The only scenery's I own from aerosoft is the work done by developer simwings. they are one of the best scenery designers in my opinion. the Amsterdam scenery was made by Dream Factory Studio http://www.dreamfactorystudio.eu/company.htm the rest are made by ether aerosoft in house artists. or the germanairports team http://www.germanairports.net I really don't understand what is happening over there with there beta testing they should have spotted all these problems before releasing it it seems there losing there focus rushing things because of time and money. at least thats what it seems like from the forums and aerosoft is not a small fs company. so I'm very surprised that this is happing over there.

Adam, I'm in the same boat as you. Out of all the Aerosoft sceneries I own, NiceX was the biggest disappointments in terms of performance.

Strange, i'm running NiceX on a sloppy laptop with a two years old Core2Duo and have not any problem with NiceX, even with 100% traffic. I have bought a lot of Aerosoft Scenery, the only disappointing one for me is Brussels, and is also created by Dreamfactory. And that is not a coincidence.....

Hi Guys,I should wait a while before buying schiphol, it gives a very bad fps.i have paris, frankfurt and heatrhrow and have with fsx accelerator 25 fps.brussels is not well and is 20 fps.now that i bought schiphol it gives 13 at best.as soon as i skip it out of the library i will have 35 with default ms.so be warned.doeke

If you take a look at the Aerosoft support forums, there is a user fix for AmsterdamX which helps to increase the frame rates at night.

If you take a look at the Aerosoft support forums, there is a user fix for AmsterdamX which helps to increase the frame rates at night.

my fps are based on day flying

If you take a look at the Aerosoft support forums, there is a user fix for AmsterdamX which helps to increase the frame rates at night.

I have downloaded this (runway light BGL file) and it makes a very slight improvement but still not as great a improvement as I'd hoped for.Adam

Strange, i'm running NiceX on a sloppy laptop with a two years old Core2Duo and have not any problem with NiceX, even with 100% traffic.

Wish I could say the same. I have uninstalled it, reinstalled, used default textures, used mipped textures, nothing I do seems to improve the frame rates for me at this aiport, which only yields me about 16 - 20 FPS with or without traffic. Which in my opinion isn't very good. Most of my other addon airports that are much bigger and house more AI, usually give me 25 FPS or more. One thing that I have noticed with NiceX is that I get a drag on FPS even when I am not looking at the airport. Usually when I pan my view away from dense areas my FPS go up, with NiceX the FPS remain strained no matter which direction I look, until I leave about a 10 mile radius from the airport.Frankly I have no idea why that airport gives me trouble.

The only scenery's I own from aerosoft is the work done by developer simwings. they are one of the best scenery designers in my opinion. the Amsterdam scenery was made by Dream Factory Studio http://www.dreamfactorystudio.eu/company.htm the rest are made by ether aerosoft in house artists. or the germanairports team http://www.germanairports.net I really don't understand what is happening over there with there beta testing they should have spotted all these problems before releasing it it seems there losing there focus rushing things because of time and money. at least thats what it seems like from the forums and aerosoft is not a small fs company. so I'm very surprised that this is happing over there.

that makes sense, their Brussels crashes my fsx w/ acceleration as well as awful frame rates. Too bad as EHAM and EBBR are 2 big cargo hubs I love flying in and out of

Avsim review is available:http://www.avsim.com/pages/0710/Aerosoft/Amsterdam.htm

I also used the autoafcad updater that had been mentioned on the Aerosoft forums (and a51.net forum) which appears to have made things better, getting FPS towards 20s in day time. The resulting issue I have now is a long queue builds up of aircraft waiting to take off from runway 6; after holding short the craft next in line for take off will taxi along the runway turn around at the bottom and then take off. I assume this will be to do with the autoafcad updater but not sure if it reflects real-life operations of this runway? Do KLM Fokker 70s really need the whole runway to take off from?Adam

May I suggest to all of you who are contemplating making an acquisistion of the Aerosoft Mega AIprort,Amsterdam FSX,first read the excellent review by Avsin Staff Reviewer,Benjamin van Soldt.It certainly saved me a few pennies before I rushed out and bought it,but at the end of the day,the choice is entirely yours

I also used the autoafcad updater that had been mentioned on the Aerosoft forums (and a51.net forum) which appears to have made things better, getting FPS towards 20s in day time. The resulting issue I have now is a long queue builds up of aircraft waiting to take off from runway 6; after holding short the craft next in line for take off will taxi along the runway turn around at the bottom and then take off. I assume this will be to do with the autoafcad updater but not sure if it reflects real-life operations of this runway? Do KLM Fokker 70s really need the whole runway to take off from?Adam

On my pc Schiphol with AI set to 35% gives more traffic than Frankfurt with 50% AI.If you get a long queue than probably you have set your AI slider to high.Also I do not have aircraft take off from rw 6.Btw the AI traffic packages decide the take off distance.

I think the German and Spanish airports from Aerosoft are great except for the fact that WOAI traffic is not visible when aircraft shadows are switched on. Funny none of the other developers have that problem. I

On my pc Schiphol with AI set to 35% gives more traffic than Frankfurt with 50% AI.If you get a long queue than probably you have set your AI slider to high.Also I do not have aircraft take off from rw 6.Btw the AI traffic packages decide the take off distance.

Gerard,I'm using Ultimate Traffic 2 so adjust my traffic settings in this rather than FSX (all FSX traffic sliders are set to zero). I'm using UT2 settings as posted on an Avsim thread by 'cmpbellsjc' which seem to work very well - thanks for sharing them cmpbellsjc! Prior to the auto afcad update aircraft weren't taking off from runway 6. I guessed that the queue forms because of the delay encountered with the plane taxiing to the bottom of the runway to turn round and take off instead of using the available runway from their hold short point on the taxiway. If the plane just took off from where it held position at the end of the taxiway, the queue would go down quicker and perhaps might not be much of a queue. I'll post a screenshot later on showing what I mean.Still, even with these settings as they are, I still don't think Amsterdam looks as busy as it should be. In response to CVEP; I understand what you mean about the bridges at EHAM. I still think they could've done a better job on them but at least it's a step up from the default where there are no bridges at all and the taxiways just go through the roads.Adam

I've attached the screenshot I refered to in my previous post about large queues and aircraft turning to the end of the runway, doing a U-turn and then taking off.See what you think. You can just see a KLM Fokker jet heading towards the Rwy6 thresh-hold.Adam