Does anyone know if changing the AFX file for FRFS PAFA using Afcad 2.21 will damage it in anyway? I just want to add more GA parking...Mark

Does anyone know if changing the AFX file for FRFS PAFA using Afcad 2.21 will damage it in anyway? I just want to add more GA parking...Mark

If you save the AF2 file in a layer above the AFX, you should be OK anywhere.John

From the author's included readme:"8. If you choose to modify the AFCAD file with AFCAD2, when you resave you will lose some excludes and taxiway sign placements, so the scenery will become distorted. You must use the payware program AFX to safely modify this AFCAD."That being said, you might be able to use the new freeware ADE9X if you would care to learn it available from here:http://www.scruffyduck.org.uk/filemanager/...f90294d503b8ad3This version works both for FS9 and FSX. I highly suggest you copy the original AFX file to a safe backup folder so you can restore it if necessary.Be sure to download the ADE9X Tutorials as well.I have yet to use this but I've been following their forum here:http://www.fsdeveloper.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=95It does not suffer some of the constraints introduced with AFCAD not saving or corrupting data in afd property files since ADE does not have automatic excludes, etc., as does AFCAD.Your other alternative is to purchase AEX as indicated to be safe.

Thanks Ron. I did read that bit in the FRFS readme file. I've run across many readme files which are often incorrect or boilerplates. So just to be sure that it wasn't possible, I thought I'd ask and see if anyone has actually tried to edit the AFX file and seen the results. It doesn't sound like you have and it appears that no one else has, (at least that has chimed in), so I guess that bit will be up to me. I've been meaning to try scruffy's ADE but haven't got around to it yet. I was also trying to refrain from recreating an Afcad file and the wheel if possible...that was really the point. Anyway, this whole business of Afcad changing to Afx and not being able to use the tried and true free editor without creating some type of distraction is really a drag. It maybe nicer for the scenery designer as it makes less work for one or two people even though there are potentially many, many thousands of people that cannot work on AI parking without a forced software purchase. So go figure...With all of the hard work that FRFS does for free. All of the attention to detail and accuracy. That the one thing the majority of end users work with is no longer available to them. That is, unless they buy a third party software first...interesting...Mark

Anyway, this whole business of Afcad changing to Afx and not being able to use the tried and true free editor without creating some type of distraction is really a drag. It maybe nicer for the scenery designer as it makes less work for one or two people even though there are potentially many, many thousands of people that cannot work on AI parking without a forced software purchase.

Hi Mark,The reason is, quite simply, that AFX includes additional features which were never programmed into AFCAD, even though the author said he intended to include some of them as the software development progressed.So it is obvious that if you open a file with those additional features, they will simply vanish because your "tried and trusted" AFCAD cannot handle them. You shouldn't malign AFX, but, if anything, AFCAD.The features you are likely to lose are:1. Excluded default scenery2. Revised taxiway signsI always use AFX for my scenery development because it is the only way my simple brain can handle the placement of taxiway signs. Using the exclude feature also saves creating a separate exclude file. AFX is progress, you really should accept that AFCAD2 is very out of date now. Yes, its a shame that AFX is not free, but I think you would see a lot of benefits if you had it.Regardless of that, have you not considered the solution I offered you above?John

Thanks John...I will try your earlier suggestion. By the way, I didn't malign anyone or anything...I simply stated the facts. So the fact of the matter still remains. That I cannot edit Afx AI parking without purchasing a 3rd party software. That while any scenery designer can still create Afcad instead of Afx files, some choose to use Afx because it is easier on them. Meaning the thousands and thousands of users that don't have Afx are either forced to buy it or not edit the file or risk file corruption.So all in all the situation kind of sucks, wouldn't you agree? Free airports that are not quite as free as they seem. Multiple formats for the same type of file where the only distinguishing feature is the filename. They can't be distinguished from the file extension so it lends very quickly to a case of mistaken identity.I personally think that Afcad is still a pretty good way to go and exactly like I said, many scenery designers would like to grow into something different because it make their lives easier. So the little bit of extra work to keep Afcad gets nixed...and the end user forks out the cash. The needs of the one out weigh the needs of the many :)Mark

Oh, one more thing Mr. Hinson, love your scenery. You have been quite a help to me and many others here so your opinion goes a long long way. At least with me. So now that I've got you buttered up properly, how's about doing a scenery for YMGT? Did you know that the limestone break there can support the only 30ft rideable waves in all of OZ? They call it god's country in these parts :)Mark

Sadly less and less comes for free these days. I have fond memories of the earlier days of the internet when everyone was falling over themselves to give you something for nothing but those days have gone. There is a great community in Flight Simulator still dishing up free stuff and how lucky we all are for it, but the number of those doing so is slowly diminishing - several have cunningly made the jump to charging you for their product with the advent of FSX.On the subject of free scenery, I regret I have ceased developing my (albeit simple) sceneries for the time being owing to lack of time caused by family health. (How dare things like that interfere with my FS time!). But anything that I do will remain free for as long as I can manage - for ever hopefully - on principle. Remember that people like me pay for software like AFX to make our life easier producing free stuff for people like yourselves. There's something not quite right there, really.Anyway, I hope that solution works for you. In theory it should work on any scenery, but of all the people I have suggested that to, none have actually come back and said it does or doesn't work.Best wishes,John(I prefer "John" to "Mr Hinson" by the way, reminds me of harder times)

I modified that file as well (using the standard AFCAD program) because some of the AI aircraft were not parking at the actual gates due to the fact that the radius for those spaces were to small. The aircrafts themselves fit into the spaces fine but were not parking there because they thought they couldn't.I didn't know this about possible missing items afterward. Does anyone know if these particular issues specifically affect this airport in any way?

I opened the referenced AFX file in ADE9X using the Open Airport .bgl. I did not treat it specifically as an AFCAD in which a stock airport must be loaded first due to what's been left out in AFCAD 2.21 compiles.It looked good illustrating different exclude rectangles for each typed of exclusion of what the designer decided to exclude when he built it from the stock reference. You can even see the detailed list of of objects within each type of exclude rectangle to see the items excluded. (These lists can be printed in table format, by the way, very nice.) As an example there are several exclude rectangles each of which contains a number of taxi signs.I chose to remove the exclude rectangles from the view options. I then chose from as drop down to add a GA Ramp Small parking area, placed and oriented it, chose an apron taxi link, dragged from the center of the parking symbol to the taxiway, and saved the airport profile.This was just a quick test and I did not compile the intermediate XML airport file into a .bgl due to my time restrictions but will complete this later.ADE9X also provides a tool to add taxi signs with background and border design, text, and heading besides placement.Anyway, I have not tested locking it to FS, the next step, to see what it offers.As an AFCAD alternative for editing advanced AFD property files, I expect it to work nicely. In many ways it is similar to AFCAD in its interface. It is intuitive. Of course you can build a complete airport with it including XML coded approaches for AI in IMC, something which AFCAD did not provide. Using ADE9X as an editor should work well.For those interested in this freeware as an airport editor for adjusting/enhancing existing scenery, I suggest downloading it and trying it with these advanced type of AFX files just to see if the interface is intuitive.

So what does all this mean? Does this mean that it's okay to modify this particular file using AFCAD and there will be nothing lost?

No. I recommend not using AFCAD but ADE9X or AFX. AFCAD will not recognize the added objects such as taxi sign excludes (from stock) and replacements added and maybe some buildings. I have seen enough viewing in ADE9X that additional items are retained beyond what AFCAD offers and AFCAD may lose or corrupt those that exist in that AFX file.I am still trying this out as an AFCAD type replacement other than buying the payware AFX.I'm sure AFX is good but for FS9 I find it limited for some other things I would want to modify. Therefore I'm testing ADE9X to see if it will function similar to AFCAD but without destroying the AFX generated file in response to this thread.

So what does all this mean? Does this mean that it's okay to modify this particular file using AFCAD and there will be nothing lost?

This thread at Flightsim may be worth reading (several times) as it explains the significant differences in AFX and ADE9X.http://forums.flightsim.com/vbfs/showthrea...ile#post1346231For my money (ADE9X is free) the ADE9X program is considerably better than the payware AFX. But that is just my opinion. I might add that the poster (Reggie Fields) has forgotton more about FS than most of us mere mortals will ever hope to know. Again, one man's humble opinion.

For my money (ADE9X is free) the ADE9X program is considerably better than the payware AFX. But that is just my opinion.

I would say you are almost certainly right, David. I will undoubtedly migrate to using it in due course but there is a massive learning curve simply because the software can do so much. It is all installed and ready to use and one day, when (if?) my personal life quietens down, I shall sit back and do a lot of reading of the massive manual! Meanwhile I can hop into AFX and use it in a way almost identical to AFCAD, without having to switch my brain on.Best wishes,John

Sure. I was just responding to the case where a user wants to modify an AFX produced file, not design an airport. It would not be necessary to learn all the manual described procedures for limited editing. It is very similar to AFCAD for editing purposes. The important point even for ADE9X is not to treat the AFX file as an AFCAD which requires loading the stock airport first but to treat it as a complete airport.bgl file to retain the designer's intentions.When I ran the ADE9X fault finder on the AFX it noted several parking spots that were isolated from taxiways and one taxi node that was completely isolated. I don't know if this was FRFS's William Morgan's intent for design purposes.

I would say you are almost certainly right, David. I will undoubtedly migrate to using it in due course but there is a massive learning curve simply because the software can do so much. It is all installed and ready to use and one day, when (if?) my personal life quietens down, I shall sit back and do a lot of reading of the massive manual! Meanwhile I can hop into AFX and use it in a way almost identical to AFCAD, without having to switch my brain on.Best wishes,John