hero93

I experienced the UDP error around 0910 UTC today at EDDM. It was gone at 0930 UTC but reproduceable when offseting the time in RealTraffic.

I can assure you we take always a lot of time optimizing the AFCAD, especially for AIG traffic! In this case it was an error introduced shortly before the release due to a misunderstanding which was sadly not caught during beta. Takeoffs were of course working during development. I am very sorry for this and a fix will be provided.

Try a lower mesh resolution (about 5-18m), Maybe it is an interpolation error.

@padrot Keep in mind that when you apply the changes while the simulator is already running there is a transition phase with mixed runway assignment. It can take up to half an hour to settle, or reload your AI.

I had the very same problem with the Aerosoft Professional Version of LSZH (DLL version 1.0.0.3). Great tool btw! Many thanks!

Under "Windows ProgramData Path for P3D" in the settings menu "Program Config Path" I link to a custom folder where I have a copy of the scenery.cfg created by the LorbySceneryExporter.

Hi Roland, I still use your AI Controller 1.4 and it works satisfying with P3D v4.52. Is there a setup where AI Controller can be used in combination with your new tools or will they interfere? In my opinion there is nothing more exciting than AI following SIDs and STARs, so this has the highest priority for me.

I really enjoy the modern approaches you use and how flawless they work. It would be most convenient if the base color could be specified with a HEX Code or similar to match the operator's Corporate Identity. But I don't know the effort this would require.

Oh man, just repainted a bunch of the GSX vehicles in custom colors. I should have waited a bit longer. I wonder if the base colors can also be changed parametrically via DirectX now, as the pushback truck has a bit more complicated scheme now.

Yes

Had the same problem. There is a thread somewhere in the Lockheed forum. I had to set the autogen draw distance to medium to see autogen at the destination. I hope they'll fix that,

Do you know a workaround when the aircraft all stay too long to high and start the final approach too late so they land way too far at the middle of the runway. I tried it with custom Approaches (via the Converter) and the files you provide (My Problem is at SFO).

I don't really see myself as a commercial member of the community. Developing AFDs is like another hobby for me, that I get occasionally payed for. I am not part of any company and I don't make money by selling Add-On Products.

Ray, as the developer of the Flightbeam and some other payware AFDs I want to comment this briefly: First of all: Did you experience any real problems with the AFD while simming, or did you just run the fault finder? Those errors you mentioned are relative, when we produce the AFD for an airport with custom ground poly we don't use the links as intended. We add way more nodes to ensure the AI aircraft are taxiing on the centerline, thus there are overlapping nodes at some complex intersections. But those are not errors, as otherwise the AI would taxi via shortcuts or off the centerline. The maximum holdshort distance has some tolerance. The fault finder will of course use the minimum, but its sometimes necessary to nearly reach the limits. And as others already wrote, this is only important at the runway ends, as the AI won't get the takeoff clearance if they are too far from the runway. At the middle runway intersections, those errors are irrelevant and at a large airport like IAD with four runways you might get a large number but it doesn't say anything. There are sadly lots of limitations and problems with FSX (i.e. runway usage). Be sure those faults are the smallest concern in AFD design. When I am in the progress of developing the AFD. I run the fault finder every 30 minutes and fix the real mistakes. I spend hours simply monitoring the AI movement, searching for the important problems and trying to increase the traffic flow. At all Flightbeam airports also the service roads are traced in the AFD so GSX works as intended, this sometimes produces more node related error messages which are irrelevant. About Aircraft Parking and Gate description: By using specific gate types we prevent displaying of the default service vehicles independently from the user settings. There is a big limitation on gate identifier. All Traffic Add-Ons use different aircraft properties (wing span, Airline Codes,...). It is impossible to match every users AI. Our priority in parking distance is the user aircraft, as there is less variety and to ensure you don't start your flight inside the terminal. I have to agree with you all, that there are a lot of bad AFDs even from the "big players", but a lot of problems you adressed are because of limitations we sadly can't change. If you have any other specific questions I am glad to answer them. Sorry for my bad English and grammar, it's late...

Maybe you could get in contact with the ADE developer and develop a new AFD-Standard and a future ADE Version could convert the default AFDs.

while AIMonitor is running press Alt + Space to get a menu with the option to maximize the Window. First of all, thank you for your great software. It is really improving the Simulator Experience. I will try to be more specific later. First I will test your software some more. Looks like it already resolved this issue. Maybe it is possible to get AI Controller parse the standard Track-Information for NATs, PACOTs and AUSOTs, to have even more realistic Flights?

Quick Question: Can you anyhow control the Landing Runway Selection or force an early go around, when a special runway was selected?

I use a lot of traffic and recognized no loss on framerates with FTX Global. They just changed textures!

N60JB, The default AFCAD of RKSI is stored at Scenery/1002/scenery/AP81180.bgl and when something went wrong while compiling or if Ken used an unusual way to import it, it is possible, that the default AFCAD is still somehow dominant. So Ken: What AFCAD have you used to edit with ADE and how did you open it? Have you MyTraffic installed? Because then there will be a duplicate AFCAD in the MyTraffic Folder which can "overwrite" your custom AFCAD.

Well, now you will have a duplicate AFCAD. What AFCAD have you started with? The default one? You can either try to add an exclusion rectangle in ADEX and excluce all, or deactivate the default AFCAD, by changing the *.bgl extension in something like *.off or *.bkp.

Great Video, indeed! You can watch it here.

Add the File to the following folder: Microsoft Flight Simulator X\PMDG\FLIGHTPLANS. Than you should be able to load the Plan via the FMC.

Hi, first of all I want to thank all those talented painters who contribute so much to our community, but: Every time I add a new livery to one of my aircraft I have to add the parking codes myself to the aircraft.cfg. Of course it is no big deal, but I wonder why the painters don't add the codes, as they release all the other cfg entries? It is so simple, just add the line: atc_parking_codes=*ICAO code of the airline*

There is a new video on youtube. It makes me hope, that it will be released very soon. It is in german, but maybe you want to take a look at it:

<br /><br />Just use FSX ATC. When it wants to vector you to the airport, use the ATC Menu to choose another Approach.<br />Don't choose an ILS Approach as it is bugged and only supports transitions from VORs.<br /><br />Choose a RNAV or GPS Approach and then you can choose a proper transition for your STAR.<br />ATC gives you an direct to your selected Transition, and when you arrive there it hands you over to the Tower.<br />You can still fly an ILS Approach, ATC just doesn't use the phrase.<br /><br />That is maybe not very real, but it gives you all needed freedom to fly your Approach and STAR and lets you use your AI Traffic and Schedules.<br /><br />This, of course, works only when the Approaches and Transitions are listed in the AFCAD, otherwise you could add them yourself with ADEX.<br />Airports which support this method are e.g. all airports by Flightbeam, Montreal by FlyTampa or Helsinki by A-Flight.<br />(There are surely a lot more but I don't know exactly as I edit all AFCADs myself)