2 hours ago, regis9 said:

I continue to be blown away by what some people think is appropriate treatment/interactions with payware developers.  

Roman, keep doing the great things you do.

Thanks, I truly intend to!

Here Roman, let me help you understand why saifs hasn't not read everything.  You have a nasty habit of only listening to those who adulate your work.  Let's start w/ my very first post to you when I gave you on no uncertain terms who has solved the issue, the post you claim was a direct insult, aggressive, attacking, etc:

"Did you remember to NOT OMIT the ILS Frequencies all default airports display in the G3000 MFD>Waypoint Info>Airport>Freq?  This is a fabulous feature MS/Asobo includes in all airports and yet 3 of the 4 addon airports I purchased omittted this.  If you didn't include this, no interest in the rest of the handiwork.  I really like that feature!  FSDreamTeam managed to learn about this and not omit this in their CYVR offering, however both FlightBeam and Orbx did not."

Was it the capitalized NOT OMIT that gouged your thin skin? Sorry, I had no idea.  I put it that way to emphasize what the issue is, not to attack you personally.  Next, I mentioned how much this new feature meant to me so that you might generalize to other users familiar with this nice feature in the default airports, and so priorize addressing it, since it clearly is solvable (think, Umberto, FSDT)  Next, I tried to make clear to you without fixing this omission in functionality I would not be interested in purchasing product from you or any other developer.  I said this because I would want someone to tell me this if I developed product, that's all.  Lastly but most importantly, I gave you clear direction as to who exactly understood how to solve the problem--who of course is Umberto of FSDreamTeam.

Here's my next wicked attack on Roman:

"Not surprised as other developers have ignored this issue as well presumably because they didn't read the fine print which apparently FSDreamTeam did.  Read this thread I started at Orbx:

https://orbxsystems.com/forum/topic/200707-ksba-ils-freq-for-07-is-missing-from-the-mfd-freq-section-in-tbm930g3000-avionics/?do=findComment&comment=1715387

Also more here after they sort of responded:   https://orbxsystems.com/forum/topic/205774-have-you-made-sure-w-msfs-airports-include-the-display-of-ils-frequencies-in-waypoint-info-airport-frequecies/?do=findComment&comment=1749817

Read Umberto's comments linked in 2nd thread--he is the one developer who did not leave this very nice feature out:  https://www.avsim.com/forums/topic/589749-clarification-on-ils-issues-at-addon-airports/?do=findComment&comment=4411144

I tried my best to get this to each developer and also to Asobo in the hopes they might point this out. Instead, droves of new airports in the marketplace and I won't spend a nickel on an airport unless they did not remove this very nice feature that all default airport enjoy."

So I even gave you a direct resource and his comments about this issue.  Here's your reply:

"I'm still a bit confused about it: is it enough to NOT delete default ILS with the flag as I posted? If so, we're golden. Or is anything else I need to do? I haven't modified default ILS or approaches, so if anything is wrong there, it's a MSFS bug. Hopefully it works OK. If you buy my airport, please test this issue and let me know!"

Now your fishing around for me to describe exactly the issue, when the first few lines of the first linked thread I gave you would have showed you exactly what the issue is.  You know Roman, it took time and effort to put that last reply of mine together to help you understand and solve the issue.  Alas, you then tell me I am to buy your airport and tell me if the issue is solved.  Oh, okay, sure, will do.

Next, here is my very next reply to your request for me to hand feed you all details and buy your airport to test it for you.  Listen folks, read this horrific attack on Roman so you can come in and give him your deepest sympathies:

"Very easy:  load up the TBM930 at any airport, in the MFD chose Waypoint Info, enter your CYOW, choose the Freq tab, and note if they correctly appear where they should.  If you don't know what I'm talking about read the first linked thread and you will see with in a couple of posts what I'm talking about.  I would never buy your airport until this is proven to work as all default airports work in this regard!"  Wicked indeed...

And here is your retort:

"Look, I have not removed default ILS frequencies or approaches as proven by my XML tag I quoted. Lashing out on me for doing something that I didn't do (and you do not even own the scenery, so you're assuming)  is frankly, bizarre. More so, insisting that you refuse to buy until I verify something, 3 times in an hour....I suggest you file a bug with MSFS. If I learn something new I will update here."

A.  I explained to you early on I took this to Asobo and the other developers.

B.  I clearly directed you, twice, to someone who understands AND solved the problem in their payware airport.

You don't listen to anyone who A, doesn't hand feed you everything, and B, who doesn't express deep admiration to help you feel okay.  Then, when saifs attempted very tactfully to help you see things differently than you do, your reply was, "OK, I guess I will have to write about this again. I'm sorry, but what's the way "I treated Noel"? You must have missed something."

Not possible maybe YOU missed something? No way!

 

 

 

 

 

Ok now let's end this as it's not going anywhere. Both of you agree to disagree, kiss and make up and let's move on. 

This has gotten OLD. Love your work Roman and I'm buying it just because of this whole topic. SMH!!!

Love your work Roman .please keep doing what you are doing, you are one of the best developer I bought from .Looking forward for your cyow  update and to your next project,..!! 

Thanks,

Edited April 24, 20215 yr by mangoo

15 hours ago, Roman Design said:

 As for the bug - if there is a workaround I can implement, I will. But I actually did everything that is supposedly a workaround, and it did not fix the problem. 

https://www.avsim.com/forums/topic/589749-clarification-on-ils-issues-at-addon-airports/?do=findComment&comment=4411144

Perhaps there is more to learn as well from your fellow developer who did solve the issue.

You're welcome.

 

13 minutes ago, Noel said:

https://www.avsim.com/forums/topic/589749-clarification-on-ils-issues-at-addon-airports/?do=findComment&comment=4411144

Perhaps there is more to learn as well from your fellow developer who did solve the issue.

You're welcome.

 

Perhaps there is more to learn by actually reading that thread...Roman posted a reply 18 hrs ago asking for further clarification because it was anything but clear what would resolve the issue at hand (i.e. revamping an existing field = no ILS in TBM FMC).  I'm sure he isn't going to come defend himself here (as he should not IMHO) and rather than a defense this is but a reminder to follow your own advice before you step off into the word not allowed in bare feet.

You're welcome.

It has been 10 years since I last posted on Avsim. This is my first post since. Seeing Nolan's posts here has compelled me to post.

Nolan, your attitude and tone is downright condescending and disrespectful. Seems like you have a chip on your shoulder. Others have said it too. But even with that attitude, Roman investigated and tried to find a solution to the best of his abilities. I may not have been as kind if I was a Developer.

If you're not happy - then say your piece, don't buy the addon, and move on. It's as simple as that.

Roman has clearly spent a lot of time putting together this scenery and it is a shame to see this thread, which started very positive, become sullied by Nolan - who has invested nothing.

Roman, keep up the good work. I will be buying this addon the moment it hits the ingame Marketplace.

31 minutes ago, Hirgab said:

It has been 10 years since I last posted on Avsim. This is my first post since. Seeing Nolan's posts here has compelled me to post.

Nolan, your attitude and tone is downright condescending and disrespectful. Seems like you have a chip on your shoulder. Others have said it too. But even with that attitude, Roman investigated and tried to find a solution to the best of his abilities. I may not have been as kind if I was a Developer.

If you're not happy - then say your piece, don't buy the addon, and move on. It's as simple as that.

Roman has clearly spent a lot of time putting together this scenery and it is a shame to see this thread, which started very positive, become sullied by Nolan - who has invested nothing.

Roman, keep up the good work. I will be buying this addon the moment it hits the ingame Marketplace.

Thank you. Just to add about the issue, I have not just tried (and read the linked post thoroughly, of course), I'm actively pursuing it. The issue is there and there should be a way to work around that bug. I found one more thing that could affect it, and I almost got to the testing phase, but Scenery Editor crashed on me again. So will have to redo and test again.

10 hours ago, Noel said:

Not possible maybe YOU missed something? No way!

I don't know why you would recite your whole original post again. Contrary to what you think of me, I did read not only your all posts in this topic, but all of the sources you quoted. And if I had specific questions, it means that those sources were not specific enough for me, i.e. on the basis of what was there I seem to be doing everything properly, and the issue is still there. Eventually I read all of those topic, beginning to end, and still no clarification on why it doesn't work in my case. Perhaps because you are not a scenery developer yourself, you assume that reading those would immediately solve the issue, which is easy to fix, and I somehow just arrogantly refuse to read. Not so. I genuinely had questions as this is is decidedly weird and contrary to SDK documentation. I wasn't sure what else could I possibly try that can fix this MSFS bug. But I'm still working on it, and hope to fix it soon. I found one more thing I can try.

Edited April 24, 20215 yr by Roman Design

1 hour ago, badgenes said:

Perhaps there is more to learn by actually reading that thread...Roman posted a reply 18 hrs ago asking for further clarification because it was anything but clear what would resolve the issue at hand (i.e. revamping an existing field = no ILS in TBM FMC). 

Glad he finally got there, next stop contact Umberto directly.  My post here began on 4/17/21, a week ago.

Everyone take a deep breath.  I'm glad the issue is now known to Roman I'm sure if he persists he will not only address it for CYOW but also for any future projects.  I apologize here for my role in contributing to Roman's reactions to my posts here.  Peace Out.

Edited April 24, 20215 yr by Noel

Good news everybody! I'm happy to report that the ILS database issue is now fixed! 

So, from what I can understand, this is what the issue is:

1. If in my airport I chose NOT to delete/override default ILS, but chose to delete and redefine the default runways, the ILSs work in manual mode but are not in the airplane database and auto-tuning doesn't work. 

2. The utility from FSDeveloper.com I used to extract default airport XML to build on, gave me ILS in separate XML tags. I don't know if it's the correct representation of the default data or the utility has a bug, but ILS are defined separately from runways. I used this code to try to fix the bug, and enabled the flag to erase default ILS. It opened in Scenery Editor and complied fine, without errors and ILS worked in manual mode, but not with auto-tuning.

<Ils lon="-75.64169" lat="45.32659" alt="112.776" frequency="109.500" magvar="13.600" range="50017.000" backCourse="TRUE" heading="70.996" width="4.4" ident="IOW" name="ILS RW07">
	<GlideSlope lon="-75.66687" lat="45.31388" alt="112.776" range="50017.000" pitch="3.000" />
</Ils>
<Ils lon="-75.69139" lat="45.3297" alt="111.861" frequency="110.300" magvar="13.600" range="50017.000" backCourse="TRUE" heading="319.984" width="3.7" ident="IRP" name="ILS RW32">
    <GlideSlope lon="-75.65884" lat="45.31116" alt="111.861" range="50017.000" pitch="3.000" />
</Ils>

2. Searching for the source of the problem, I decided to define ILS within runway definition in Scenery Editor. I copied the values from the ILS tags above. If failed to compiled with XML errors at first, but after I manually edited XML and removed the original XML ILS tags, it compiled OK and looks like it has solved the issue. So the runway code now has ILS definition, instead of separate ILS tags.

<Runway groupIndex="1889" lat="45.31890000000000" lon="-75.67055999999999" alt="108.25400000000000" heading="126.38400268554688" length="3052.65502929687500" width="62.42399978637695" patternAltitude="304.79998779296875" surface="{2E0DE83F-B79A-4435-905C-DCBBEAC55C59}" transparent="FALSE" number="14" designator="NONE" primaryLanding="TRUE" primaryTakeoff="TRUE" primaryPattern="LEFT" secondaryLanding="TRUE" secondaryTakeoff="TRUE" secondaryPattern="LEFT" primaryMarkingBias="40.00000000000000" secondaryMarkingBias="40.00000000000000" groundMerging="TRUE" excludeVegetationAround="TRUE">
    <RunwayDeformation alt="106.985001" ratio="0.000000"/>
    <RunwayDeformation alt="111.862000" ratio="1.000000"/>
    <Coloration red="150" green="150" blue="150" alpha="255" override="TRUE"/>
    <Markings edges="FALSE" threshold="FALSE" alternateThreshold="FALSE" fixedDistance="FALSE" alternateFixedDistance="FALSE" touchdown="FALSE" alternateTouchdown="FALSE" dashes="FALSE" ident="TRUE" leadingZeroIdent="TRUE" precision="FALSE" alternatePrecision="FALSE" edgePavement="FALSE" singleEnd="FALSE" primaryClosed="FALSE" secondaryClosed="FALSE" primaryStol="FALSE" secondaryStol="FALSE" noThresholdEndArrows="TRUE"/>
    <Lights center="NONE" edge="HIGH"/>
    <BlastPad end="PRIMARY" surface="{00000000-0000-0000-0000-000000000000}" length="42.000000"/>
    <BlastPad end="SECONDARY" surface="{00000000-0000-0000-0000-000000000000}" length="42.000000"/>
    <ApproachLights end="PRIMARY" system="MALSF" strobes="215" endLights="TRUE" touchdown="FALSE" snapToGround="FALSE" reil="FALSE" offset="30.480000" spacing="30.400000" slope="0.000000"/>
    <ApproachLights end="SECONDARY" system="MALSF" strobes="215" endLights="TRUE" touchdown="FALSE" snapToGround="FALSE" reil="FALSE" offset="30.480000" spacing="30.400000" slope="0.000000"/>
    <Vasi end="PRIMARY" side="RIGHT" type="PAPI4" biasX="43.974037" biasZ="1138.949829" spacing="0.000000" pitch="3.000000"/>
    <Vasi end="SECONDARY" side="LEFT" type="PAPI4" biasX="43.316002" biasZ="1111.322998" spacing="0.000000" pitch="3.000000"/>
    <Ils lat="45.32988748830926" lon="-75.69175727173698" alt="108.63101788237691" end="SECONDARY" range="50017.00000000000000" ident="IRP" magvar="13.600000" heading="319.98400878906250" frequency="110.30000000000000" width="3.700000" name="ILS RW32" backCourse="TRUE">
        <Dme lat="45.31300583464861" lon="-75.65916143891083" alt="108.29135638941079" range="50017.00000000000000"/>
        <GlideSlope lat="45.31300974285141" lon="-75.65914499311610" alt="108.29490873403847" pitch="3.000000" range="50017.00000000000000"/>
    </Ils>
    <RunwayStart end="PRIMARY" lat="45.32686996459960" lon="-75.68593597412109" alt="108.25400000000000" heading="126.38400268554688"/>
    <RunwayStart end="SECONDARY" lat="45.31092834472660" lon="-75.65517425537109" alt="108.25400000000000" heading="306.38400268554688"/>
</Runway>

Conclusion: One would assume that not erasing the default ILS would leave it functional, but it would not. Manual tuning functionality is retained, while it disappears from airplane databases and auto-tune doesn't work. The workaround is to erase default ILS and redefine it in Runway definitions (and not as a separate ILS tags! That was the tricky part in my case.) - apparently then it works both in manual and auto-tune mode. I will test further, but that's what it looks like so far. This should wither be reflected in documentation, or fixed in the SDK.

 

Edited April 24, 20215 yr by Roman Design

1 hour ago, Roman Design said:

Good news everybody! I'm happy to report that the ILS database issue is now fixed! 

I will test further, but that's what it looks like so far. This should wither be reflected in documentation, or fixed in the SDK.

Good job Roman.  In the end then, this is something that Asobo can resolve such that developers don't need to go thru these gyrations.  If so, I wonder if you have any inside track to Asobo?  Part of my angst about this and trying to get attention for it very early on (Oct 7, 2020 at Orbx and LVFR and Asobo) was that the writing was on the wall in terms of so many other airports being released w/o a resolution.  Will CYOM be released thru the MSFS Marketplace, and/or do you have your own sales point?

Cheers & Thanks

Edited April 24, 20215 yr by Noel

24 minutes ago, Noel said:

Good job Roman.  In the end then, this is something that Asobo can resolve such that developers don't need to go thru these gyrations.  If so, I wonder if you have any inside track to Asobo?  Part of my angst about this and trying to get attention for it very early on (Oct 7, 2020 at Orbx and LVFR and Asobo) was that the writing was on the wall in terms of so many other airports being released w/o a resolution.  Will CYOM be released thru the MSFS Marketplace, and/or do you have your own sales point?

Cheers & Thanks

Let me unpack this:

Yes, it's the MSFS bug, in terms of that the expected behavior is whatever is not erased and redefined in the custom scenery, should remain working. In terms of ILS it's not behaving this way, as we all know now. It should be fixed by Asobo, but it's in the long line of other bugs...

Yes, I have an inside track to Asobo, of sorts: a closed Third Party Developer's forum which I have access to because of an approved Microsoft Flight Simulator Partner status. I posted about this issue there yesterday with all details I had at that point. 3 hours ago I got a reply from one of the Asobo developers, saying "Thanks for the report, I’ll talk to my colleagues in charge of cockpits/instruments to see where the issue could be coming from." Now that I figured out the issue I posted the update with details - basically the same text I posted above. I would not get my hopes up, because there are literally hundreds of bugs and issues that are more urgent and have not been fixed yet. They have a lot on their plate and doing a great job, but there's a lot to do yet. You can see the developer snapshot to see what they are working on. But they do fix a lot of bugs as well, so let's hope for the best. 

CYOW is released through my website, and will also be released through the MSFS Marketplace, it's already in the queue since I released the first version. But it takes quite a long time until an airport clears the queue and goes through QA, and then if any changes are requested goes through the second time. It hasn't been ingested for testing yet, and I don't have any ETAs, but I know it's going to take a while. So everybody can get my scenery on my website the moment it's ready, possibly a couple of months before MSFS Marketplace release. Same applies for any updates: whoever buys at my website gets email notification of an update immediately, but it may again take a couple of months for MSFS Marketplace. I will be releasing the second update soon, while MSFS Marketplace doesn't have the initial release yet, and won't have for a while.

 

5 minutes ago, Roman Design said:

I will be releasing the second update soon, while MSFS Marketplace doesn't have the initial release yet, and won't have for a while.

Very good, I'll wait for the 2nd update presumably this is the one which has resolved the issue.

Cheers

3 minutes ago, Noel said:

Very good, I'll wait for the 2nd update presumably this is the one which has resolved the issue.

Cheers

Yes, the next update I'm releasing will have this fix.