Hi guys,

I am wondering which developers are not following the P3Dv5 SDK for their sceneries 

Below is from PMDG statement posted by RSR

"Scenery Update Notes:
During the transition to P5D, we found that many scenery developers are quickly updating their installers to make them P5D compatible, but many are not *also* taking the step to re-export the scenery BGLs in order to make them compliant with the P5D SDK. This would cause the 747 to be unable to read those airport scenery in order to display the airport moving map on the navigation display. We have created some logic in the EFB that will use some heuristics to attempt to determine if the scenery file is P5D compliant, and if not, it will switch to treating it as a P4D scenery and attempt to import the data. Please note that this is not perfect- and some scenery might not read correctly if it hasn't been exported using the P5D SDK. This is an issue for the scenery developers to resolve- but we *think* we have mitigated it in most circumstances in order to give you the least amount of headache possible."

 

May be we can let them know that their product needs to be compliant with P3dV5; as we all know P3D 5 came out of no where very as only few devs knew about its existence.

 

 

 

Edited May 8, 20206 yr by Skywolf

This comment is not specifically directed at the PMDG quote, but there is something curious about it.  Airport designers rarely do endruns around the P3d PDK and SDK. Their biggest sin is not using the most recent version of the BGL compiler. This often is done to avoid having multiple airport versions compiled for every sim version. I'm not saying that this approach is correct, only that it's less complicated for users. For example, airports compiled with P3d4 BGLcomp will still look more or less okay in P3d5. The reverse may not be true, depending on whether an airport takes advantage of new features.

But which 3PDs commonly skirt the PDK and SDK? It's aircraft and weather add-on developers. They don't like either the groundhandling or the aerodynamics. They want to control more weather parameters, etc.. Does this design approach break the sim? Probably not. But it is harder to keep current. Honestly I don't rarely care what tricks are used to create realism. No one has to buy any add-on. And the interaction among multiple add-ons is such an unknown that understanding it is almost impossible.

Isn't PMDG themselves ignoring good practice and recommended procedure by installing their addon right into the root folder? 😉 Something something pot and kettle something.

I know it is not that black and white but are you seriously wanting to force other developers to do extra work that might be unnecessary for the proper functioning of their addon, just so PDMG can make their feature work?