fsAerodata question

[Guest]

Yes, I like to call it “add-on” wars, it’s popular show going on 13th season. :)

 

FSaerodata will backup the original BGLs and add file extension FSDAT or something like that.  

You can locate the files in question via the sector map in the learning center .chm ... i.e. scenery\0202 is some of California area ... in that folder you’ll see the FSDAT (in the office today so going of memory)  backups, rename, and retest ILS.  If it works when reverting back to original BGLs, then something else is not being updated correctly ... could be a case of add-on wars.

Your mission should accept it will be to locate the conflict ... this message will self destruct in 10 seconds :)

Cheers, Rob

[Guest]

53 minutes ago, Rob Ainscough said:

Yes, I like to call it “add-on” wars, it’s popular show going on 13th season. :)

Haha, yes, well, I sometimes worry about all this: it's not only the addons themselves that are becoming a problem but also the addons you need for other addons. Like ProATC: I really love that one but 1. it won't work if you also use MakeRwys... so what if the creator of that one stops working on it... that'll make ProATC stop working. But to make it even worse 2. P3D's new way of dealing with addons has made MakeRwys dependable on Lorbi Addon Organizer...! So we get all kinds of chains of addons and if one pice of that chain stops working the entire sim can get into problems. GSX added a few other programs to my PC, some sort of manager and Couatl. Navigraph gets better with fsAerodata (so I am told) but you also need an updated magvara,bgl... Earlier on I posted all the addons that I need to run to get flying but in the background even MORE stuff is being added and loaded! It's not enought to just install an addon and use it: you have to also install various apps on which they depend and you all have to set them up, change their settings, even fool around in ini's and cfg's. I also (luckily) have the habit of documenting everything I do so I won't have to figure everything out from scratch the next time but I have to say that the last two weeks there was so much going on that I forgot to document really everything... and so I am beginning to understand why some people do not like to reinstall their sim (and OS).

[Guest]

Agree with you 100% Jeroen ... it's certainly enough to scare potential new users away.  If you look at P3D "as is" vs. P3D "fully loaded", you'd be hard pressed to identify them as the same simulator.

I have days where I just get to a point of frustration with my Add-ons for P3D and go fly XP11 ... then I get frustrated with my Add-Ons for XP11 and go back to flying P3D ... and then I get frustrated with them both and fly AF2 or FSW ... then I get bored with them and back to solving P3D/XP11 problems in what seems to be a never ending cycle.  Blame the platforms for being to "open" or blame the add-ons ... or blame my never ending quest for more realism.

But I'm almost certain many of us have been there and cycled in/out of flight simulation and the never ending quest to fly the virtual world with all it has to offer.

Cheers, Rob.

[Guest]

Yes, been there, done that... it’s a neverending story, really. But a very nice one too if you don’t focus too much on the problems.  

[Mischung 48]

Hi Jeroen,

it is just an idea, but are you using Orbx Vector? 

Because if you do, it will override many of the stock airports (and of course airports FsAerodata is trying to update). I had the same problem with Herve's data, as it only corrects stock aiports.

The other side is, that I cannot use the sim without Vector, because of the airport elevation corrections  It's a vicious circle.

So the main problem is to get the current navdata into the Vector-aiport files or not to use the Vector-airports.

Regards

Marc

[Guest]

No, I am only flying above FTX regions, not Vector. But afaik fsAerodata overrides everything as long as you make sure it is on top in the scenery library.

[jabloomf1230 2,445]

1 hour ago, J van E said:

No, I am only flying above FTX regions, not Vector. But afaik fsAerodata overrides everything as long as you make sure it is on top in the scenery library.

That's correct. For recently released 3rd party airports, there is of course, no impact of fsaerodata, because those airports are almost always up to date. Vector changes polygons (lakes, large rivers, etc.), polylines (shorelines, roads, railroads power lines, streams, etc.) and in some cases, airport elevations. It is also unaffected by fsaerodata.

[officercrockey 196]

2 hours ago, jabloomf1230 said:

That's correct. For recently released 3rd party airports, there is of course, no impact of fsaerodata, because those airports are almost always up to date. Vector changes polygons (lakes, large rivers, etc.), polylines (shorelines, roads, railroads power lines, streams, etc.) and in some cases, airport elevations. It is also unaffected by fsaerodata.

Not quite true. I have an (addon-) airport with strange elevation problems. If I disable the fsaerodata approaches, everything is fine. fsaerodata actually changes something (for example the ICAO code for airports that have changed ICAO codes) and for some reason they affect the elevation as well.

[Guest]

fsaerodata will change many "default" BGL with it's own version, the original BGLs will now have an extension of ".FSAD" (not FSDAT like I originally stated going off memory).  I would expect that ILS corrections will likely also have elevation corrections (not always, but I would expect it to be common).

As for order in scenery library, I would place it above Orbx and any Aerodome flattening but below 3rd party airports with the assumption 3rd party airports are correctly implementing more recent data -- this maybe a bad assumption).

Cheers, Rob.

[jabloomf1230 2,445]

3 hours ago, officercrockey said:

Not quite true. I have an (addon-) airport with strange elevation problems. If I disable the fsaerodata approaches, everything is fine. fsaerodata actually changes something (for example the ICAO code for airports that have changed ICAO codes) and for some reason they affect the elevation as well.

Tell me which airport and I will check the fsaerodata entry for you. fsaerodata only changes arrivals, departures, approaches, airspaces and ICAO codes as you noted. If it is changing the base altitude of an airport then it is either because of what Rob stated or there is something else happening. The elevation "error" can be probably be fixed for that one airport by creating an ALT BGL file with ADE and placing it in .../scenery/world/scenery:

https://scruffyduck.screenstepslive.com/s/help_docs/m/20268/l/210825-what-bgl-files-can-ade-create

That will change the altitude back to what it was originally, but then the airport's approaches might be off by a few feet or so.

[officercrockey 196]

3 hours ago, jabloomf1230 said:

Tell me which airport and I will check the fsaerodata entry for you. fsaerodata only changes arrivals, departures, approaches, airspaces and ICAO codes as you noted. If it is changing the base altitude of an airport then it is either because of what Rob stated or there is something else happening. The elevation "error" can be probably be fixed for that one airport by creating an ALT BGL file with ADE and placing it in .../scenery/world/scenery:

https://scruffyduck.screenstepslive.com/s/help_docs/m/20268/l/210825-what-bgl-files-can-ade-create

That will change the altitude back to what it was originally, but then the airport's approaches might be off by a few feet or so.

It is UGGG in the sim and UGTB today. The addon doesn't change the elevation, so without fsaerodata everything is fine. 

I was in brief contact with the developer and he tried to help/explain but with no success. So I would be surprised, if you could fix it easily :) 

[jabloomf1230 2,445]

Let me check on this tomorrow and I'll get back to you. IMO, Jose (fsaerodata) is one of best developers in terms of responsiveness, right up there with Dave from Pilot2ATC and Pete Dowson (FSUIPC). I would assume that he felt that fsaerodata is not the source of the problem. Keep in mind that Jeppesen also makes a few mistakes now and then and these issues are translated via Navigraph to every add-on that uses that database.

EDIT: I took a quick look at both the stock P3d Lochini airport (UGGG, which is disabled) and the fsaerodata version (UGTB) and offhand the only thing that I see different is the ICAO code. The airport elevation  is 1623.999 ft in both files. But the fsaerodata  UGTB procedures file has an elevation in meters of 493.776 m which works out to 1620 ft. That's a discrepancy of 4 feet or just over a meter. is that what you are seeing?

[officercrockey 196]

5 hours ago, jabloomf1230 said:

Let me check on this tomorrow and I'll get back to you. IMO, Jose (fsaerodata) is one of best developers in terms of responsiveness, right up there with Dave from Pilot2ATC and Pete Dowson (FSUIPC). I would assume that he felt that fsaerodata is not the source of the problem. Keep in mind that Jeppesen also makes a few mistakes now and then and these issues are translated via Navigraph to every add-on that uses that database.

EDIT: I took a quick look at both the stock P3d Lochini airport (UGGG, which is disabled) and the fsaerodata version (UGTB) and offhand the only thing that I see different is the ICAO code. The airport elevation  is 1623.999 ft in both files. But the fsaerodata  UGTB procedures file has an elevation in meters of 493.776 m which works out to 1620 ft. That's a discrepancy of 4 feet or just over a meter. is that what you are seeing?

Hello Jay,

thanks for looking into this. I will try to make a screenshot tonight. Which file did you check? The problem does not lie in the airport specific file but in one general file fsadapproaches.bgl (or similar, can't remember exactly right now). It is ok for me, as I only want to use the updated navaids anyway. I don't care much about the approaches.

Edit: BTW, I had a similar problem in SPJC (former SPIM) and the Latin VFR addon... so there are some hickups when it comes to changed ICAO codes. It is some kind of a feature that can be turned of globally in the installer, but that did not help me either. I think the best approach would be the orbx-vector approach, where you can exclude single airports. When they are all in one file, that does not work.

[jabloomf1230 2,445]

In the fsaerodata  files/Navigation Data/P3d/PROC/scenery folder...

UGTB.bgl.

The other file that contains the fsaerodata modified stock version of the airport is at

../Prepar3d V4/scenery/702/APX59170.bgl

[officercrockey 196]

Hello Jay,

attached you can see my problem. Only difference between this and normal is one file: FSAD_comms.BGL. Could be this 4 feet you were talking about but the procedure files are not the problem. I have them always active and it is ok. The problem is in FSAD_comms.BGL