Surely there is a large market for addon scenery for the 2 biggest PNW airports, KSEA and KPDX. Surely someone is working on these airports?? Flytampa? FSDreamteam? Orbx? Someone??

No. Nobody is. I wish someone was as I would rather do KATL-PDX/SEA than to California.

 

Sent from my Samsung Galaxy Note 2

 

 

Ya it truly is too bad nobody wants to tackle them. I really dont have anything to fly to out that way other than YVR in the NG.

I'd like to see a good DFW, IAH, etc. 

I'd like to see a good DFW, IAH, etc. 

 

FS Dreamteam has done DFW.

 

One plus for SEA is that it's the most detailed default airport in FS, as far as I know.

I heard a rumor that George @flytampa was looking at it.(KSEA)  Check the FT forum

I believe he decided against it eventually, Reason was, no matter what he tried the KSEA area was a frame killer.

Quote

Re: KSEA V2?

 

by george[flytampa] » Wed Feb 09, 2011 8:06 pm

A little hard on the poor guy as usual guys.

 

We have looked at Seattle several times in the last two years. You really wanna know why we don't update or re-make SEA?

That area just plain sucks in FSX. Even with the just default scenery theres very little overhead for more scenery. Now with that popular PWN scenery, its even slower. Add Fly Tampa Seattle to that, it'll be frame rate misery . I know some of you don't care about frame rates as long as your PMDG computers simulate the Air Con packs correctly, but I like to see something pretty outside the windows moving by at 30+ FPS.

 

We may look at it again in the future as CPUs get faster. & no, a FS9 only version or update isn't planned. All our scenery is now primarily developed for FSX or not at all.

 

 

KSEA is on the FSDT radar for next year.  See Virtuali's comments in this thread: http://www.fsdreamteam.com/forum/index.php?topic=8531.15

I heard a rumor that George @flytampa was looking at it.(KSEA)  Check the FT forum

 

 

Not anymore...and for reasons that I completely agree with.  The Seattle area is already a resource hog.  Put ORBX, REX, the NGX, and some 4096 textures in there, and you'll be lucky to not get an OOM with DX9...not to mention single digit fps.  Now put a highly accurate payware scenery on top of all of that, and you won't be able to land without an OOM.  Just look at all the issues people were having with FSDT's CYVR.  It would only be exasperated in Seattle.  PDX wouldn't be much better.

 

Here is the FT thread: http://www.flytampa.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=25&t=6063

Whoever does decide to do KSEA/KPDX is going to have to build 2 versions! One for default and one for ORBX PNW since the elevations are different!!

Not anymore...and for reasons that I completely agree with.  The Seattle area is already a resource hog.  Put ORBX, REX, the NGX, and some 4096 textures in there, and you'll be lucky to not get an OOM with DX9...not to mention single digit fps.  Now put a highly accurate payware scenery on top of all of that, and you won't be able to land without an OOM.  Just look at all the issues people were having with FSDT's CYVR.  It would only be exasperated in Seattle.  PDX wouldn't be much better.

 

Here is the FT thread: http://www.flytampa.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=25&t=6063

I have to agree as well. Not much good if you OOM on approach. Such a heavy area, just as default.

Well then maybe FSDT should do SEA, since they have figured out how to adjust their texture popup distance, and if you are near SEA you don't get the sim drawing textures for YVR. That would work great for not having framerate problems. Too bad we will have to wait until next year though? Oh well. How about PDX?? Someone?

It's a shame that no one has decided to work on these two airports. For now I'll settle for this:

 

FZ02 KPDX

 

FlyTampa KSEA

Isn't ironic? The home of MS and Boeing.

PDX using FSX - DX10 mode, done about three months ago.