Jump to content

hermit05

Frozen-Inactivity
  • Content Count

    6
  • Donations

    $0.00 
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1 Neutral
  1. > JasonW I'd love elaborate, but it would wear out my keyboard. In short, UT2 devs had to resort to another provider of RL flight schedules and sort of screwed up in converting their data into UT2 flight plans. There are quite a few airlines missing, airports that changed ICAO codes (like Johannesburg or Bangkok) and not known with those codes to FSX are without traffic, etc. I made and uploaded here to Avsim a UT2 add-on schedule for Joburg (in FSX FAJS, in real life now FAOR). A few others have also made some corrections. If you want the full story just go over to the UT2 registered users forum and read the whole story. We all hope that the next schedule will be less troublesome and more worth the money. None-the-less, UT2 is and will remain my absolute favorite! It is extremely flexible and user-customizeable and yes, with the F1 audio environment it is very immersive.
  2. My number 1 for years! Summer-fall 2013 flight plans are pretty bad, I have done a lot of updating there! Have since a few months replaced most AIA 737's and DJC's A318/3219/320/321 series with FAIB AI models and repaints and continue to replace as more repaints become available. Stunning models, all engine versions and varieties, worth the while.
  3. I have looked at the stock approaches with ADEX and they check out fine against the published approaches/STARS. It is very unlikely that the AFCAD is the problem, unless the add-on scenery uses custom made approaches and the AFCAD author loaded the stock data while making the AFCAD in ADEX. That can really mess things up! I can take a look at the AFCAD xml for you, just PM me. However since I do not have the add-on scenery I cannot double check against that. Maybe the docs that came with the add-on can shed some light, but I doubt it.... Rgds, Hans (not the same as above, but yes, also Dutch)
  4. Exactly the same situation for me!All fonts check out fine, there is no yellow triangle on the FMS display, the display is not dimmed out.Loading the dark and cold stock 172 and then switching to the tutorial works. Loading the JS41 from the aircraft menu (after dark and cold 172) does not work.The first 2 flights with the JS41 were flawless, the FMS switched on as advertised. After that...... ziltch!It seems that even when shutting down the systems as per text book, something hangs in the ON-state. I even tried the FSUIPC 4 macro to kill all systems in the JS41, no go.There definitely is something not kosher in that system coding.I do not think it is 'normal' that we should be switching from one to the other like a bunch of baboons in a melon field where other (also PMDG) products give us the possibility to set dark and cold in whatever paint scheme anywhere in the world. I simply do not want to continue to fly out off White Plains, I've seen enough of that place by now.For now I will ground the JS41 until maintenance comes up with something workable.....Hans Wilms
  5. Don't know what happened, it was there when I first posted!From where I am, two solutions possible at the moment:- increase the size of the 'island' to fully cover the grill (un-realsitic)- try to figure out pixel by pixel the correct position to flip the texture mapping on the grill (could take ages)I wonder why the texture is flipped on the grill???Hans Wilms
  6. I have a nasty texture mapping issue doing a Sky Express repaint of the JS41.The problem is obvious in attached screen shot. The left hand nacelle has the same issue!I hope someone from the PMDG graphics team can help me find where this detail is hidden in the PMDG_J41_MasterT map, so I can correct the mis-mapping.BTW, I am using PSP X2 (I'd rather spend money on a trip to Tahiti then on Photoshop......)Hans Wilms
×
×
  • Create New...