Jump to content

netshadoe

Members
  • Content Count

    980
  • Donations

    $0.00 
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

144 Excellent

1 Follower

About netshadoe

  • Rank
    Member
  • Birthday March 24

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://
  • ICQ
    0

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Ottawa, ON, CANADA

Flight Sim Profile

  • Commercial Member
    No
  • Online Flight Organization Membership
    none
  • Virtual Airlines
    No

Recent Profile Visitors

4,640 profile views
  1. IIRC, it's two years. It's in the manual, but I'm not at home at the moment.
  2. I'm going to try something a little different than you Ray. According to this snippet that I found in this post at the bottom: # APX Airports# ATX Routing information# BRX Bridges# CVX Various coastlines waterpolys roads# NVX Navaids - VORs, NDBs, & associated scenery objects.# OBX Objects# DEM Digital elevation map# bvcf.bgl CENTER type airspace boundaries.# BNXWorld* Geopolitical and airspace boundaries. I'm going to back up my whole scenery folder in P3Dv5 and try copying only the APX files to P3Dv5 from my P3Dv4 backup that I have zipped on my storage computer and see how that works. The reason I wish to try this method is that I've noticed in comparing v5 and v4 that the APX files contained in P3Dv5 (the airport files) are generally half or 2/3 the size of those in P3Dv4, thus confirming a great loss of data. There are a few areas that do have greater information. For example, on 1st glance, 0004 has more data in some of the APX files, and there are two extra APX files in v5 that do not exist in v4. My assumption here is that there are new, added airports in this area of the world. 0004 is the South Pacific, so it stands to reason that there may be some new airports that were generated, though, not necessarily great for AFCAD parking. I'll make notes as I go and post what I find as go through the files. The other files on the other hand (CVX, OBX, etc) seem to have larger sizes in some cases, but I'll have to do some testing to see if there are any conflicts using v4 APX files with the rest of the v5 files in each scenery subfolder (0000, 0001, 0002, etc)
  3. That wasn't my point. I've been using Flightsims since Sublogic put out its first simulator before Microsoft bought it out over 40 years ago...heck, my 1st plane simulator pre-dated that - a P51 Mustang simulator on a Radio Shack TRS-80 Color Computer, written in BASIC and stored on a cassette tape, so I've seen the evolution of many flightsims over the years. I still think MSFS isn't being catered to the flightsim crowd, as much as they are paying lip service to us...it's just that....fluff. I have yet to see an update that has blown my socks off. Yes, performance has gotten better, and the eye candy has become prettier....but there has been no substance that has made me want to change. To be fair, even P3Dv5 is a half-baked rush job too that LM pushed out to grab a few bucks before MSFS was released...so it's not just MSFS I'm picking on. My point is that MSFS is catering to the XBox casual gamer. What serious simmer would use an XBox to fly a simulator? Does an XBox player care if the weather is accurate? Do they care if they can access historical weather? Do they care if FSUIPC works since they will never use it? Do they care if the AI use real schedules? Probably not...and MS and ASOBO know that and focus on the money makers like placing pretty things here and there to juice people up and make them think things are moving along, and creating a few challenges or tours, and then offering up better challenges and tours in the store to sell....meanwhile, nothing of substance comes out or works. Again, I'm happy if I'm wrong and MSFS turns out to be the end all and be all of simulators...but as a serious simming platform, it isn't even close. There is more to simulating than pretty clouds and great scenery and silly challenges setup to interest the casual flyer. The serious simmer isn't what the bean counters at MS or ASOBO are looking for...It's about glitzing up a video game enough to attract those who will spend on DLCs (a fancy term we call 'addons' using simmer parlance). We have already seen how the money is everything...look how fast P3D was dropped by DLC...sorry...addon developers. It's not about the hardcore simmer...it's about the almighty buck...bitcoin,..ruble...etc. Again...I'd be very happy to be wrong.
  4. Lol...you forgot Microsoft Flight in 2012...dropped within the year of release.
  5. This... I think you hit the nail on the head here, and I'm willing to be wrong about this. I think MSFS is more about the 'video game', and less about 'true' simulation. Don't get me wrong, they have a great platform with new innovations...but I feel they are unfortunately catering more to the casual gamer more than the hardcore simmer.
  6. Interesting...the things I could see a possibility losing are updated runway idents, and maybe sloped runways(??). There are a few dozen of those with default airports...but frankly, I don't care about runway idents/sloped runways vs. parking spots. Maybe see what it does with a sloped airport? I dug up a few that are supposedly sloped from another post: LFHU, KAVX, KCOD, LFKD, LFKX, LSGK, LFMB, EGUO, LFFC, VYKL. VNFT, VNBJ
  7. Agreed. In the race to beat MSFS to market, it seems more and more that P3Dv5 was unfortunately half baked. Both were half baked IMHO. I usually avoid early access titles, and both of these titles should have been labeled 'Early Access'. Like Ray, I'm giving Lockheed Martin the benefit of the doubt, but their silence is completely deafening. Unfortunately, consumers these days seem to accept early access crud just so they can satiate their need for instant gratification...and the production companies know it and take advantage of that, and get their instant flow of cash from those who need instant gratification...viscous circle. And the real problem with half baked early access titles is the 'fanboi's will defend the product to the death, deficiencies and all...others will accept that this is they way it is now with software (the 'oh well' mentality)...the production companies have their money, so there is no appetite for the company to fix anything...and the whole cycle will begin anew with the next version release (I've seen people here talking about v6 already...) because everyone is all glittery eyed with the new shiny object they swing in front of you.
  8. Just my two cents... Ultimate Traffic 'Live' is not 'v2'...more an abandoned 'v3' to be more precise. There is UT1, UT2 and UTL (Live)...all three were started and never finished/abandoned. ...From their own product page: "1600 aircraft repaints" - AIG has over 1200 airlines alone, each with dozens of liveries (even special liveries, updated liveries). UTL liveries on the other hand are very outdated, or non-existent (how many of those "900" airlines have no liveries? Daedalus Airlines anyone?). "90 aircraft types" - I don't know how many 'types' AIG has (I'm not at my home computer right now), but they have over 400 different models. For example, you won't get a generic Airbus A320. You'll get a CFM engined model, an IAE engined model, one with or without sharklets (accurate to the livery), the NEO models, the private aircraft models, etc. Point is, you'll get better quality AI models across the board. UTL AI models are ancient/not optimized for P3D Ultimate Traffic Live has been in Beta since November 2019, and has essentially been abandoned since mid to late 2020. Many UTL flight plans are well over a half-decade old. Little to no cargo airlines (especially the large ones like UPS, FedEx, DHL, Amazon, etc) Ultimate Traffic Live = $45.00 USD AIGAIM + AIGTC = $0.00 USD, Euro, Yen, Rubles, Pounds, <<insert your currency here>> As for the 'injection' method of adding AI, AIG has been doing that for months now. Over half of the 1200 or so available airlines can be optioned to be controlled by AIG Traffic Controller (AIGTC) which is also in beta, but being actively developed, which also uses the 'injection' method. Instead of .bgl plans, AIGTC uses .AIGFP plans that also will integrate air routes (instead of point A to B like the bgl files). This controller also allows helicopters to be used as AI, with proper helicopter movements (hovering, vertical takeoff, etc). I'm sure there are other things that have been pointed out that I'm missing here, but bottom line...from one simmer to another....save your hard earned cash.
  9. No problem. I sent them to your support email. No rush. Life comes first! 🙂
  10. Yes, as far as I can tell with my limited knowledge of mdl files.
  11. That is way above what I know...I hope this is the right way: Using ModelConverterX, looking in the attached object editor, the strobe light effects are listed below: 747-8i: fx_FAIB_7478_strobe 747-8F: fx_FAIB_7478F_strobe These are the same as what I found in the original FAIB download. In the AIGAIM Effects folder, these effects have been renamed by AILRP: fx_FAIB_7478_strobe.fx.ailrp fx_FAIB_7478F_strobe.fx.ailrp That about the extent of my expertise! Lol!
  12. I don't see anything 'obvious' in the two configs. I have a [LIGHTS] section and a [FSREBORN_LIGHTS_CTRL] section, but I see that in other configs also. Here are the two configs, 748 and 748F respectively. I omitted the [flightsim.x] sections to shorten them up. I downloaded the original FAIB packages, and I don't see anything different from the ones downloaded by the AIG AIManager. There is nothing in the readme concerning fuel tank configurations, but it does mention that the wingflex lights are built into the model, like the other FAIB models. Anyway, if this is a limitation of the model, no biggie. I just wanted to ask just incase I was pooching something on my end! 🙂
  13. Hi, You could try asking here: PSXseeconTraffic for FSX | P3D - The AVSIM Community
  14. Hi, Using the AIGAIM AI package, I can't figure out why the B747-8 and B747-8F by FAIB are double strobe like an Airbus. I checked everything I know of in the aircraft.cfg: atc_type=Boeing atc_model=B748 in both and other things that may not matter to AILRB: ui_manufacturer=Boeing Also manufacture and type are in the title of the AI Entry. Is it just an 'FAIB thing' and everyone sees the same thing? Just curious. Thanks
  15. Good thing you kept going in that line...thought you needed the latest and greatest wife too!! 🤣
×
×
  • Create New...