...their lack of interest in making what could be a simple update to their scenery...

 

...Sadly this is indicative of a purely business approach totally devoid of the needs of our community.

Your comments make a response very difficult, this holiday season.

 

If you had looked around the FSDT forums, you would find that a remake to current standards is on the agenda. And no, I don't believe throwing down new runways, taxiways, etc is a "simple update".

 

From a "purely business approach", expect to grab your credit card to pay for the not-so-simple update.

 

And it's just a thing I have, but the gratuitous use of the word "need" is almost funny. See, you need air, water and nourishment to survive. Otherwise, you will die. Not having an updated ORD does not translate into a "need", but people use that term rather than saying "I want", much like a 6 year old in the toy aisle just before Christmas would say "I want, I want, I want..."

Well you are entitled to your opinion. I stand by every thing in my post. 

And it's just a thing I have, but the gratuitous use of the word "need" is almost funny. See, you need air, water and nourishment to survive. Otherwise, you will die. Not having an updated ORD does not translate into a "need", but people use that term rather than saying "I want", much like a 6 year old in the toy aisle just before Christmas would say "I want, I want, I want..."

Well said MM. That term "need" is over used imho when it comes to addons for FSX. Most of the devs i'm sure are doing their best to provide us with our "needs" so we can fly, taxi, and park properly.

Poorly designed afcad parking spots and blatantly incorrect or blank airline gate assignments are a real pet peeve of mine.  I don't understand why some developers don't spend the extra few hours to clean up such errors, especially with all the care and effort they put into manually placing buildings and adjusting taxiway nodes, why stop there??

 

Reminds me of some of the Imaginesim airfields, particularly KATL, where entire gates are missing.  You can see the node where the taxiway should connect to the spot at the gate, but the actual link is missing.   Again, it would just take a few minutes to an hour to clean up such glaringly obvious errors, it drives me nuts that they spend months upon months on their work but see the presentation of AI at their airports as an afterthought!

 

 

Reminds me of some of the Imaginesim airfields, particularly KATL, where entire gates are missing.

 

ImagineSim does this intentionally so that user aircraft always have a proper gate to park at. At a busy airport like ATL it's not unusual for your Delta aircraft to get parked in cargo or overflow.

Exactly my thought: Blueprint, anyone?!?   :rolleyes:

 

Do there airports work with Windows 7? I thought when I was reading there product description Windows 7 wasn't listed under the requirements. They have a couple airports I would like but I was hesitant because I didn't think they were compatible with Windows 7. 

Do there airports work with Windows 7? I thought when I was reading there product description Windows 7 wasn't listed under the requirements. They have a couple airports I would like but I was hesitant because I didn't think they were compatible with Windows 7. 

 

 

Blueprint offer two demo airports, that work fine on my W7.

 

And why shouldn't they, as long as their file formats can be read by FSX?

Poorly designed afcad parking spots and blatantly incorrect or blank airline gate assignments are a real pet peeve of mine.  I don't understand why some developers don't spend the extra few hours to clean up such errors, especially with all the care and effort they put into manually placing buildings and adjusting taxiway nodes, why stop there??

I agree. The part that really annoys me with FSDT airports is you spend a lot of time fixing their work, but if you have GSX, every time you do an update it installs another AFCAD in the airport folders, because the install doesn't recognize your modified AFCAD. This results in duplicate files and you have to clean them out.

Poorly designed afcad parking spots and blatantly incorrect or blank airline gate assignments are a real pet peeve of mine.  I don't understand why some developers don't spend the extra few hours to clean up such errors, especially with all the care and effort they put into manually placing buildings and adjusting taxiway nodes, why stop there??

 

Reminds me of some of the Imaginesim airfields, particularly KATL, where entire gates are missing.  You can see the node where the taxiway should connect to the spot at the gate, but the actual link is missing.   Again, it would just take a few minutes to an hour to clean up such glaringly obvious errors, it drives me nuts that they spend months upon months on their work but see the presentation of AI at their airports as an afterthought!

 

 

Afcads are easy to fix. What bugs me is the fact that after I fix the afcad and later on run any fsdt installer, it proceeds to OVERWRITE every change to every FSDT airpot that I have ever made. It even goes so far to replace the gsx sound files that I edited so you don't hear that annoying and amateur sounding boarding sounds.

I forget who but I remember some time back a poster said the happiest simmers he knows are those who use default scenery and focus on mastering there panels. As a scenery junkie myself I wonder if he was on to something considering time and treasure spent. I remember in one of Mike Rays past articles he started his tutorial at the departure runway because sim doesnt taxi very realisticly.

Blueprint offer two demo airports, that work fine on my W7.

 

And why shouldn't they, as long as their file formats can be read by FSX?

 

Good to know, thank you. 

Afcads are easy to fix. What bugs me is the fact that after I fix the afcad and later on run any fsdt installer, it proceeds to OVERWRITE every change to every FSDT airpot that I have ever made. It even goes so far to replace the gsx sound files that I edited so you don't hear that annoying and amateur sounding boarding sounds.

Yup, that's roughly the same issue I mentioned. I use ADE to make modifications and my AFCAD naming convention is different from FSDT's, so when the installer installs new AFCAD's, it doesn't overwrite. It just adds a duplicate which is slightly less annoying than having your modified file overwritten. Either way, the updates have don't tell you what you are installing and they don't give you any options. I usually ignore all FSDT updates because I have no idea of what kind of a mess they are going to create. Now, if the AFCAD's were done right in the first place, I wouldn't have to touch them in the first place and the updates wouldn't be that big of a deal.

It's really too bad because FSDT is such a great developer with visual quality and framerates are not too bad although JFK plus any other addon airport nearby or big scenery equals OOM. I have every one of FSDTs airports too. Just wish they would add a little more quality and work to patch older products.

ImagineSim does this intentionally so that user aircraft always have a proper gate to park at. At a busy airport like ATL it's not unusual for your Delta aircraft to get parked in cargo or overflow.

We can almost simulate reality in some regards with gate assignments. Nearly every time I fly into ATL the gate assignment changes before the plane arrives at the terminal.

Afcads are easy to fix. What bugs me is the fact that after I fix the afcad and later on run any fsdt installer, it proceeds to OVERWRITE every change to every FSDT airpot that I have ever made. It even goes so far to replace the gsx sound files that I edited so you don't hear that annoying and amateur sounding boarding sounds.

 

Why don't you create a new scenery layer (like "modified airports) which you keep on top of all other scenery enries. I have all my modified afacds in it and it works well. In most cases I even don't have to switch "off" the original afcad.bgl.

 

Harry