FSDT KLAX released!

[Swoop 0]

Yeah, I thought of that Steve and it's a good observation. I'm sure that FSDT has made the same observation as well. I'd also like to have this new version of KLAX but It's still $40.00 and is it worth it? It would also be nice to hear from non-forum regulars as it seems that hype leads to higher pricing. (I tried to warn) My opinion is that at 40 smakeroos, that airport better be perfect, with great frame rates, and Umberto if you're listening, forget about the moving vehicles, throw in some dancing girls instead please :)Mark

[Joseph29 225]

Doesn't anyone have an issue with it costing $40.00!!!!Mark

Don't forget the Zurich coupon. You can use that on any FSDT scenery. I bet a lot of people will use that coupon when they buy LAX (I will be using it).

[ubersu 78]

OK, here are my first impressions (on the trial version).Please do not take them too seriously, they are just the first impressions, no review or anything else.Nice:- as usually with FDST sceneries, the modelling and the textures are superb; pure pleasure for my eyes- FPS are really good, no more worries from me on them- it does look like a visual improvement over the Cloud9 version I was using for years awaiting a new FS9 LAXNot so nice:- the mentioned runway markings (saw them on 06R) are not only double but also are... flickering, which is hard for me to accept (I haven't installed any extra mesh yet)- for an unknown reason I can see little traffic, mostly Qantas, Delta and American - I've seen no Asian or European airlines; terminals are mostly empty (AFCAD problems?) - I'll check it for different hoursSo, overall, a positive impression.I'll hold on with the purchase though till I examine the two things I mentioned in the 'not so nice'.Others' feedback is welcome.

Approach arrows are fixed...DJ

[out 769]

Approach arrows are fixed

Yes, they are!Umberto and FSDT have been very professional.My way of saying 'thank you' is the purchase I am going to perform in a while. BTW It's a pity we won't see Vancouver for FS9.

[edetroit 933]

Looks like it will be up for AES support as well.....double whammy!

[ubersu 78]

Yes, they are!Umberto and FSDT have been very professional.My way of saying 'thank you' is the purchase I am going to perform in a while. BTW It's a pity we won't see Vancouver for FS9.

I think Umberto and team are stand-up folks - they've always been very good at correcting flaws as well and quickly as possible. I look forward to Vancouver and Montreal (from FlyTampa) since I run FSX as well as FS9. I'm pretty sure Montreal will be available in both versions and if KLAX does well maybe FSDT will have a change of heart for FS9.DJ

[Swoop 0]

Really awful frame rates here on the system in my sig. We're talking 10fps...stuttering so badly I thought I was flying an Alaska winter tour in an ultralight. The screenshots look good however :)Mark

[Swoop 0]

Just like to add to my post. I went ahead and put a virgin FS9.1 install in place. There was no aftermarket software of any kind involved, just a plain vanilla FS9.1 installation and FSDT KLAX. I started a flight at the active runway and was pulling 7fps ( seven frames per second).I started another flight at gate 47b and was receiving 10fps (ten frames per second). A little better because I was not staring down all of the southern terminals. Keep in mind that my system is mildly overclocked to 4.1ghz as I don't like pushing the base clock any higher if I don't have to. I also have the memory overclocked to 1600mhz...Mark

[WingZ 547]

I think it ate my sim.Somewhere in the automated install it decided my Cloud 9 Phantom wasn't registered, so I said "Yes" and got a key downloaded.That may be unrelated, but the sim just refuses to start now.Gollee I do detest installer software, with a passion...

[virtuali 4,419]

I started another flight at gate 47b and was receiving 10fps (ten frames per second).

This is the frame rate at B47:

Keep in mind that my system is mildly overclocked to 4.1ghz as I don't like pushing the base clock any higher if I don't have to. I also have the memory overclocked to 1600mhz... Mark

There's surely something wrong with your system, I have a 2.66 non-overclocked Mac (memory it's 1066 mhz), which is the worse possible system for FS9, since it has fairly low clock and FS9 doesn't use any multi-cores, so it won't benefit at all from the dual quad-core system, it only runs on 1 core.

[Swoop 0]

Ha! I was waiting for someone to say that Umberto. There's nothing wrong with the system as far as a box goes, it's a really clean install of XP32. It's fast, slick, and performs as expected with most airports. I will say this, there have only been a couple of airports that I've tried lately that have simply been dogs on this box. They appear to be FSX ports to FS9 as an afterthought?But be that as it may, I could agree with the idea that I'm getting a corrupted download (possibly) from FSDT. The reason that's a possibility is because I am getting 25fps with the Cloud9 version...that's with 75% traffic, Active Sky running, MegaScenery SoCal, FSGlobal2010 and UT USA. Once I pull out of C9 KLAX and get into the air, the FPS jumps to 40fps because that's where I've got the fps locked. It's a really nice ride, smooth and clean.So it begs the question, does your software require a specific version of VC++ or C# library to operate? Are you statically linking the libraries when you're compiling the .DLL? Also, I run a minimum XP Service configuration turning off services like the Workstation and Server services (and many others). Could that be a cause if your software needs a service that is expected and its not there?I would like my vote to be a corrupted download but the jury is out on this one...any thoughts because rather then give you a hard time, I'd like the $40.00 airport to work. It's a really lovely rendition of the new KLAX :)MarkSoftware Engineer (Since the early 80's and still coding away)

[virtuali 4,419]

There's no way you could get a corrupted download, because the installer won't install the scenery, since it has self- integrity checks to prevent from corrupted downloads.

So it begs the question, does your software require a specific version of VC++ or C# library to operate? Are you statically linking the libraries when you're compiling the .DLL?

A problem with .DLL would result in the Addon Manager not loading, surely not an fps loss. And of course, it would happen at ALL FSDT AND CLOUD9 sceneries but, since you said yourself that Cloud9 KLAX runs well, this clearly exclude any .DLL problem.My idea is, since you use a 32 bit OS with a 1GB Video card, this is starving your system for memory, since the Vram is *subtracting* memory from your system because of the 32 bit OS, not *adding* as it would have in a 64 bit OS.Since the scenery is quite demanding from a texture point of view, if you are using it together with other addons that consume lots of it, is possible your configuration is struggling because of the memory issue.BTW, my video card is only 512MB, but of course I'm using Windows 7 x64. I've already replied to your post on our forum, so there's no need to continue here with what is clearly a specific problem with your system.

[Swoop 0]

OK Umberto, well take this over to your forum but I'd like to say something here as well. The test I ran was with a virgin install of FS9.1 and only your software...nothing else. At boot, the system only consumed 170mb of ram and I went directly into FS9.I think that if your software doesn't support 1gb video cards on FS9 then that should be well known to the entire FS9 community before they purchase it. I'm going to run sysmon and some other utilities that I have on my system and find out exactly how much VRAM and main memory are being consumed as to leave no doubt. You could be right but we'll see.That being said, I'll take this over to your forum and thank you for the help in this forum.Mark

[virtuali 4,419]

I think that if your software doesn't support 1gb video cards on FS9 then that should be well known to the entire FS9 community before they purchase it.

I don't know if you haven't read my explanation, or you just down't want to accept it:it's not that "our software doesn't support 1GB video card", the very idea that a scenery would work on a 512 MB video (if this is what you mean, in reply to my remark that I have a 512MB video card) but it would work *worse* on a 1GB card doesn't make any sense, of course.What I've said is that, even BEFORE you load any scenery, or even FS9 itself, the very moment you BOOT your system, your 1GB is ALREADY taking away available space FROM your main memory on a 32 bit OS!!You don't believe this, just check your available RAM after booting Windows, you'll probably see something around 2.5GB so, since you have 4GB, what's happened to the *other* memory ?It's possible that your video card doesn't work well under this configuration IF the scenery takes more than an X amount of VRAM.So no, don't say "our software doesn't support 1gb video cards on FS9", at least we might say: "our software doesn't support 1gb video cards IF the user made the mistake of using it on a 10 years old 32 bit OS"Of course, since the scenery is available in Trial version, there's no need to "let this be known to the FS9 community", since the whole point of having a Trial, is that anyone can check how the scenery works on HIS own system, without having to rely on 2nd hand reports.

[virtuali 4,419]

Just for completeness sake, this is how KLAX for FS9 runs on my NOTEBOOK:CPU Core 2 Duo 2.8 ghz - 4GB Ram - nVidia 9600GT Mobile 512MB - Windows 7 x64.