KPHX By BMWorld & AmSim RELEASED

[ktd544002 25]

I’m probably going to pick up the BMWorld version since it looks pretty good, and waaay better than default.  I will use it as a stopgap until Flightbeam’s version is released...assuming it will be much better.  I figure I’ll get my moneys worth out of it until then since since it could be awhile.  It’s an important airport and I just can’t fly into the default one.  I’ve replaced airports I’ve purchased with better ones before!

[micstatic 4,340]

11 minutes ago, ktd544002 said:

I’m probably going to pick up the BMWorld version since it looks pretty good, and waaay better than default.  I will use it as a stopgap until Flightbeam’s version is released...assuming it will be much better.  I figure I’ll get my moneys worth out of it until then since since it could be awhile.  It’s an important airport and I just can’t fly into the default one.  I’ve replaced airports I’ve purchased with better ones before!

same.  

[Dillon 2,198]

Just tried the scenery.  Performance is good and the scenery looks good.  The only let down is at the Corporate ramp there's no private static jets there but what more important there's no parking spots on this ramp to start a flight from.  You would have to spawn at the adjacent FedEx ramp if you're trying to start a flight at the airport with aircraft like the Longitude.😕

[thepilot 591]

Good to have something in the interim. But a Flightbeam release is a Flightbeam release. And that's always a must-have in my book. 

[flyerkg 62]

KPHX is one of my favorite airports by design and it's hard to pass up any quality rendering.
 

[Greazer 1,345]

The textures don't look right.

[Sunshine13 234]

any test results as far as performance ?  I will buy it, and yes Flightbeam is the best!!!

[Twenty6 694]

Too expensive. I'll weight for a sail.

[kiwikat 529]

3 hours ago, Greazer said:

The textures don't look right.

Looks like PHX to me... flown out of there a few times. Awful airport, lol.

[aniiran 433]

Well I got it.  Performance is fine not much of a frame hit, pretty surprised at the performance. I'd say on par with Flytampa Boston. 

However I have to say it's a little disappointing to be honest. Lots of color/textures incorrect and a few things where this scenery falls short.  I found about two dozen other nitpicky things, but these are major issues to me. 

1. You can't taxi correctly out of the alleyways in terminal 4 (A,B,C, and D gates) because when there is traffic there the parking spots are too far back.  In the picture no airplanes tail should go past the checker mark line.  Also, there is no blue center taxi line.  Also Heavies are not parking in the correct spots, they should park at the ends. 

2. The other major issue is that every gate has a Southwest logo on it. Also, note that not all the gates at Phoneix are the same.  Some actually have electronic boards on the gate its self at the end caps of the terminal since there is no where to mount them on the building, and some like T3N E gates have a yellow triangle on top denoting the gate.  Also, the gates are a light cream color not grayish.  It looks like they reused the gates from their Seattle scenery.

 

3. Terminal 3N E gates do not look correct, the whole building has been modernized and looks like the center everywhere with a more silvery brushed metal look motif. You can also see E5 is in the wrong spot.

4. Terminal 3S F gates textures don't look right compared to photos I have,  I think they need to do more research on what these gates look like.  For some reason instead of going with a silver metal look they went all black.

5. Terminal 4D the newest one.  Does look correct but there is a new connector path.  It does not look like the old one pictured here.

 

Edited March 14, 2023 by aniiran

[pmplayer 9,609]

10 hours ago, Dillon said:

Just tried the scenery.  Performance is good and the scenery looks good.  The only let down is at the Corporate ramp there's no private static jets there but what more important there's no parking spots on this ramp to start a flight from.  You would have to spawn at the adjacent FedEx ramp if you're trying to start a flight at the airport with aircraft like the Longitude.😕

Maybe in a next update ?

Love that they do mostly fluid airports with a very good performance and    optimization, that always has top priority for me above everything else..

cheers 😉

Edited March 14, 2023 by pmplayer

[CaptBillyBob 51]

@aniiran,

Is it possible the AI planes aren't parking correctly or are the dimensions incorrect? Most park too far back.

Edited March 14, 2023 by Ray Proudfoot
Large quoted post with images removed

[aniiran 433]

18 minutes ago, CaptBillyBob said:

Is it possible the AI planes aren't parking correctly or are the dimensions incorrect? Most park too far back.

Regardless of the reason, it's something the developer needs to fix. Almost all lower level developers for some reason over look this.  If Flightbeam and FlyTampa can get it right I don't understand why the other developers struggle with this. 

[Drumcode 1,907]

17 hours ago, thepilot said:

 Flightbeam release is a Flightbeam release

100% this.

[CaptBillyBob 51]

16 minutes ago, aniiran said:

Regardless of the reason, it's something the developer needs to fix. Almost all lower level developers for some reason over look this.  If Flightbeam and FlyTampa can get it right I don't understand why the other developers struggle with this. 

Did you report it on The Orbx forum?