Drumcode

Drzewiecki releases Chicago Airports X

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, paulyg123 said:

Is there a way not to install Drzeweicki KMDW with Chicago Airports?

I don't have the DD Chicago Airports (maybe later today), but if they followed their traditional method of scenery creation then all you have to do is search in The Chicago Airports Scenery folder and remove any files with KMDW in them. The files in the texture folder are sometimes reused (though I don't know this to be the case here) so I would leave them unless there is clear evidence that the textures are not used elsewhere.  It doesn't hurt to leave them as they'll never be called for KMDW if you've removed those files from the DD Chicago Aiports Scenery folder.

I hope this proves helpful to you!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

2 minutes ago, DaveCT2003 said:

I don't have the DD Chicago Airports (maybe later today), but if they followed their traditional method of scenery creation then all you have to do is search in The Chicago Airports Scenery folder and remove any files with KMDW in them.

 

They did follow it and there's an option in the installer to not do so. The only thing I don't like is that the airports aren't separated from the city and everything is attempting to be installed into the Chicago X directory. I'm nit picking now as I like my files a little bit more organized.

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)

Hey guys.

I advise against manual changes in the files, the installer has been tweaked well to do all the work for you automatically. In theory those three airports are autonomous and can be separately installed but if you find any issues, just let us know and we will fix it (it is impossible to predict everything). Anyway, if you really have a need of manual file deletion 😁, you need to remember about SODE files too ( %programdata%\12bPilot\SODE\sdx ).

Jacek, two products are placed in the same folder simply to make the whole package work more efficient / share textures etc (we did the same in Seattle). You can manage everything via the installer though. An example - in our Polish Airports series there are car parkings in all airports with same car models, but airports are in separate folders so the same car texture needs to be copied f/e 4 times - that is not efficient. With smaller airports this does not really matter but things become different with large/huge/omg-amazingly-huge (KORD) airports.

Edited by DrzewieckiDesign
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
32 minutes ago, DrzewieckiDesign said:

Hey guys.

I advise against manual changes in the files, the installer has been tweaked well to do all the work for you automatically. In theory those three airports are autonomous and can be separately installed but if you find any issues, just let us know and we will fix it (it is impossible to predict everything). Anyway, if you really have a need of manual file deletion 😁, you need to remember about SODE files too ( %programdata%\12bPilot\SODE\sdx ).

Jacek, two products are placed in the same folder simply to make the whole package work more efficient / share textures etc (we did the same in Seattle). You can manage everything via the installer though. An example - in our Polish Airports series there are car parkings in all airports with same car models, but airports are in separate folders so the same car texture needs to be copied f/e 4 times - that is not efficient. With smaller airports this does not really matter but things become different with large/huge/omg-amazingly-huge (KORD) airports.

Thanks Stan! Excellent work by the way, I really like the Rosemont convention center area, nice touch! I haven't explored more, are there any easter eggs around the city? 🙂

I've installed City X a couple days ago and manually moved them to another location and re-mapped the XML to reflect this change. Then done the same for the airports last night. Quick question, will you be changing your installers at some point to not force the installation to the root P3D directory?

Share this post


Link to post

Thanks!

No, we won't I am afraid. Keeping everything in one place ensures correct update procedures and generally is much easier to manage. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

I want the DD strictly for the city and KMDW. ai plan on dropping FSDT KORD v2 into it. I think I will wait to buy until after ORD release as who knows if they will play nice with each other.

Share this post


Link to post

stan / all

can i assume sode windsocks, variable seasons, conditional (not pilot activated) low visibility taxiway / runway / approach lighting,not exactly like seattle but almost is among the feature not listed.

Share this post


Link to post

in reading through this post, I see SODE is mentioned.  Can someone be kind and explain what that is?  I sometimes get a pop up saying SODE is no working

 

Share this post


Link to post
36 minutes ago, paulyg123 said:

in reading through this post, I see SODE is mentioned.  Can someone be kind and explain what that is?  I sometimes get a pop up saying SODE is no working

 

Sim Object Display Engine

In a nutshell, SODE is a better implementation of smart animated jetways. It gets rid of the default jetways and uses new ones that are a lot more detailed and dock up to aircraft more precise. Just install the free program and it does the rest. Most developers now are using this method for their airports.

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, vadriver said:

can i assume sode windsocks, variable seasons, conditional (not pilot activated) low visibility taxiway / runway / approach lighting,not exactly like seattle but almost is among the feature not listed.

Affirmative.

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, DrzewieckiDesign said:

Affirmative.

sode conditional visibilty lighting (taxiway/runway/approach), not triggerable (aka PAL) as with seattle ..........great news, another step to "integrity".

Share this post


Link to post

Greetings,

I live near Chicago and learned how to fly at KMDW back in the day when it wasn't busy.  I am very tempted to add the city and airports.  I am wondering since I have ORBX Meigs airport  installed, if the city and airports would be compatible?  It would have been nice to include Meigs with the option of deleting it if you wanted a current Chicago city scape. 

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)

Have they fixed the ILS28C yet?

Update: Fix is now on the DD forums. 

 

Edited by Wise87

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Wise87 said:

Have they fixed the ILS28C yet?

Update: Fix is now on the DD forums. 

 

I bought this yesterday along with Chicago City X.  I did a flight from MSP-ORD in the FSLabs 320.  All I can say is wow.  Very well done.  Finally a good quality ORD that was very and rendition of the city that was very good to me in terms of performance.  I don't look at frames but can say with storms around it was very smooth.  I actually landed on 28C and didn't notice an issue with the ILS.  What are you referring to? 

My only minor "complaint" is that when parked at the gate (I was in the B concourse), the windows are very transparent to where you just see emptiness through the terminal to the other side without any people.  I don't know what you could do to change that as adding "people" would probably be a waste of a resource.  In all, this is VERY good!

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, cbreeze said:

Greetings,

I live near Chicago and learned how to fly at KMDW back in the day when it wasn't busy.  I am very tempted to add the city and airports.  I am wondering since I have ORBX Meigs airport  installed, if the city and airports would be compatible?  It would have been nice to include Meigs with the option of deleting it if you wanted a current Chicago city scape. 

There is a compatibility option for this in the installer.

I went ahead and bought this and so far frame rate is good. I think at KORD it might actually be better than default.

Share this post


Link to post

I purchased city & airports. So far not so good for me (why did I have to get sucked into VR - cant go back to monitor now).  I did some circuits around the city with PMDG 747/777 & performance seemed to be acceptable at first.  Last night I tried to fly MSP-ORD with Leonardo MD80 & got CTD with terrain.dll error when entering city area.  Did some more testing with MD this morning & was getting a lot of jumping & stutters.  Also I get some aircraft bouncing on the ground at ORD which is usually pointing to mesh complexity... I have mine dialed back to avoid that problem.  Really want to get this package running decently in VR.   

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
7 hours ago, Zimmerbz said:

I bought this yesterday along with Chicago City X.  I did a flight from MSP-ORD in the FSLabs 320.  All I can say is wow.  Very well done.  Finally a good quality ORD that was very and rendition of the city that was very good to me in terms of performance.  I don't look at frames but can say with storms around it was very smooth.  I actually landed on 28C and didn't notice an issue with the ILS.  What are you referring to? 

 

I did a little night tour of downtown from KPWK last night and was very pleased also. I'm going to do a touch and go tour tonight, PWK>ORD>MDW>PWK in my recently purchased A2A C182. 

Edited by Drumcode

Share this post


Link to post

Me and another pilot just finished a flight from ATL to ORDnin the MD-88 and everything worked great. The scenery is very frame rate friendly and looks great. Deciding if I want to purchase the city next for a nice view on the arrival. 

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, Wise87 said:

Me and another pilot just finished a flight from ATL to ORDnin the MD-88 and everything worked great. The scenery is very frame rate friendly and looks great. Deciding if I want to purchase the city next for a nice view on the arrival. 

Get "City", it REALLY adds to the immersion when approaching over Lake Michigan. Personally I think DD Chicago City and Airports perform better than stock P3D Chicago area with no addons.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
17 hours ago, Zimmerbz said:

My only minor "complaint" is that when parked at the gate (I was in the B concourse), the windows are very transparent to where you just see emptiness through the terminal to the other side without any people.

I agree, this might actually be added as an optional content.

 

The 28C ILS issue is related to the default navaids library and can be quick fixed by putting this file:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/7wh0xu034w8w9q7/APX24170.bgl?dl=1

into: FS\scenery\0302\scenery . We need to investigate the actual conditions when the problem occurs (it neither occurs for all users nor this occured during our beta tests).

Edited by DrzewieckiDesign

Share this post


Link to post

I'm torn on whether I should buy this... having the new runway in the scenery without it being on real charts or in nav databases is going to be awkward. It would've been cool if there were two versions you could switch between--current configuration and what the airport will look like next year.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
14 hours ago, Chapstick said:

having the new runway in the scenery without it being on real charts or in nav databases

alex ..... can we wait for 2 years as per KORD Runway Development

Share this post


Link to post
15 hours ago, Chapstick said:

I'm torn on whether I should buy this... having the new runway in the scenery without it being on real charts or in nav databases is going to be awkward. It would've been cool if there were two versions you could switch between--current configuration and what the airport will look like next year.

I can understand that but I don't think it's that big of a deal.  You can always just use the 10/28's.  I just did a flight departing on 9R and the scenery has the runway extended so yeah,  it didn't show up correctly on my Navigraph charts but it really was no big deal.  It's a great scenery and well worth it.  Performance was much better than I expected to encounter as well.  Happy to be able to fly into KORD once again as it has been a long time!

Share this post


Link to post
4 hours ago, Flic1 said:

I can understand that but I don't think it's that big of a deal

i'll wait till i hear how it also affects ATC options ........ one could conjure up an airac update which would reference the "pseudo" ILS's. or just close appropriate runways.

Share this post


Link to post

I'm happy the soon to be runway is already in the scenery. It will avoid th scenery be outdated in 6 months once it is finished.

It is easier to ignore a runway beeing built than having it missing for the next 4 years, just like what previously happened on ORD sceneries.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

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