Jump to content

Artur Munteanu

Members
  • Content Count

    165
  • Donations

    $0.00 
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1 Neutral

About Artur Munteanu

  • Rank
    Member
  • Birthday 04/27/1969

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Italy
  • Interests
    love my wife, my dog and my cats!

Flight Sim Profile

  • Online Flight Organization Membership
    Other
  • Virtual Airlines
    No

Recent Profile Visitors

797 profile views
  1. Does this work only with IPad? With Android not?
  2. So it's different from 777? Because the manual say:"The transponder mode selector is defaulted to TA/RA in the 777, as this is commonly used even on the ground now since most airports 777s operate at use airport surface detection equipment (ADSE) to track aircraft on the ground."
  3. This is exact what I mean! The external model is already there, the cockpit also, just the panel VC no. So it's not a new one, but I would say more an "expansion" form 737NGX. Also having no data yet, this is something else... My question was: (with all data by the hand of PMDG) could be possible to make the expansion for 737NGX or it has be done a new product from the begining?
  4. Well I don't think is so complicate... It need only a new VC and some little modification on wing model.
  5. Just wondering... Is there any chance that PMDG would give to the simmers this?
  6. Why is NDP-1505 and not JEP-1505? :o Does it make some difference? I allways have JEP both on PMDG and Aerosoft NavDbB.
  7. Why do you put another post with the same issue? I already answer to you in you're previous post.
  8. Anyway, here we talk about an error created by something wich has been caused by an unknown factor. So if I think IMO, in this way: Did PMDG has something to do with false terrain allarm? - NO Did Airac cycle has something to do with false terrain allarm? - Maybe Did the scenery airport has something to do with false terrain allarm? - NO Did RAAS has something to do with the false alarm? - Maybe Did Make runaway tool has something to do with false terrain allarm? - Maybe So if proceed with the elimination, and do like Sherlock Holmes says: "Eliminate all other factors, and the one which remains however improbable must be the truth.", maybe someone could find the node of this issue.
  9. Well... I must say that there is something wrong with the airac cycle, because there is no way that on 30R/12L rwy you have that lenght! The 14275 is the lenght of the 30L/12R!!! "Dubai Airport has two runways, 12R/30L is 4,450 m × 60 m (14,600 ft × 200 ft), 12L/30R is 4,000 m × 60 m (13,120 ft × 200 ft)." (wiki), Also you can look at all charts for Dubai Intl. I don't know what to say, there are too many variables wich don't mach. Is true that the scenery for Fly Tampa has an expanded area, but cover most of the city of Dubay, but was only aded the photo scenery and buildings, but not the terrain moddelling. And however the airport area, is plan without buldings or hills (it's desert there and sand on Dubai :rolleyes:), so I don't think that the scenery is the problem.
  10. I've try to look deeper into this problem. There is another add-on wich use the runaways.xml file created with "make runaways" tool form the root of FSX :RAAS. As indicated in the manual of RAAS, after you install a new scenery, to avoid incorect calls problem of runaways or maybe not playing the advisory, you have to run this tool "1. Run the MAKE RUNWAYS tool to refresh your runways database". So I open the file created by "MakeRwys" tool wich is "runaways.xml", and at the same runaway on OMDB - 30R - found this: OMDB,0302,25.247707,55.380978,34,300,13143,110.90 As you can see here is 34 and not 32. But a very little difference, I mean we talk about 2 feet, could cause the incorect Terrain call? The difference is bigger with the 30L runaway: ARPT_RWY.dat (navdata folder pmdg) is: RW;30L;25.235919;55.394881;60;11130;300;300;14590 runaways.xml (root fsx used by RAAS) is: OMDB,0301,25.235296,55.396034,34,300,14606,111.30 Here we talk about 26 feet difference! And this put on another logic question: Did RAAS have something to do with the false terrain allarm? :o
  11. I have this problem on OMDB (Fly Tampa) at runaway 13R aproach. So I've look into the files that you mention, but the altitude is correct in both (and so for all other 3 runaway at OMDB): wpnavapt: OMDB30R13123300 25.247708 55.380933110.9030000032 arpt_rwy.dat: RW;30R;25.247708;55.380933;32;11090;300;300;13123 And stiil have false terrain alarm. As I mention at the begining at this topic, this issue have started after I upgrade the airac cycle to 1502. The wierd thing is that if I downgrade the airac cycle to 1408 the issue dissapear. So I'm not so shure that the two files wich you mention are the problem. What do you think? BTW: the numbers are identical in both files no matter wich airac cycle I use (1502 or 1408).
  12. Can be used with I-Pad like aerosoft did with MCDU Airbus X Connect Extended?
  13. Ah ok, because the FSX aircraft is for real! I understand...
  14. Have you ever been in a real simulator? Well I do. In Italy at Thiene (VI) I pay my 80 euros for one hour fly with 737 NG and made my flight. The software wich simulate the outside cockpit view dosn't has anything else that empty airports, there are no cars, no boats nothing else but very accurate aiports design and land. Nothing else, not even AI traffic. And I say that I don't use the default FSX airport vehicles, NOT that I don't use airport vehicles. As I fly only in payware airports, they have thei're own ground traffic, so I don't need the FSX ground vehicles. Take a look here to see the simulator wich I talk about: I used DX10 for 2 years with DX10 fix, but when I start to use some Fly Tampa airports, I have to quit, because the scenery from fly tampa aren't compatible at all with dx10, and the fix dx10 doesn't fix anything on they're airport scenery. It still remains black runaways with no texture, vehicles airport white with no texture, etc. Even PMDG suggest NOT to use DX10 in FSX. So I don't use it.
  15. This is true, I read about this issue on WOAI forum, but I don't use shadows, for planes and also I don't use shadows for scenery object. You know, reading all this about the difference for the two AI addons (WOAI and UT2), you make me think at an important problem that I didn't mention. And this was really a coincidence! In the same days, wich I has the new version of 737NGX and try some fly with 777, I made some modification for AI traffic: I start to import models from WOAI in UT2, I mean manual install in fsx, and some route database with power pack, because I wanted to substitute some of the daedalus planes wich wasn't present in UT2. Then (now that I think and turn on my steps) I remember that the OOM started right after that. Now I wonder if using WOAI models of planes in UT2 has something to do with that. There seems to be a lot of difference as you say betwen the models airplanes use. Infact when I was using the UT2 I've notice on airplanes imported from WOAI blac disk instead of engine, now that I use only WOAI, it seems to me that the engines are coming back. So, I think that yes, can use UT2 with AI model from WOAI, but maybe some issue like OOM and various crashes can occure. Infact since I've start to import AI models in UT2 I've never encounter OOM, now that I remember, and on the other side now when I'm using ONLY WOAI the problems dissapeared. I mean the right solution can be : don't mix them toghether or to be more clear don't use AI models plane imported in UT2 from WOAI? What do you think?
×
×
  • Create New...