747-8 Airport moving map

[kubasbo 0]

Hi I have problem with my AMM in 747 on Frankfurt Professional Aerosoft EDDF. Half of taxiways is not drawn and it looks very bad. Thanks for your help

[scandinavian13 5,192]

1 hour ago, kubasbo said:

Hi I have problem with my AMM in 747 on Frankfurt Professional Aerosoft EDDF. Half of taxiways is not drawn and it looks very bad. Thanks for your help

I think the intro manual discusses this. I know I mentioned it in the video I did. Either way, this is entirely dependent on how your airport scenery designer set up your scenery in the sim. It was at one point common to make your scenery BGL a bitmap/image file, and draw zero-width taxiways on top, which would show up like you're reporting.

Entirely a scenery issue, unfortunately.

[Wothan 173]

The proplem with Aerosoft Frankfurt is that the AFCAD file only uses "PATH" for taxiways, thus they will not show up as taxiways on the Display.

Changing all "PATH" to "TAXI" will fix this (Can be done with "Airport Design Editor").

The same problem is present with the Aerosoft Barcelona Airport addon (and probably with other "Oliver Pabst" sceneries).

 

This is not to blame Oliver Pabst, cause he could not know that a new addon would use it this way.

Please check Your PM's !!

 

 

Edited October 9, 2018 by Wothan

[Ephedrin 418]

59 minutes ago, Wothan said:

Changing all "PATH" to "TAXI" will fix this (Can be done with "Airport Design Editor").

Merci!

[B777ER 2,485]

1 hour ago, Wothan said:

The proplem with Aerosoft Frankfurt is that the AFCAD file only uses "PATH" for taxiways, thus they will not show up as taxiways on the Display.

Changing all "PATH" to "TAXI" will fix this (Can be done with "Airport Design Editor").

The same problem is present with the Aerosoft Barcelona Airport addon (and probably with other "Oliver Pabst" sceneries).

 

This is not to blame Oliver Pabst, cause he could not know that a new addon would use it this way.

Please check Your PM's !!

 

 

I have noticed this with Aerosoft EDDF and PANC from Simwings. Doesn't look good at all I'm afraid. 

[Wothan 173]

I have edited the AFCAD files myself for EDDF, PANC, LEPA, LEBL... etc.- and now they look fine.

[happyfeet2011 1]

May you share your .bgls? :)

[Olympic260 415]

Before sharing anything please make sure you are allowed to share these modified bgls 

[ph-cxz 28]

here is the topic in the aerosoft forums aerosoft-airports-and-pmdg-efb and it is an easy fix by changing PATH to TAXI.

[Wothan 173]

What Oliver Pabst (the developer of these addons) tell is that changing PATH to TAXI means that the sim will draw the taxiways, allthough they cannot be seen, due to the addons overlay. In some cicumstances, they might become visible. Since the sim will draw these taxiways, s certain performance drop might occur.

Now...

As told,I have replaced all PATH's with TAXI for my own Frankfurt, Berlin Tegel, Berlin Schoenefeld, Barcelona and Anchorage addon airports from Aerosoft. These changes has not shown any negative effects on the graphical layout if these airports, nor do I see any performance drop worth mentioning.

Also, when reading Olivers post, You will see that the way the PMDG 747-8 uses the AFCAD files for drawing taxiways, and the way many addon developers choose to configurer their AFCAD files, means that the ND Airport map will become unusable.

I guess most users, who have put so much money into the PMDG 747-400/8 probably also had spend money on 3rd party addon airports.

My intend is not to bash PMDG, cause their ND just shows the AFCAD as it is. But I also see the problems for the addon aiport developers, who strive for great visuals and great performance.

My personal experience so far, just shows that with the few airports I have converted, there are no ill effects.

 

The easiest way though would be if PMDG would show PATH as taxiways, maybe even with a toggle in the FMC configuration: "SHOW PATH AS TAXIWAY" - just my opinion.

Edited October 14, 2018 by Wothan

[mfrantz 45]

Finn, I have tried to explain the situation the best way I could in this PMDG General forum post:

If you read this again carefully you may understand that are may factors involved and why a simple PATH/TAXI replacement is not a "one-fits-them-all" solution, even within the same airport some times. I understand that you have tried this to a few airports and it worked, but this is different from the knowledge of how this exactly things works (e.g. how naming, widths and other factors also come into play). We have this knowledge, simply because we have developed it ourselves, so we we stick with what we know for certain. 

This does not mean that we are not open to adjustments and improvements, as already mentioned we are working on this, but we won't rush to add a "SHOW PATH AS TAXIWAY" option without considering all the factors and thinking about more consistent solutions.

7 hours ago, Wothan said:

means that the ND Airport map will become unusable.

Believe me, if the ND Airport map was unusable with addon sceneries we would have heard about it by now (the hard way through a storm of support and forum posts complaints). We have warned right from the start that there may be some glitches with addon scenery, and there are indeed, but our experience so far tells us that overall the ND Airport map performs reasonably well and in no way it can be described as unusable.

 

[Ephedrin 418]

9 hours ago, Wothan said:

My personal experience so far, just shows that with the few airports I have converted, there are no ill effects.

 

The easiest way though would be if PMDG would show PATH as taxiways, maybe even with a toggle in the FMC configuration: "SHOW PATH AS TAXIWAY" - just my opinion

I bet this would create more issues than solve.. I have no idea what "path" can be or even is used for but simply using something as something else can't be a solution. Aerosoft developers usually go the easiest way and it's very usual on their forum to tell everyone "it couldn't be different or the sim would behave strange". It's the same with their Twin Otter's taxi behaviour. "wasn't possible or..." Other developers show them regularily that it IS possible if you are a little bit creative. For what I have noticed so far this behaviour only affects Aerosoft publications. I personally think that if it bothers us, we can modify those airports ourselves without making other developers responsible for any strange walk around that might break something else. Sometimes we should accept that not every addon can be 100% compatible with every addon. Try to use FSPassengers with any complex addon... It will hardly work. Compromises are mandatory in flight simulation. Especially when Aerosoft is involved.

Edited October 14, 2018 by Ephedrin

[Wothan 173]

It's not solely an Aerosoft airport issue...

Taxi Gate Munich as well as Fly Tampa Dubai also uses PATH and looks weird. 

I think Oliver Pabst's (Aerosoft) explanation sounds correct. So please refrain from telling that this is only due to "lazy" Aerosoft.

Regarding the Twin Otter, I'm actually the developer (Aircraft systems, instruments and animations) . Note that the Twin Otter is a 30,- euro addon with both Wheeled, Float and Amphibious versions, as well as the 100 and 300 series. Had it been a 60-120,- euro addon, then I would agree that more development time should have been used in that area. But with all it's  other features, I would say You get plenty "Bang for the buck's". Fixing the default FSX / P3D Turboprop behaviour us nit easy when You at the same time akso have tweaked it to behave much closer to a real free turbine turboprop.

I'm not here ti disgrace PMDG's products - I'm actually a happy customer if their products and own them all, itherwise I wouldn't spend such an amount if money.

I just thought tgst I had found a reasonable way of fixing this small issue, and still fibd that I have done so - at least for a few addon airports and only time will tell if better solutions will come from the various addon developers, cause i get tgat PMDG cannot fix it on their side.

Edited October 15, 2018 by Wothan

[Ephedrin 418]

Somehow I can‘t quote anymore on the mobile version of avsim...

the pricing is a reason I can live with, no doubt, at least a bit. but not with the typical „is not possible“ in nearly every addon‘s forum over there. 

Nevertheless we can always adjust sceneries ourselves without involving any developer into it officially. Your explanation was very good and realizable.

[Wothan 173]

3 hours ago, Ephedrin said:

Somehow I can‘t quote anymore on the mobile version of avsim...

the pricing is a reason I can live with, no doubt, at least a bit. but not with the typical „is not possible“ in nearly every addon‘s forum over there. 

Nevertheless we can always adjust sceneries ourselves without involving any developer into it officially. Your explanation was very good and realizable.

Well..not to stray off course..

I don´t think that Aerosoft ever said "Not possible", at least no regarding the aircraft I have been developing.

And if it has been said "Not possible," then probably by the meaning "Not possible within the constraints of development budget or scope of the project"

Aerosoft Aircraft addon tend do be lower-middle cost, for that price You cannot expect PMDG, Leonardo or Majestic level of realism - You get what You pay for.

 

Nonetheless, I see that PMDG cannot simply change their code to read PATH's as TAXI, nor can we demand or expect the scenery addon developers to change their software "Just because" a addon developer chose to You their AFCADS for displaying an airport map, so for certain airports we must either learn to live with the issues they present, or change the files ourself, riscing to wreck something else.

I regard this as the send of this discussion for me.

My only intend was to try helping people with the fix I found works for me, and not to start bashing a product that not deserves any bashing, I´m happy with the PMDG 747-8 and all the other PMDG aircraft in my hangar.

 

 

Edited October 15, 2018 by Wothan