There is a big problem at KTEX in FS2004. Somehow MS managed to stick an ILS shack right in the middle of the runway. It is located on the approach end of runway nine. Considering the density altitude and the shear cliffs off both ends of the runway, I think this airport is quite challenging enough without adding runway obsticles :-) Anyone know how to go about fixing this problem?This airport, Telluride, Colorado, is among the most spectacular airports in the world (the highest in the US), and one of my favorites to visit in MSFS, especially if you have enhanced terrain mesh for the area. Other than this problem it really looks fantastic in FS2004.By the way I did try it without the enhanced mesh and the shack is still there, so that is not the problem.Andrew

WOW that sucks bud :D I remember something like that happened to my hometown airport when I bought FLYII, that piece of junk game went right back to Electronics Boutique :)Sorry, not sure how to solve that problem.

piece of junk uh? Have a little respect for the people that developed this game.. or anything for that matter. Why dont you upload something for us and let us "criticize" your workJohn

I am pretty sure that there is a way to excluded specific 3D items such as buildings. I had to do it a long time ago in a previous version when adding new scenery. I just don't rememmber the procedure. Perhaps someone here knows how to do it? Also if someone else could go and check this to make sure it is not just my installation that has this problem at KTEX. Furhtermore, if anyone sees something like this at other airports they visit, post it here as well. If it happened here, it probably happened in a few other places as well.Andrew

bummer news Andrew as TEX is one of my fav places to visit in FS AND in real life! i would love to see a pic of the area in FS04. any chance of that once the screenshot forum opens up again?thxchris

Ouch!Working on a quick fix right now.... Not sure if its going to work anyway.... I'll let you guys know.PS/ I'm not the Biggest MS fan, but having 23000+ airports is normal that some "little" things get screwed some times.

>piece of junk uh? Have a little respect for the people that>developed this game.. or anything for that matter. Why dont>you upload something for us and let us "criticize" your work>JohnWhat are you talking about? FLYII or FS2004? I was criticizing FLYII for the record, re-read my post. And if you were talking about FLYII, yes I think it's a piece of junk game, can't live with my opinion? Then don't read it :) Here's my work if you want to "critisize" it, I could care less! http://www.3d-realm.com :D

Went to your site...FANTASTIC work. Maybe not for everyone but I loved it. This is way off topic but I just had to comment on your work.Larry Shinn

Just bumping this up for the evening crew to see.Andrew

AJ, Very excellent work on your website.

People are entitled to their opinions, live with it or grow up. Which ever is easiest.

>People are entitled to their opinions, live with it or grow>up. Which ever is easiest.People are also supposed to use civilised language...That's something that didn't happen here.To say a flight sim with worldwide scenery is a piece of junk simply because a single object on a single airport is located in the wrong place is going a bit far, as I think you would agree.Fly!2 was indeed not the best product on the market by a long shot, and was plagued with problems (in part due to pressure to release it before FS2002 I am certain) which in the end destroyed the confidence of the publisher in the development team leading to their demise (together with the tragic death to cancer of a key team member about a year later).But that doesn't take away that calling it a piece of junk because a scenery object is displaced is seriously overreacting.As to the person discovering this cosmetic flaw (I wouldn't even call it a bug) in FS2004, have you reported it to the FS2004 development team?If people were to do that instead of just flaming here maybe the team could incorporate those comments and findings into an update to the product so all could benefit.And please be more courteous than people are here. Screaming and namecalling like I've seen here against the FS2004 team won't get you anywhere, in fact it will likely get your message tossed directly into the garbage without ever seeing the eyes of someone who could do something about your problem.

Not my Website. Your complement should be directed to dqpilot. I agree that it is beautiful work.Andrew

Many of us are aware of the tragic events around the death of one of Fly's! major contributors and are saddened by his loss.However, FlyII was bad. Very bad. So bad, that Avsim was forced to delay their review on the product until numerous patches were made available.I am not decrying the developers on this one, I know how the developer/publisher relationship works. The publisher (I believe it was G.O.D.) was idiotic in it's decision. And it crippled a potentially fantastic piece of software.But be that as it may, With that being said. Fly 2, in un-patched form (which I imagine is how the person in this thread rated it, since he returned it rather quickly) WAS and IS a piece of garbage.In fact, it may very well have been the public outcry against FlyII that sent Microsoft back to the drawing board and delayed FS2002. The 9/11 affair was a convenient cover, but I'm pretty sure some further polishing was done to make sure that FS2002 was in good shape for release.

It has been noticed.The program uses a very complex routine of placing airports, objects, autogen etc. for the entire world.It is reasonable that there will be a few errors here and there-I haven't seen this yet anywhere else but I am sure there are others.It should be able to be easily "fixed" by end users.http://mywebpages.comcast.net/geofa/pages/Geofdog2.jpg