Sign in to follow this  
avgaskoolaid

FlyTampa Amsterdam announced!

Recommended Posts

Several days ago, FlyTampa announced Amsterdam, presumably for FSX and P3D. According to their forum, it is planned for a 2015 release. I'm personally very, very excited for this. Hopefully they'll be able to find a way to get around the performance issues that plague AMS (related to the number of taxiways). With this and the Aerosoft V2 on the way, along with the NL2000 freeware version, we will really be spoiled for choice when it comes to EHAM.

http://www.flytampa.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=7313

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

Great, the Aerosoft EHAM is a bit dated, may try the V2 first since Fly Tampa can be system demanding if anything like their awesome CYYZ.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Think FT had better fix their CYYZ before I would even consider any other product.  If you can't fly heavy metal in there at reasonable setting, what's the point?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hope it will be flyable unlike Aerosoft's EHAM, it's more like a slideshow than a game. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Think FT had better fix their CYYZ before I would even consider any other product. If you can't fly heavy metal in there at reasonable setting, what's the point?

For a highly detailed airport like their latest CYYZ, I find it manageable and definitely no worse (performance wise) than FSDT stuff. When it comes to FSX, if you want eye candy, there has to be a compromise. I am also very impressed with their airport configurator that allows you to try some compromises before Changing your graphics sliders.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks like it's being done by Emilios, who also did FT Copenhagen and Thessaloniki X, published by Aerosoft. Basically I learned my VAS management from him after purchasing LGTS.   :P

 

Both LGTS and EKCH are very enjoyable, so EHAM should become another good one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess it's inevitable that there will be times when two or more airport developers will be working on the same airport at the same time, but I can't help thinking that it's a waste of valuable development time when there are so many other large airports around the world that have never seen the light of day in FSX/P3D.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Think FT had better fix their CYYZ before I would even consider any other product.  If you can't fly heavy metal in there at reasonable setting, what's the point?

 

Have you installed their LITEX package?.....they say if you have any plane addon (specificlaly PMDG and Aerosoft) that its recommended. Their config tool also has several options to get it flyable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hope it will be flyable unlike Aerosoft's EHAM, it's more like a slideshow than a game. 

 

Try it with FSX-SE.  The other day I flew into there from LFPG -- and with 100% MyTrafficX traffic (aircraft all over the place, lovely!) -- then, after parking, unloading pax and reloading, out to Aerosoft's EGLL, and never saw any stutters or framerates less than 25, mostly a lot higher! I was well chuffed I can tell you! ;-)

 

I've deliberately been flying to/from all these intense airports in order to prove to myself that it really is true, that FSX-SE really does cope well!

 

My next flight will be EGLL to FlyTampa's EKCH. Maybe tomorrow (Weds).

 

Pete

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Try it with FSX-SE.  The other day I flew into there from LFPG -- and with 100% MyTrafficX traffic (aircraft all over the place, lovely!) -- then, after parking, unloading pax and reloading, out to Aerosoft's EGLL, and never saw any stutters or framerates less than 25, mostly a lot higher! I was well chuffed I can tell you! ;-)

 

I've deliberately been flying to/from all these intense airports in order to prove to myself that it really is true, that FSX-SE really does cope well!

 

My next flight will be EGLL to FlyTampa's EKCH. Maybe tomorrow (Weds).

 

Pete

 

Well Pete in P3D V2.5 I have with the PMDG 737 or 777 28 till 45 fps on the ground at Heathrow (AS version and never could achieve that in FSX DX10 lol,and more data now)

 

So you see there are more sims out there performing really well on the old base from the FS series of code...

 

Current Amsterdam offering from Aerosoft is one of the worst developed sceneries from a technical standpoint (I'm even very polite here;-))

So I applaud that Fly Tampa is doing Amsterdam my home town (almost lol)  Airport a non brainier when it's released.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hope YSSY comes out before this as been waiting on that one for years :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

+1 for a guaranteed buy for FT EHAM.

 

There is currently no version of this airport running anything like a decent framerate.

 

Whereas FT's St Maarten, Kai Tak and Dubai are frankly amazing - so I have great hopes for a new Amsterdam.  Bring it on!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So you see there are more sims out there performing really well on the old base from the FS series of code...

 

I have high hopes of P3D turning out to be really good, but for me I'm afraid it is really not quite there yet. It certainly doesn't perform so well on my system as either FSX or FSX-SE, and the graphics (particularly the anti-aliassing) are still not right, at least for me. I do wish it wasn't so, because I paid for both academic and professional versions (the former for testing, originally, and the latter on my cockpit system).

 

 Current Amsterdam offering from Aerosoft is one of the worst developed sceneries from a technical standpoint (I'm even very polite here;-))

So I applaud that Fly Tampa is doing Amsterdam my home town (almost lol)  Airport a non brainier when it's released.

 

 

I'm afraid I am no expert at accessing scenery from a 'technical standpoint' at all. To me it looks good, and, in FSX-SE at least, performs well. And it matches my charts for the airport well. Not sure what is so technically substandard about it.

 

But I will, of course, try the FlyTampa offering. I only fly in Europe and I make very sure i don't miss anything that may be good.

 

It's just that I wish some of the as yet missing major European airports would become available. What about Rome, for instance, long promised but not yet appearing. Pisa, Vigo, and Prague are among other major omissions at present, airports I've frequented in real life which I'd love to do also in simulation.

 

Regards

Pete

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have high hopes of P3D turning out to be really good, but for me I'm afraid it is really not quite there yet. It certainly doesn't perform so well on my system as either FSX or FSX-SE, and the graphics (particularly the anti-aliassing) are still not right, at least for me. I do wish it wasn't so, because I paid for both academic and professional versions (the former for testing, originally, and the latter on my cockpit system).

 

 

 

I'm afraid I am no expert at accessing scenery from a 'technical standpoint' at all. To me it looks good, and, in FSX-SE at least, performs well. And it matches my charts for the airport well. Not sure what is so technically substandard about it.

 

But I will, of course, try the FlyTampa offering. I only fly in Europe and I make very sure i don't miss anything that may be good.

 

It's just that I wish some of the as yet missing major European airports would become available. What about Rome, for instance, long promised but not yet appearing. Pisa, Vigo, and Prague are among other major omissions at present, airports I've frequented in real life which I'd love to do also in simulation.

 

Regards

Pete

 

Agreed Pete but it's good we have choices now for everybody his preference expectations, it's better as a few years ago.

Correct AA is a weak point but so many stuff makes up for it have it local here now at an acceptable level :-)

 

Well performance wise it could be done far better also the quality it was nice for the time back then,

but unfortunately not so clever done regarding performance ;-)

 

Rome was done by the same developer however cancelled by Aerosoft.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have high hopes of P3D turning out to be really good, but for me I'm afraid it is really not quite there yet. It certainly doesn't perform so well on my system as either FSX or FSX-SE, and the graphics (particularly the anti-aliassing) are still not right, at least for me. I do wish it wasn't so, because I paid for both academic and professional versions (the former for testing, originally, and the latter on my cockpit system).

 

 

 

Anti-aliasing for P3D needs to be set externally from Nvidia Inspector. What kind of issues are you having? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was going to say what happened to Sydney

Different members of FlyTampa are working on that project..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anti-aliasing for P3D needs to be set externally from Nvidia Inspector. What kind of issues are you having? 

 

I have tried most settings in nVidia Inspector, but I can never seem to get it looking as good as FSX on at 1080p on my 10 feet wide projection screen.

 

I think, for me, the only potential advantage P3D has over FSX at present are all to do with shadows, but flying a 737 real cockpit, viewing the outside world through the windows from 30000 feet, this isn't really very important. And P3D just isn't as smooth as FSX-SE, and suffers badly at dense airports with lots of AI traffic.

 

Add less compatibility with add-ons (though, yes, they are all catching up), P3D for me remains a watching brief. And of course I still keep FSUIPC up to date for it.

 

Regards

Pete

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

And P3D just isn't as smooth as FSX-SE, and suffers badly at dense airports with lots of AI traffic.

 

I can't comment on the performance of FSX-SE as I have never used it. However, P3D on my new PC (i5 4690k @ 4.,6Ghz/2GB GeForce GTX 770/16GB Kingston Hyper X Fury DDR3-1600 RAM) performs very well indeed at dense airports with plenty of AI traffic. Considerably better than FSX performed on my old PC (i5 2500k @ 4.3Ghz/1GB GeForce GTX 560Ti/8GB Corsair DDR3-1600 RAM).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have tried most settings in nVidia Inspector, but I can never seem to get it looking as good as FSX on at 1080p on my 10 feet wide projection screen.

 

I think, for me, the only potential advantage P3D has over FSX at present are all to do with shadows, but flying a 737 real cockpit, viewing the outside world through the windows from 30000 feet, this isn't really very important. And P3D just isn't as smooth as FSX-SE, and suffers badly at dense airports with lots of AI traffic.

 

Add less compatibility with add-ons (though, yes, they are all catching up), P3D for me remains a watching brief. And of course I still keep FSUIPC up to date for it.

 

Regards

Pete

 

Hi Pete, I also fly with a projector (100"), using P3D as a scenery generator (building a home cockpit with Jeehell FMGS for the avionics). Using nVidia inspector my settings are extremely sharp and comparable to FSX/FSX-Steam. 

 

I was using FSX-Steam but have gone back to P3D 2.5. P3D (besides XP10) will be evolving and improving over time. 

I can't maintain 3 flight simulators and I am sticking with P3D and XP10. 

 

Thank you for updating FSUIPC. I know you have a 737 homecockpit, have you tried Jeehell FMGS? Its free and great :)

 

I've been trying to figure out how to use Jeehell's software with X-Plane (using XPUIPC, but its not working!), perhaps you geniuses if you have time could lend me a clue. 

 

Cheers. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know you have a 737 homecockpit, have you tried Jeehell FMGS? Its free and great :)

 

No. I was using Project Magenta up till late last year -- I'd been with PM since its very early days, when it was really the only such package around. But I moved on to Prosim737 with which i am extremely pleased.

 

Pete

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm with the majority on this I'm sure but if it's anything like their Toronto then I will stay well clear.

 

Even on p3d and dx10 Toronto is up there with the worst performing sceneries going. Reminds me of the Aerosoft Brussels and Amsterdam. Slideshow ;-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this