Was really waiting for this one as I like the airport very much. Before buying I installed the demo (I didn't way back when KDFW was released) and I'm really disappointed. I'm only getting 8-11fps with default Bell and NO AI! I'm running a PIV 2,53, 1GB RAM and a ATI Radeon 9500PRO. I love their work but I don't know what Computer they run to get decent framerates. Toby

I'm curiouls about how it compares to the default under FS9.Tim

Until they start using GMAX or whatever it takes to optimize their designs I most likely will pass on most of their work (KDFW brought my old system to a halt. Dell P4 1.5gig, Radeon9700pro, 1gig RDRAM). They don't seem to take having decent framerates while using their scenery into consideration although they are better than Wilco. It's good to see KIAH on their drawing boards because redoing default or airports that's already been designed is boarding overkill for me. I do like their work and their older scenery looks great in FS2k4. I might have to retract my above statement if they drop KIND or KMSP on us in the near future.If I were you, anything that doesn't run at a reasonable rate I wouldn't bother with besides Microsoft already gave us KORD by default. Simflyers could have did KMDW, now that would have been awesome...

>Until they start using GMAX or whatever it takes to optimize>their designs I most likely will pass on most of their workIt was designed in GMAX (at least mostly) but GMAX doesn't optimize the design over other tools. Most scenery is designed using several different tools nowadays, since one tool (like GMAX) can't do everything better than every other tool. A lot of the cool things in scenery can't be done by GMAX at all, but are created using BGLC instead.The real reason we get lower framerates with these Simflyers sceneries is because of the crazy amount of detail in them. When you model every lampole and oil stain at an airport you start to tax teh system. Also, the high level of detail in the textures can't help either. Also, scenery animation like rotating radars, and the "Jetdock" system hurts framerates a lot.- Martin

I could have sworn I read somewhere that Simflyers designs in FSDS. Infact I just read on their forum that they are trying to move over to using nothing but GMAX (in a way acknowledging that GMAX will improve overall performance). Here's an excerpt:Not 100% gmax as Cal is still working on going 100% Gmax ORD is part Gmax and part FSDS (I will need Cal to chime in and give details) but performance is still good. JT_________________Sim Flyers Developer Look at how was Lago was able to create Honolulu Intl. and not have the framerate problems of Simflyer's current scenery???

>I could have sworn I read somewhere that Simflyers designs in>FSDS. Infact I just read on their forum that they are trying...>Not 100% gmax as Cal is still working on going 100% Gmax ORD>is part Gmax and part FSDS (I will need Cal to chime in andSo it is part GMAX, which is what I said in my post. I got this from the forums too. Part of my point is that there are lots of things that GMAX can't do, therefore "100% GMAX" is a myth. I think that people have it in their minds that GMAX is the only tool we should use. Some things that GMAX can't do are:- call library objects (baggage carts, default buildings)- place VTP lines (rivers, roads, costlines, water, bridges, telephone poles, lakes, airport skirting, golf courses)- create mesh- create landclass scenery- place autogenGMAX is used to create custom objects that can be placed in scenery (or aircraft...). It doesn't even place them directly, but relies on another program to do it instead (makemdl.exe). Many designers don't like the difficulties in placing objects this way, so often the objects are exported and converted to .api files, which are then loaded into scenery design programs and compiled using scasm.exe the same way the FSDS2 objects are. So, GMAX/FSDS becomes moot when you are using the same compiler. I think a better reason for using GMAX is that it is simply a powerful, professional program that already has a large user base of 3DS designers. Anyone who has 3DS experience can quickly come over to GMAX and start designing objects. This is the real benefit - professional faster design is now possible. Many of the tools in GMAX have no FSDS2 equivalent, meaning that the FSDS2 has to work a lot harder to get the same results sometimes. This is especially noticeable when we cut windows from aircraft, for example.- Martin

I wish dey would plum start wo'kin' on Class C airpo'ts instead uh Class B. MS be hangin' an ok t'very baaaad job on de high detail Class B airpo'ts dey do but no one be touchin' Class C. Since dey is smalla' fields and whut not it would ###### less time t'do, less stuff fo' de CPU t'draw, possibly givin' less uh a FPS drop. Jes hang loose, brud. Mah' 2 cents. NP

Raffaele has been working in Gmax since Las Vegas his PHX will also be in Gmax. The reason why it is taking Cal a bit longer is that Raffaele took almost 6 months from the time he released Dulles (FSDS) to the time he released Vegas. We have found in tests that FSDS2 performas just as well as Gmax does Cal is moving ahead and will be all Gmax as well.None of the beta testers we had reported issues with performance.John

I'm glad MS gave us more detailed airports. I live 5 miles from KDFW and bought the Simflyers DFW in FS2002 (and used the KLAX one), little did I know that the machine to run it smoothly with full AI had not been invented yet! LOLWhen I see guys with 3.2 Intels and radeon 9800s runing at 20 fps, I don't see the point of using a simflyers scenery, they look great, but when you have to turn down your settings just to use the airport.........I am a scenery designer and yes they are optimized for as detailed as they are and you can get the same results using either FSDSv2 or GMAX, depends on the designer watching his polygons and such. Until someone proves to me that you can have all sliders maxed and full AI in heavy clouds and weather conditions, then what is the point of investing in something that IS going to impact my performance even more?!other than that, they are great airports!! ;-) Regards, MichaelKDFWhttp://mysite.verizon.net/res052cd/mybannercva1.jpgCalVirAir International VAwww.calvirair.comCougar Mountain Helicopters & Aviationwww.cgrmtnhelos.com

Had a P4 1.3 and the sceneries were pretty slow. I got lucky and upgraded to a P4 3.0 800fsb and a 9800 pro. I can run all the sceneries even DFW very well. Not writing this to brag or anything just saying they will run smooth once people upgrade to a better a computer and lets face FS9 wont run well on much less if you want to have all the nice detail. I guess it all in the name of progress just a shame it costs so damn much.:-grrAndrew

I have a new Dell P4 2.6gig 800fsb and KDFW still runs terrible for me in FS2k4. I was landing at Simflyer's Orlando last night and even that airport has some performance issues. These guys really need to switch designing tools. Like you said, "I guess it all in the name of progress" but that doesn't mean things have to slow down especially when your spending quit a bit of money to speed things up...

I noticed none of you is speaking about SimFlyers's KLAS performances.The point is not unsignificant since KLAS is - at the moment - the sole Simflyers scenery where everything (except for active jetways, DGS and active ground vehicles) is 100% made with Gmax . You all blame DFW as the worst scenery in terms of performances, but you all seem to forget the huge size of that airport, which is almost double-sized than airports like KATL or KLAX. To render KDFW with the detail we put in it and to hold the performance breakdown within reasonable limits has been the bigger effort we had with it, but nobody is due to impossible things.Size counts, and that's the sole reason why DFW is so frame-unfriendly. Also, the tools we used when we made DFW are not the same we're using now. That's why I would like to hear opinions about KLAS's performances, because all our future sceneries will be made using the tools we used for KLAS, not the ones we used for DFW.All that I know is that we put the same hell of details into KLAS than into our previous airports, but - at least on my system (only a 1.4 Ghz processor) - I noticed a significant performances improvement with KLAS. Is the same for you?RaffaeleSimflyers developer

Well, here's my opinion on KLAS:I have an AMD2200XP with a Ti4600 and 512MB RAM. I have purchased all Simflyers scenery for FS2002 and upgraded to FS9. Right now, the only simflyers scenery I have installed (after a recent reformat) is KLAS because its the only one that is running really smoothly on my computer with my sliders set as they are (not maxed). KLAS ....Excellent (I was really suprised, I expected slow performance given the "strip" being right there)KJFK (light) .....terribleKEWR ....terribleKPHL .....fairKMCO .....fairKDFW ......terribleKLAX .....poor to fairKIAD .....fairKATL ....poor to fairCYYZ.....dont know yet.....haven't tried it since I bought it. I hardly fly into canada but I wanted to support Simflyers so I bought it anyway.The airports in Europe and Manchaster.....haven't tried them either. Again I purcahsed to support Simflyers.I use these with the PAI installers in FS9, default AI turned off, and AI slider to 100%.Poor - FPS 8 and belowFair - FPS 8 to 13Good - FPS13 - 20Excellent FPS 20 and above (My slider is locked at 25).This is not to flame Simflyers (like I said, I purchased airports I dont even use so as to support them). I dont use the airports (except KLAS) because I know that my machine is not powerful enough to run them. I still think that they are the best airport designers out there and I will definitely install these airports and buy the new ones when I upgrade to a 3.xx CPU. I just dont think it makes sense trying these sceneries in a machine that is less powerful.I should also mention that the problem with the autogen around the airports has also turned me off a little (I know they are working on fixes for that).Finally, someone mentioned that Lago did PHNL in complete GMAX and that it runs really smoothly. That is true, but consider that the level of detail that Simflyers puts into their scenery is much more than lago put into PHNL.My advice to Simflyers: Produce a really "water-ed down" version of your sceneries that would run smoothly on lower range machines. Charge the same price for it because that person can always install the "heavy" version at no charge should they decide to upgrade.

SimflyersYou guys are the best there is no doubt about it. Here's my opinion I hope you take it in the positive vane its given in. Dont do the Airports that FS9 already have in them!Give us Airports like Tuscon, Palm Springs, Half Moon Bay, Port Angeles, Key West, Suffolk Co, Waco, Jackson Hole WY, ect. Give us Airports that we can fly our GA into. For me I just cant justify purchasing your Airports with all the detail then turning down all of my settings just to fly into them and they then look little better than the default one.RegardsDennis Waggoner

Hey:I don't know how KORD runs (not buying it, I am boycotting SM) but I know the others have HUGE framerate issues. Now, to the SimFlyers team, have you tried Martin's KMIA? (FlyTampa) That is a big airport, my friends. With every construction cone in place and mounds of dirt where they should be... It's great. Runs at 23FPS here. I think you guys need to check, because if he can pull such a detailed KMIA with smooth performance, then you guys are doing something wrong. lolDP