Bill Womack

There were a couple of typos in the URL, David. Try http://capncolwa21.mysite.freeserve.comthanks,

Admittedly it's a small thing, but I've noticed that the fix they implemented to stop the screen flashing when using menus in full-screen mode has been optimized further. For me, using the 3.9 Cats and pressing "alt" when in fullscreen 3D caused a momentary hesitation and then the activation of the menus. In the 3.10 release it works without hesitation, much like it always did in FS2002. Like I said, it's small but might point to a larger optimization at work once we've had a chance to get a feel for frame rates with this new driver. No adverse effects from running these yet for me.

By the way Cap, you may not think that the PCI mode is hurting performance, but I had that problem a year or so ago with one of my video cards. Updating the AGP miniport drivers on my motherboard enabled the card to work in full AGP mode and I saw a HUGE improvement in smoothness and frame rates. Your mileage may vary, of course, but you may find that PCI mode actually is really holding your new card back.

Moving an object around isn't a big challenge if you animate it. However, I'm not sure that moving the actual location of an object as defined in its header would work because FS seems to build a database of scenery objects at startup and then stubbornly refuses to even consider re-evaluating the scenery until the next startup. Otherwise scenery designers wouldn't spend so much time quitting and relaunching FS in order to see their changes take place. It was admittedly a lot easier in FS2002, where changing a bgl file and reloading the scenery could be accomplished without actually quitting the sim.

As far as I know, AFCAD2 layouts are totally separate from any work you do in FSSC. To keep everything working together nicely, I've been making my AFCAD layout first, then taking a screenshot of the layout in AFCAD itself and using that as my background image in FSSC. That way you get a ready-made aerial view of the field for placing objects. It seems to work pretty well.Oh yeah, to output the bgl files for FS9, you just use the "Export Scenery Wizard" under the File menu and specify where you want to put the BGL files.

I got the example files to compile, Bill, so I guess it works even without the initial XML declaration. I don't think it makes any difference whether you include the line breaks to organize the code within the XML tags, it's purely a matter of making it more readable for the coder.

They seem to have split the creation of models from the layout of airports. The BGLComp program seems to assemble the airports. The creation of models, seems to be handled by MakeMDL, the SDK for which will supposedly be coming soon. I can see this opening up a lot of possibilities for new scenery design tools. This actually looks more like SCASM than BGLC with regards to the ease of creating scenery, so I applaud that. I'll be very interested to see the new MakeMDL SDK now.

Good idea, Mark! We don't have any done yet, but perhaps we can include a couple with the download. I'll talk to some of the other team members about getting that done.thanks,

All I can say is wow. As a web developer who's been scripting for years, I was always confused by the syntax and flow of BGLC code. From just a quick glance at the new docs I'm already way more comfortable with the new XML-based methodology. Of course the real test will come when trying to actually use this stuff, but I'm already much more hopeful. Thanks for the heads up!

In addition, any scenery that contains custom terrain textures won't mesh well with your BlueSphere or other replacement ground textures. I can see this being a fairly big problem for scenery designers in the coming months if replacement generic textures become popular. I'm not saying the replacements are a bad thing, but they tremendously complicate matters for designers who want to use custom terrain textures in their scenery and have them blend with the surrounding terrain.

Ever since Bill Rambow let me fire up the R4D and terrorize Avsim conference goers by taxiing wildly about the airfield, I've been searching for a way to recreate the experience in my home cockpit. Here's a shot of me in my basement with my homemade R4D and Vmax yoke. Note that my copilot, like Mark, is using a CH yoke -- it's attached to his carseat along with a nifty little horn so he can beep-beep at pedestrians as we tool down the virtual highways knocking over phone poles. What's that you say? These things will fly, too? Where's the fun in that?http://forums.avsim.net/user_files/52919.jpg

I picked up a Vmax Flight Systems control yoke at the Avsim conference and I simply love it. It's got a great feel and solid metal construction that's head and shoulders above my old CH Yoke. Of course the CH yoke gave me years of good service and it was very affordable, so I'm not down on it really, it's just that my new yoke feels oh so nice! Having said that, I'm also beta testing Russel Dirks' new FS-Force module that is a replacement for the force feedback effects in FS. It's just a completely awesome bit of work, and it will prove quite popular I predict. I'm using it in conjunction with an older Logitech Force Feedback stick (no longer available, but you can still pick one up on Ebay) and it's providing superb force feedback and some of the most realistic trimming functions I've ever felt. I'm hard pressed to choose between this great yoke and my $15 stick now! So if you're open to different controllers, I'd think about getting a FFB stick once Russel releases FS-Force. It'll knock your socks off!thanks,

You're welcome in advance! I'm just happy this project is nearing completion. I've been flying here all by myself and now I want some company!thanks,

The Mid Atlantic Air Museum Simulations Group (MAAM-SIM) is pleased to announce a little gift for the flightsim community. On December 25th, we will release our much anticipated freeware scenery of MAAM and KRDG (Reading Regional Airport) for FS2004. With this release you'll have a place for your copy of our B-25J "Briefing Time" to call home. And soon, you'll be able to add our all-new Gmax version of MAAM's Douglas R4D to your virtual ramp![table width=600" border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="3] [tr] [td]http://www.spottedantelope.com/bwomack/images/rdgsign-sm.jpg[/td] [td]http://www.spottedantelope.com/bwomack/images/maam-sm.jpg[/td] [/tr] [tr] [td]http://www.spottedantelope.com/bwomack/images/frvillage-sm.jpg[/td] [td]http://www.spottedantelope.com/bwomack/images/beachngr-sm.jpg[/td] [/tr][/table]This scenery is based on extensive photo documentation by the MAAM-SIM team and covers all major buildings at KRDG and quite a number of small details as well. Scenery features include:[ul][li]All-Gmax construction for optimized frame rates[/li][li]Photo realistic building textures[/li] [li]Full night lighting[/li] [li]Frequency-controlled door animations (hangar doors open and close on demand) for the MAAM hangar and a nearby T-hangar[/li] [li]A new AFCAD 2 file repositioning taxiways and refining aprons[/li] [li]New GA and airline traffic file that mimics real-world airport operations[/li] [li]Modeling of the Reading Pagoda, an important VFR local landmark[/li] [/ul]This is a classic American mid-sized airfield and we think you'll enjoy it enough that you might just want to make it your new base of operations! This airport also had the distinction of being the host for the 2003 Avsim conference and exhibition. For those of you who were fortunate enough to attend, this will bring back a lot of memories. If you weren't able to make it, here's your chance to pay the conference a virtual visit!If you do not yet own the award-winning B-25J Mitchell 'Briefing Time', you can get your copy at www.maam.org and support the museum's restoration programs at the same time. Take a look at this press release about the new FS2004 CD for all the details: http://www.avsim.com/pages/1103/frontpage/briefing_time_cd/Happy Holidays from the MAAM SIM team!Bill Rambow, Jan Visser, Rob Young, Mike Hambly, Fred Banting and Bill Womack

Is anyone else hearing an annoying buzzing sound? It's almost like words or something? Where did I put that flyswatter?

I think (although I could be wrong) that trees_v3.zip is the latest, and yes they should work fine in FS2004. Check the upload dates for them, as the most recent version will always overwrite the others.

Geez, where to start? There are a number of freeware aircraft with good quality VCs available, so it sort of depends on what you like to fly. Probably the best place to start is a thread I started a few weeks ago -- http://forums.avsim.net/dcboard.php?az=sho...ing_type=search in it, a lot of people gave their opinions about planes they really liked, and almost all of them have great VCs. Check it out.thanks,

I've noticed several new replacement ground texture packages being posted for download here lately, and I've got a troubling thought about it. Someone has already started a thread in which they decry the problem of some airports terrain textures not blending well with their new generic ground textures -- which of course is something that's bound to happen if the author of a custom terrain package designs their textures to blend with the default MS ground tiles. I can see this becoming more of a problem as the replacement ground textures become more popular, provided of course that they do. I don't have any answers to this other than a shrug. It reminds me of the old days of Web design when there were several competing web browsers (remember those days?) and one of them would come out with some new "feature" that only worked on that browser and looked like crud when viewed on the others. So then web developers had to choose between not including that feature and thus catering to the lowest common denominator, including the feature and accepting that it wouldn't work properly for some users, and including multiple browser-specific ways to implement a similar idea. The first option renders stable code but basic and fairly boring designs that don't live up to user's expectations. The second method generates ill will and loads of tech support requests. The third way is sometimes so time consuming that often the project had to be scrapped altogether as not cost effective.I think it's great that so many minds are working to improve the overall look of FS, but sometimes these alterations come at a cost. Does anyone else see this as an upcoming issue or am I blowing it out of proportion?thanks,

I'm extremely happy with Ultimate Traffic and would highly recommend it. I've had no problems to speak of with it since the FS2004 patch was released, and the sight of all that real-world traffic all over the globe adds a huge level of realism. And due to the fps-friendly PAI models, I find that pound-for-pound, the larger amount of traffic doesn't pull down my frame rates as much as the default MS traffic. Of course, if you have an older or less powerful computer then you might have to scale back your traffic percentages to make it work smoothly. And with all the AFCAD files being released now (including hundreds by the UT team themselves) you should have no problem tricking out your favorite airports with realistic traffic.

Hi Mark,I can't see any reason why you couldn't make an AFCAD file for a carrier. The problem as I see it would be the lack of arrestor cables. That is to say, you'd have to have AI aircraft that could stop on a mighty short runway for them to actually work with a carrier. Of course, it might be doable. I'm just not sure how MS calculates the runway required for AI aircraft.

One thing that the FS versions of Canada and Hawaii share in common (and not with the east coast of the US) is a relatively light amount of AI traffic. What are your traffic settings like? If they're high, try cranking them down to a lower percentage and see if it doesn't have a positive effect on frame rates. Or disable the AI traffic altogether just for a test. You might be surprised at the results.

I think you just hit on the entire basis for the field of consulting. As life and all its trappings grow more and more complex, the vast majority of people IMHO have become somewhat overwhelmed by it all. Computers provide an extreme example of this. I've worked in a corporate environment before (and this was a high-tech company mind you, with a disproportionate amount of PhDs) and I was shocked at how few of them understood their computer well enough to do much more than basic word processing. It's just a fact of life; you can't know everything. Maybe you could get close in decades past, but just hang up even trying now. So I can see a niche market for some enterprising souls who provide a calm and reassuring voice, help you through a problem and send you a bill once things are working well again. As for the argument that we all can find this stuff online for free, isn't that a bit like saying "why should I pay some bugger who's written a book when I can find every word he put down in the dictionary for free?" Sometimes it's not having the information available that's valuable, it's knowing how to put it together into something meaningful.

What happens when you try to get Gmax bgl files to work in FS9? I ask because I've got a whole aiport full of them that I've built with no problems. If you let me know what error is thrown or what is happening, maybe I can help out. And yes, the latest AFCAD is version 2.11 (I believe) -- your note is from AFCAD 2.04. The new one will allow for new airport entries.thanks,

Hi Voscon,Yes, if you use the gamepack from FS2002 to export models they'll work fine in FS9. Also, the new AFCAD is out already! You can find it here in the Avsim library so have a look. You can also use it to add new airports to the FS9 GPS database. Good luck!thanks,

Hello Luc,For another option, you might do what I did a while back. I had an ATI Radeon 9700 Pro for my main card and wanted to add another, so I looked on Ebay and found a perfectly acceptable Radeon 7200 PCI card that could share the Catalyst drivers with my 9700. Since I'm not using it for displaying 3D, I get no performance problems and it works great for running 2D windows like instruments, FSNavigator and the like. Also, because it's not even remotely state-of-the-art, I bought the 7200 for something like $39 US -- a real deal. It's just a thought for another way you might proceed. Good luck!thanks,