My experience with UK Extreme isn't quite so positive

That could change, Ian, if you tried their latest offerings. They ARE outstanding. EGCCv2, EGKKv3, EGBBv2. Or see the screensots of Newcastle which is going to be out: http://www.uk2000sce...hp?topic=6601.0Gerry's sceneries are top notch: great detail, great animations, great support and great framerates in general. Of course you must have a need to fly to the UK.

haven't tried France VFR or Eiresim

As for FranceVFR I have an impression they make outstanding mesh and phototerrain but airports themselves have always seemed average to me. For a long time they even had default aprons and taxiways.I don't know how much it changed now, I may be very wrong on that.I know Eiresim only from screenshots and was not tempted as their builiding texturing looked very 'cartonish' too me (sorry if this word doesn't fit here much in English).Though I also admit I admired watching screens of their Cork ground textures, which look really gorgeous (almost impossible with FS9 tex resolution limits).Talking about quality it doesn' have to be payware. Take some Russian (or ex soviet) sceneries which look and work better than most paid ones (UNNT, USSS or UDYZ). I'd pay without a blink (no hint, no hint).Well, I'm going off topic again.... shame on me.... <--- self-punishment

That could change, Ian, if you tried their latest offerings. They ARE outstanding. EGCCv2, EGKKv3, EGBBv2. Or see the screensots of Newcastle which is going to be out: http://www.uk2000sce...hp?topic=6601.0Gerry's sceneries are top notch: great detail, great animations, great support and great framerates in general. Of course you must have a need to fly to the UK.As for FranceVFR I have an impression they make outstanding mesh and phototerrain but airports themselves have always seemed average to me. For a long time they even had default aprons and taxiways.I don't know how much it changed now, I may be very wrong on that.I know Eiresim only from screenshots and was not tempted as their builiding texturing looked very 'cartonish' too me (sorry if this word doesn't fit here much in English).Though I also admit I admired watching screens of their Cork ground textures, which look really gorgeous (almost impossible with FS9 tex resolution limits).Talking about quality it doesn' have to be payware. Take some Russian (or ex soviet) sceneries which look and work better than most paid ones (UNNT, USSS or UDYZ). I'd pay without a blink (no hint, no hint).Well, I'm going off topic again.... shame on me.... <--- self-punishment

One rarely sees a smiley with a flagellum! :LMAO:DJ

I have the FS9 version. It looks really good. The main complaint I have is I can't seem to pick up the ATIS. It is listed in "comm" section of the AFCAD but doesn't appear to work for some reason. Also, none of the taxiways are labled. Taxi instruction are "taxi to runway xx via". That's it. The AFCAD is really sad. Also for those that try and work/fix on the AFCAD with ADE, the AFCAD will not compile due to errors which are not explained in the error message. So far Imaginesim support has not responded to my problems.Jim

Good point about the AFCAD Jim. That's my only serious issue as well. Seems like a a silly oversight to put into the model all the relevant taxiway signs and not include them in the AFCAD... Other than that it's a very nice scenery with excellent FPSIan

That could change, Ian, if you tried their latest offerings. They ARE outstanding. EGCCv2, EGKKv3, EGBBv2. Or see the screensots of Newcastle which is going to be out: http://www.uk2000sce...hp?topic=6601.0Gerry's sceneries are top notch: great detail, great animations, great support and great framerates in general. Of course you must have a need to fly to the UK.As for FranceVFR I have an impression they make outstanding mesh and phototerrain but airports themselves have always seemed average to me. For a long time they even had default aprons and taxiways.I don't know how much it changed now, I may be very wrong on that.I know Eiresim only from screenshots and was not tempted as their builiding texturing looked very 'cartonish' too me (sorry if this word doesn't fit here much in English).Though I also admit I admired watching screens of their Cork ground textures, which look really gorgeous (almost impossible with FS9 tex resolution limits).Talking about quality it doesn' have to be payware. Take some Russian (or ex soviet) sceneries which look and work better than most paid ones (UNNT, USSS or UDYZ). I'd pay without a blink (no hint, no hint).Well, I'm going off topic again.... shame on me.... <--- self-punishment

I may give their newer sceneries another try some time. I got their Gatwick scenery and got very poor FPS with it. I do use and enjoy their RAF sceneries. And you are right about some freeware being as good as or even better than many payware - including UNTT which I love. But like you, I'm off topic and I don't want that flagellum ripping into my back so I better quit now! :(

Do you have any problems picking up the ATIS? Jim

Just a note, Imaginesim say they will release a new AFCAD this weekend (6/25-26) for KDEN.Jim

Hi, just downloaded KDEN for FSX but it wont install. I'm getting a message saying that I need to install Net Framework 2.0 to complete the installion. After downloading this application I'm told to turn windows feartures on or off. After attemping to do this it still will not do a complete install . I using windows 7and I have Imagine Sims KATL for FSX installed on this system. I have never had this problem trying to install any of my previous addons.If anyone could be of assistance it would be a great help.

Hi, just downloaded KDEN for FSX but it wont install. I'm getting a message saying that I need to install Net Framework 2.0 to complete the installion. After downloading this application I'm told to turn windows feartures on or off. After attemping to do this it still will not do a complete install . I using windows 7and I have Imagine Sims KATL for FSX installed on this system. I have never had this problem trying to install any of my previous addons.If anyone could be of assistance it would be a great help.

You might get a quicker response if you post in the FSX forum (this is FS9) or check out the Imagine Sim support forum? Good luck with it

You might get a quicker response if you post in the FSX forum (this is FS9) or check out the Imagine Sim support forum? Good luck with it

Did Imaginesim open a support forum somewhere while I wasn't looking?

About ADE if you run its fault finder and highlight each fault in the list it will expand the error description in the lower area. ADE uses the MSFS SDK supplied compiler and adheres to the strict limits of the SDK. (FSX has greater limits in some cases.) I recently looked at a huge airport freeware afcad in ADE and it stated it could not compile the afcad because the FS9 number of parking spots with parking codes is limited to 255 in the MS compiler. The afcad also had duplicate parking spot labels. (It also found broken taxi links which might cause bumps and also stall AI.)It was in regard to a thread about bumpy taxiing on another FS9 forum for a version of KATL and one contributor commented on checking the surfaces of the taxiways and runways. ADE is list oriented so a list of taxiways and runways showed the movement surfaces without looking at each individual object.Anyway, if AFCAD221 was used it did not strictly check these limits as it has its own compiler because MS did not publish the tools and specifications promptly.Anyway, I thought I'd broach this because of the exam of the afcad in this thread.

IMS is getting better and better with each release (like FSDT is getting worse and worse).

Oh jeez, haha that is one of the funniest things I have read here in a while. Maybe you should take a look at their version of KLAX that their working on and then tell us how they are getting worse with every release. I think most people would say they are getting better with each new airport, not worse.