11 hours ago, Chapstick said:

Not looking bad?

Performing well would be fine with me even if they looked the same 😞

5 hours ago, psolk said:

Performing well would be fine with me even if they looked the same 😞

Agree. Performance of any new version would be a definite want however my Aerosoft version of EGLL runs quite nicely on v5.3 so I dont have any major complaints right now.

As for the scenery itself, I am sure the dynamic lighting with this version will potentially be better. There's not so many structural changes/updates to be incorporated in a new version. The scenery from a runway, taxiway and buildings perspective has remained pretty static for the past few years at the RW airport, so the current sceneries available are not incredibly out of date from what I can tell.

 

 

I personally think and this is just my opinion that the Sim Wings EGLL is sufficient for the time being.EGKK needs to be looked at for P3D what airports do we have available at the moment,UK2000 and Jennasoft,well enough said on that.With iniBuilds being a UK developer i thought Gatwick would have been much the better idea.

I agree with Benbo. The Aerosoft Professional SimWings version of London Heathrow looks good and runs well in P3Dv4.5HF2 on my i5 7600k @ 4.5Ghz/32GB DDR4-3600 RAM/6GB GTX 980Ti powered system, and that is with the IniBuilds dynamic lighting update at 4x SSAA. We need a top quality replacement for London Gatwick more than we do Heathrow.

As usual, many are missing the critical point - this is designed for MSFS first and foremost. It's being made regardless of what product line up already exists for P3D.

By using the assets from the MSFS version, a P3D version will hopefully be a nice bit of relatively easy extra cash so that they continue to make P3D scenery in the future. We won't get Gatwick, JFK, Newark, LAX, etc. if sales for the P3D product flop.

On 2/13/2022 at 11:07 AM, Christopher Low said:

I agree with Benbo. The Aerosoft Professional SimWings version of London Heathrow looks good and runs well in P3Dv4.5HF2 on my i5 7600k @ 4.5Ghz/32GB DDR4-3600 RAM/6GB GTX 980Ti powered system, and that is with the IniBuilds dynamic lighting update at 4x SSAA. We need a top quality replacement for London Gatwick more than we do Heathrow.

For the first time ever I agree with you, as you normally run to Gary's rescue. Gatwick is in dire need of a talented developer to inject some fresh blood into a Gatwick (and joburg) project

On 2/13/2022 at 10:07 PM, Christopher Low said:

I agree with Benbo. The Aerosoft Professional SimWings version of London Heathrow looks good and runs well in P3Dv4.5HF2 on my i5 7600k @ 4.5Ghz/32GB DDR4-3600 RAM/6GB GTX 980Ti powered system, and that is with the IniBuilds dynamic lighting update at 4x SSAA. We need a top quality replacement for London Gatwick more than we do Heathrow.

You'd probably be able to tell me - does the Aerosoft run better FPS-wise than UK2000 EGLL?

I have not used UK2000 Heathrow Xtreme in quite some time. The UK2000 version should run better (because it is less detailed), but I cannot say for certain.

Edited February 20, 20224 yr by Christopher Low

On 2/12/2022 at 10:15 AM, fluffyflops said:

agreed. some fresh new young blood is needed.  not this dreay, pale and stale UK2000 and simwings  stuff. 

if only origami studios brought their EGKK from xp11 into p3d.  its one of the best xp11 scenerys going.  EGKK  has been abused by lack luster scenery for over 10-15 years.  Im sure gary is a lovely bloke, but his EGKK is dull and boring.

Funny that. When I have passed through Heathrow, I have never been overcome by an urge to sing and dance. Airports ARE boring horrible places, just look at most of the people who work there, it reflects.

To be fair, even the best airport addons can be a disappointment in certain areas. I have just parked at Gate 7 at ORBx LOWI Innsbruck, and the reflection textures that have been added to the front of the terminal building look indistinct and low resolution. This is the problem with fuzzy baked in reflection (or interior) textures. They may be high resolution, but they look low resolution. It is much better to use more basic "light" textures for the windows, or (even better) transparent glass textures with interior 3D modelling. I can see the same at ORBx EGPN Dundee, UK2000 EGPH Edinburgh, and other locations. It is not so bad if textures like this are on buildings further away, but right in front of the VC at a terminal gate?? Anything in locations like that needs to be of the highest quality.

By the way, talking of UK2000 Gatwick Xtreme, I realised the other day that the night textures on the lower half of the building when parked at Gate 105 seem to be associated with the older FSX version, rather than the more recent P3Dv4 version. I only noticed this when I watched one of those "Tappers" videos on YouTube the other day, as he parked his plane at Gate 105 (FSX). So, apologies for the beta testing failure

Edited February 20, 20224 yr by Christopher Low

2 hours ago, Christopher Low said:

It is not so bad if textures like this are on buildings further away, but right in front of the VC at a terminal gate?? Anything in locations like that needs to be of the highest quality.

Agreed.

Some people think it's a waste of resources to develop airport interiors. However, AS Cologne is a prime example of how modelling the interior lifts the entire scenery to a much higher level.

Given that Heathrow has a fair amount of glass on most terminals, it feels a bit lax by current standards for iniBuilds to use very minimal interior modelling or opaque glass textures. Hopefully, this is just because it's still WIP. If not, I'd like them to revisit these decisions before release.

Edited February 20, 20224 yr by F737NG

I can understand that modelling interiors is a significant addition to the amount of work required, but at the very least the textures that virtual pilots can see close up at the gate need to be comfortable to the eye. A baked in reflection texture of a daylight scene at night would look totally out of place even if it was crisp and clear.

Edited February 20, 20224 yr by Christopher Low

Like many I'm very happy with the SimWings EGLL Scenery - but I will take a good look at the inibuilds version when it releases, a PBR-era EGLL is always a nice prospect.

I think a 3D modelled terminal interior that can be seen from the flight deck while approaching the stand to park or on push back does add a lot to the immersion and realism , especially for me using VR.

I’d much rather resources were spent there than in modelling more the obscure and irrelevant areas of the airfield.

In real world operations glass fronted terminals with a mirrored surface are great as they allow you to look at the reflection of the ramp and see how the loading is going. Some thoughtful airports , like Montego Bay MKJS have actually installed a round mirror at each stand so you can see what’s going off behind you, it didn’t work on the 747 though as we were to high up to see it. 

2 hours ago, jon b said:

I think a 3D modelled terminal interior that can be seen from the flight deck while approaching the stand to park or on push back does add a lot to the immersion and realism , especially for me using VR.

I’d much rather resources were spent there than in modelling more the obscure and irrelevant areas of the airfield.

Yes I definitely agree, FSDT's O'hare v2 and FlightBeam's KIAD come to my mind as two sceneries that come to my mind that do the terminal interiors very well, certainly Terminal 5 would benefit hugely from this sort of addition.

Going into third person and viewing the aircraft from the terminal interior is also fun - in my case it may even bring back memories from the one time I was privilaged enough to be able to fly on a 747 out of Heathrow in late 2019.