai traffic. but its a not a big deal later on when I do a full upgrade, of my whole system. for fs9 and fsx, will be a totally different story, so far fsx runs fine as long as autogens off.I too would love to see kmsp but as far as flytampa, so far from what I have seen at there boards they will probably never make any nyc airports.Cal Lewin and his team are the only ones out there right now that are doing airports nobody else wants to even make.

Cesar even with a new machine KEWR is a problem, I've seen it. When you have airports like KMSP that's never been done on a serious level in Flight Simulator's history (I'm talking payware here) why bother with the New York area. It's terrible on framerates in both FS9 and FSX. That's not going to change. Get airports like KMSP done if we're going to talk about "airports nobody else wants to even make". KLGA is a waist of time especially if it runs like KEWR...

I have MYNN and I'm very happy with it. FPS aren't any less than other airports; details are good. I've read less than glowing comments about other imaginesim airports, so perhaps MYNN was a fluke. I don't know. However, unless I read really bad stuff on LGA after it's released, I'll certainly take the plunge.Bob

I have all ImagineSim's airports with the exception of Charlotte and happen to like them. Chris is right about KEWR and also the bad choice of doing KLGA. The New York area is just a bad area to do an airport in FS9 or FSX (well everything is a bad idea in FSX) unless you have the techniques of FlightZone in play. I'm glade Imaginesim did KEWR but the framerates for that airport is horrible. I wouldn't get Imaginsim's KLGA because I have enough problems with Shez's scenery (no fault of his own). I agree KMSP would have been a better choice at this point. It's about time that airport get's a little attention (well maybe allot).If of all places we have KMKE, not having KMSP by now is just plain wrong...

I have to agree, even though I think the last few projects from Imaginesim have been very good (KCLT, MYNN, KCVG). I rarely fly anywhere near New York anymore as it it is just not enjoyable. I doubt that any developer could make an add-on work effectively in FS9 in that area.Maybe we should lobby Imagesim to drop it before they invest too much more time on it?

Although SimFlyers' and Imagesim's earlier works were pretty hard on performance, the developer has really come a long ways since those times in terms of performance and realism.SimFlyers KLAS and KPHX run great and IMO look pretty good too.The later stuff (like ImagineSim CVG) look good and also run very well.I imagine that MYNN was a "fluke" but not by luck rather design. The airport is not a mega-hub like KEWR or KDTW- thus by nature it requires fewer scenery elements to re-create and therefore will run better. Not to mention that MYNN is surrounded mostly by water which makes it quite easy to render in the sim.Ruahrc

Ruahrc Simflyer's KLAS and KPHX was one of the few airports the guy at Imaginesim didn't do and it shows. I see the same techniques in play with Imaginesim that made some of Simflyer's sceneries so horrible. KEWR is horrendous yet it serves a purpose for me as it's needed in that area. KDTW is not that much better from this developer and that should have been a no brainer concerning optimization on performance. The only reason MYNN is great is because that area in general has nothing hardly there (it's an island). There's not that much to the airport either. Having Imaginesim do KLGA is asking for FSX performance in FS9, it's a bad idea. Shez is the best your going to get in that area (and I'll slap myself if I'm wrong).

Imaginesim has gotten better and better with performance with each release. CVG is much better than say DEN or EWR. Cal has shown that he learns well and it shows with his latest releases. LGA is a smaller footprint than EWR. That and with Cal's gains in modeling performance should make LGA a winner. Remember that he is also doing it for FS9. There is a bunch of us that still use FS9 and we should appreciate it that he is still doing this for us. Lets show him some support guys.

"Remember that he is also doing it for FS9. There is a bunch of us that still use FS9 and we should appreciate it that he is still doing this for us. Lets show him some support guys."I have to agree 100% on this one. :-)Guess I'll have to try it based on this fact alone (same goes for Fly Tampa's new effort)...

There are so many other airports that need to be done. Airports that have never been done. And lots of airports that need a new version - did anyone say Simflyers... But, I guess we need thank him for continuing to release FS9 sceneries.I have all of ImagineSim's sceneries and will get this one too, most likely. Denver, Detroit, New Orleans were not bad, better than most of the Simflyers line. KEWR is interesting. Maybe it's because it's in the New York area or maybe it's something else, but performance is somewhat of an issue (look and feel too). Charlotte, Nassau and Cincinnati are great sceneries and a huge improvement over KEWR.So La Guardia should be just fine. Quality-wise and performance-wise.

"So La Guardia should be just fine."KLGA isn't fine default let alone with scenery built on top of that area. I will concede in saying I will support this effort for the sole fact Imaginsim is doing it for FS9. For LaGuardia I feel you can't beat Shez's effort unless FlightZone get's involved...Imaginesim would do well in updating KEWR. Like you said it's not only performance that's wrong with that airport...

Well, I get framerates in the low to mid teens when flying around New York. Whether it be Imagine's KEWR or Simflyers' KJFK. That's with the scenery slider set to the right and autogen one notch from the left. I'm running 100% pimped AI traffic with crosswind Afcads at both airports.And my machine isn't exactly amazing. PIV 3.4 Ghz HT. 2 Gigs of 533 Mhz DDR RAM. And an ATI X800SE graphics card...Assuming that KLGA is better than both sceneries, it should be just fine, for me anyway. I will try a flight to default KLGA to see how performance is there though.