alepro

I had a similar issue. I fixed it by deleting the ShadersHLSL folder in the P3D main directory (backup first, just in case), deleting the Shaders folder (as above) and then I reinstalled the P3D 3.35 Content and Client installers. Hope this helps...

I paid ~$86 which is a steal in my mind. Just visited KSFO and KPHX and it's amazingly well done.

Thanks a lot - that did the trick. Greedy me added all airports to the cart at once

Just wanted to pounce on this deal but I don't get the bundle savings: Copy & pasted from my sopping cart: Flightbeam KDEN $23.80, Flightbeam KIAD $23.80, Flightbeam KPHX $23.80, Flightbeam KSFOHD $26.99 Sub Total $98.39 Anybody know what I am doing wrong?

Sorry but how do you know that to be the case? The only factual information on that subject came from some of the old Aces team, who stated repeatedly that FSX did very well indeed, which is partially why they made an extension pack for it and resurrected the canceled Train Simulator project which is what they were working on when the axe fell. The decision to discontinue the franchise was simply an attempt to improve their bottom line by decreasing the head count during the GFC. Flight simulation was never a core business for FS so they pulled the plug on that. Don't get me wrong, personally I'm kind of glad they are gone since I'm hoping that someone a little more centered in the FS community will pounce on the void that has opened here, but claiming that FSX wasn't financially successful when in fact it was isn't going to improve our chances of getting a new sim.

Good news for Australians for sure. I'm glad ORBX were clear enough about getting out of the large airport scenery market so that others can deliver. What we now need is FlyTampa or FSDT to give us a Sydney scenery :Praying: . Please!!!

I just want a decent YSSY scenery. FSDT or FlyTampa would be my preferred choice for sure. I hope one of these two will come through this time around!

Sydney from FT would be heaven! I so hope they will do it!

Personally I tried it out since I do run an ATI card and was hoping for smoother performance, but unfortunately the mod messed up the water effects. I did have a try at fixing it and managed to improve it, but not quite to where it was without the mod so I rolled back. No harm in trying though and I have red plenty of positive feedback so full kudos to ******* for giving it a go. Btw, does anyone know what happened to him? I haven't read anything from him in a while.

I just downloaded the update and I'm a very happy camper. Full marks to Umberto and everyone at FSDT for taking customer feedback and offering up fast solution!

It is indeed. Requires the registered version.

I am wondering if this is a glitch somehow. Look at Seattle. That dot should be gray (as in FS2004 only), but clearly isn't.

Thanks for the detailed explanation Umberto!

Thanks for taking the time to respond Umberto. I have followed the DX9 vs DX10 argument and learned a little about the difference in memory management. My issue is that I have a few add-ons that don't work with DX10 and hence I don't use it. My concern is that I already have dialed down so many settings and still get OOM's with this scenery, when I am able to run 3 and more complex sceneries together. I mentioned the JFK example previously. I also am able to run Aerosofts EGLL, together with UK2000 Stansted and Gatwick, and London City - all with a complex aircraft such as the PMDG 747 (haven't taken the NGX there yet) and again with full AI and complex weather. If Vancouver really is bigger then those 4 sceneries together (despite the fact that CYVR has very few dynamic scenery objects), then maybe you guys have pushed the envelope a little to far in the graphics department. Don't get me wrong - I love the look, I love the dynamic shadows, and the night lighting is superb. But at the end of the day we have to live within the limitations of this aged and flawed sim we are using, and if this scenery is too much to handle for FSX/DX9 I'll have to uninstall it and cut my losses. Personally I'd prefer a "lower resolution/less complexity" alternative ala ORBX, which give me a control panel to customize the scenery to my needs and my computers abilities. Would that be something you would consider?

While this is well reasoned, this is not what is going on here. I am not running ORBX, Vancouver+, the NGX and am running the sim with texture_max_load of 1024, low res DXT3 clouds, the simple default weather theme and I still get an OOM within a few minutes of loading the scenery. I also have disabled the "force to use high resolution textures" option in the add-on manager. I do not have OOM's when I fly the NGX into ORBX, Aerosoft "Mega-airports" in Europe or any other FSDreamteam airports (I own all!). I can even fly into FSDTs JFK with Aerosofts Manhatten with the NGX while I also have Imaginesim's LaGuardia loaded and full Ultimate traffic AI and UTX night lighting active. I simply do not get OOM's. Ever. Until now, that is. There is an issue with the FSDT Vancouver scenery, and I'd like to see that addressed, otherwise I simply can't purchase any future releases. I regret not having tested the scenery trough the demo, but so far buying from you guys has been a no-brainer. Btw.: I am running this on Win7 x64, i7-2600 with 12GB ram and an ATI6790M 1GB.

I own every FSDT product, and never had an OOM, but using this scenery on a simple test flight (QW757, single light cloud layer, daytime, UTX, Ultimate Traffic, force high resolution textures disabled in the add-on manager, DX9, texture_max_load = 1024) I got one within 10 minutes. I own lots of other addon's such as the NGX, ORBX, and plenty of Aerosoft airports and I never had an OOM issue on my current setup. Something is wrong here and I hope it will get patched quick smart.

I have. I know that there is some appreciation for the QW, which led me to purchase, but some of the system omissions just seem lazy, rather then "simplifying" matters for the user as it is claimed (for this as well as a few other "lite" aircraft). But each to their own. If you don't want a detailed system model, then the QW might indeed fit the bill.

I have bought the CaptainSim 757 and the QualityWings 757 and to be honest I am disappointed in both of them. The QW doesn't offer nearly enough complexity for my liking and the CS isn't a whole lot better, plus there are still bugs present. There simply isn't a LevelD style 757 available today, so my advise would be to save your money.

Looks like the developers have reacted to some of the criticism and created a patch (to Version 1.10): The new update 1.10 from the German Airports Team contains the following changes: Optimization of apron, taxiway, runway, ground and night textures, added roads on apron, fixed 3D grass, fixed taxiway signs L4/L5, fixed flickering on Terminal C and further performance improvements. Customers can download the new full version as usual from the order history page of their customer account. There is also a separate update available from the support database. Good service!

I recently purchased the Qualitywings 757 to replace my CaptainSim 757, and unfortunately I have to say that I regret both purchases. The QW is just too dumbed-down to be enjoyable (to me at least, I know others like it), and the CS757 isn't a whole lot better, and still somewhat buggy for me. Should have stuck with the LevelD 767 and saved my money...

I'm so glad they saw the light on this one. It seemed to make no business sense at all to not make the A318/9/330. And if they get it right they'll have an instant best seller on their hand. Let's face it, we are getting rather desperate for a contemporary Airbus product.

You can enable a dx10 "preview mode" using their configuration utility, but it says that it is "day only". Personally I haven't tested it since I run Dx9 only.

My download finished eventually and after taking a quick look around the place my enthusiasm is a little damped. It's a faithful rendition of the real thing and dynamic traffic is excellent as always (thanks to Oliver Pabst), frames are good to great, and the atmosphere is right (great night lighting too), but the texture quality is not quite where it should be imho. For one the scenery is build on top of an arial photograph, as is usually the case for the German Airport Team. Trouble is that the resolution isn't very high and the photo was clearly taken in the afternoon as long shadows are present next to buildings and lighting poles. Unlike what FSDreamteam and Flytampa have previewed recently these shadows are not dynamic, so it looks quite odd depending on the time of day and weather. Generally the textures are lacking resolution, which becomes especially apparent when pulling up at a gate. No window reflections either, btw. Lastly I was expecting some more landmarks around the airport. Things such as the iconic televison tower and the Esprit stadium and the trade fair areal are completely missing in action. All this stuff was present since the FS98 days. Not sure why they didn't bother... Generally the scenery is not well embedded into it's surroundings. It ends almost exactly at the airport perimeter and textures don't blend, so the change is quite abrupt, especially since the ground textures of the airports are on the darker side (at least this time of year). I'm not unhappy with my purchase, but I do think it's time for the developers to re-acquaint themselves with some state of the art scenery modelling, particularly in regard to textures. These boys used to be the best, but time has moved on and there is so much more possible. Just my two cents. Edit: Jetways are static! You need two AES credits to get around that, which is on the lower side for such a big airport.

Duesseldorf is now out btw. I'd expect Dubai soon and I think Vancouver might come soonish as well. I have little faith left for a speedy release of the Airbus Extended, but I was hoping that PMDG would release by January. We'll see.

I have been waiting for this one a very long time: Aerosoft has just released Duesseldorf (DUS/EDDL): http://www.aerosoft.com/cgi-local/us/iboshop.cgi?showd,,12326_2 Now if one of their mirrors could kindly get over 50KB/s I'd be off flying :-) Btw. I'm not affiliated with the developers or publisher.