Mike...

I got my pre-order in for the PFP 3N after a couple of days of trying. From the EU site, as I'm in the EU, free shipping. I didn't have to pay?! I need to pay when the sale starts... I'm thinking this is going to take a while. 😁

Yeah, noticing that as well, 80% GPU. The spinning circle on the login queue page is buttery smooth. 🤪

Installation went pretty smooth, nearing 200 Mbps at one point. However, now stuck in the queue as well. They should've seen this coming. Maybe they should've lowered the download speed... More time in the download queue and less time in the game queue. 😁

They couldn't provide a button for that? 😉

Just did my first flight with BATC. Basic voices are good enough for me. Don't use my own voice, just auto-respond and auto-tune. KATL/08R SMLTZ3 WALET DCT ZJAYX GRNCH5 KMCO/35R BATC said default KATL contains bad taxi data, so had to taxi at my discretion. Told me to go to 26L, while everybody was going to the opposite end (BATC should at least read which direction AI is going). Wind check, 145 at 8... No ability to change callsign in the software. No reload function in the software. Had to close and restart BATC several times... Visual approach to 35R. Heading left to 130, then right 155 again shortly after, then left 95 and then intercept localizer. That's a 90 degree angle, is that normal? Forgot to acknowledge runway in sight so it had me go around, landed anyway. Reloaded BATC to get taxi instructions, could only select pushback and startup. Not really impressed, this is too early access.

Spook, I think you're still not following... Kiwi recently purchased LHBP (for FS9), he was offered to download v1.00. When news of this update reached him, he checked and found the 1.50 update. He thought it was the v2 update, but in fact, 1.50 was released in July of 2009. So... he started out praising Aerosoft for updating their older product, but now he's understandably surprised that his original download was not completely up-to-date in the first place.

Guys, the FS9 1.50 Update has been available since July 2009... It has absolutely nothing to do with v2. There are no plans to release a "v2" FS9 update/upgrade at this time: http://forum.aerosof...-to-version-200

Bob, the point is, how are you going to have arriving AAL traffic use only 8L/26R? The rest is of less importance. That simply can't be done without resorting to my above suggestions. Unless you close all other runways for landing of course, but then you're going to have a lot of arrival traffic on that one runway...:(

You don't understand the original question. Allow me to quote an earlier post: The answer to that is, no, not really. Note that I did not say, no, period. Because if you have a lot of time on your hands, you could theoretically pull it off. But it has nothing to do with closing certain runway ends for certain operations, nor with the crosswind tutorial.For this to work, you'd have to make a fake airport and use a fake ICAO code for it in your Afcad editor of choice. Then you'd recompile your American Airlines traffic file, after changing the KMIA code to your fake new code, say XXXX. XXXX would sit at the same coordinates as KMIA, but it would only have one runway, 8L/26R (or a departure runway as well). That way, you can send all AAL traffic to that one runway. The real challenge is "merging" KMIA and XXXX together, so you don't get an "overlap". For example, you'd close 8L/26R in the KMIA Afcad. Because FS sees it as two different airports, it will let AI land on the same physical runway at the same time... You'd also remove the AAL parking spots from the KMIA Afcad and add them to the XXXX Afcad, to make absolutely sure the same physical space is not occupied by two aircraft. You do the same with certain taxiways, etc...So as I said, lot of time on your hands, expertise in these matters, it could work, but there's no quick and practical solution.:(

To answer the original question. No, not really.

I agree. Doesn't take a lot of time and it can be done for free if needed. Anything is better than nothing, IMHO. And that has nothing to do with rights or entitlement or whatever, it's the decent thing to do. (Like we are polite to the devs, well, most of us...) Even if you say, "you all suck, I'm done", I can respect that.:(

There is a PDF included with ACA2005, called "Documentation", have you checked it out? It's a good start.

Sure thing.:(

I suspect you have duplicate titles. So sorting them out is your main priority. You could keep clicking on OK, there may be that many duplicates, but an alternative is to download ACA2007 Light. It's not an update or replacement to ACA2005, but it should allow you to do a quick scan, sort out some issues and then hopefully go back to ACA2005.You are using the latest version of ACA2005, right?

Wasn't Simflyers working on KMSP and/or KBFI?

You're welcome.:(

Yes, ACA2005 is your tool. Download it from here: http://aifs2.pvdveen.net/?page_id=5It's an AI enthusiast's best friend.It should be pretty straightforward, but if you have any questions, feel free to ask.:(

A much improved ATC/AI engine. Or at the very least well documented access to those systems through the SDK, so third party devs can address longstanding and well documented issues with the aformentioned.I will not be buying Flight on release day like FSX for example, which has been collecting dust pretty much ever since. AI enthusiasts will be looking into Flight from day one, I have to like their findings or like the reviews of an ATC/AI addon, before I take the plunge myself. Flight sure looks pretty, but it has to deliver on so many other levels before I get excited.

Can you be specific?

+1, difference is considerable.

There's a great deal more to parking spot assignment by the AI/ATC system, than simply matching up aircraft radius (defined in the model) and gate radius (defined in the Afcad). Both are highly customizable by the way.I suggest you start with reading the documentation included with AFCAD and/or ADE. Especially the AFCAD readme goes into some detail, look for the section called "35. Parking Assignments for AI Aircraft". As you can see, radius is but criterion number 4... So there are other things to look at before saying radius is the problem and/or solution.You must also look at what kind of spots are available in the Afcads. There simply may not be enough appropriately sized GA and military spots. Which will force those aircraft to other spots. Or the aircraft may have the wrong atc_parking_types set. Etc...

Well, I didn't want go into it, but the following: Is perhaps making it quiet. I've been here for a while now and have witnessed many public pressure threads, heated as though they may have been at times, they all went on. If you have had a different experience, then perhaps you've gone about it the wrong way.:smile:I can't imagine this topic, about a configurator and lack of support for FS9 (even though the addon for it is still being sold? I've been through it myself. They sell it at full price, you buy it at full price, but full support, nope), deleted and you locked.

To complete the set, here's a shot with old style FS Genesis Mesh.I think they're pretty close with the newest mesh having the edge. Whether or not to go for it if you already have mesh, depends greatly on your flying habits, IMHO.:(

I think it's time to name that dev and put some public pressure on them.:(

I think better would be a comparison of old mesh vs. new mesh. I have no doubt the new mesh is great. But for all these years, we've also been raving about the old mesh, so surely it was somewhat great also. Unless you're familiar with a spot, like you are, is one really gonna notice a huge difference? Justifying the cost. Especially with the NextMap stuff, not available as part of a subscription.:(