tonywob

Moderator
  • Content Count

    3,954
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

2,159 Excellent

3 Followers

About tonywob

  • Rank
    X-Plane Forum Moderator

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Zielona Góra EPZG

Flight Sim Profile

  • Commercial Member
    No
  • Online Flight Organization Membership
    Other
  • Virtual Airlines
    Yes

Recent Profile Visitors

5,947 profile views
  1. It will probably make it for SP1. There are more POIs coming.
  2. You should enjoy that. Head up along the coast to Blackpool, lots of POIs to see. BTW did you finally get round to completing your PPL?
  3. Hope you enjoy it Peter 🙂 Warning, don't use it with 11.30b7, that one seems to have a nasty autogen popping bug.
  4. tonywob

    X-Plane 11.30 Beta is out!

    Thanks Nils Sadly, I've come to rely on xVision too much, so I'm not updating to 11.30 until that is updated as well. Seems like a game of cat & mouse at the moment 🙂
  5. tonywob

    Best overlay generator

    Ortho4XP doesn't generate overlays, it simply extracts them from the default scenery (or HD Mesh v4), so all it's doing is placing the default scenery objects on top of the orthoimagery. As for accuracy, well it's autogen based on low resolution land-usage data, so whilst it looks believable, it is obvious that it isn't accurate when comparing with the ortho imagery. The biggest problem I found with this approach wasn't the autogen, but rather the tree placement that can look quite messy. World2XPlane scenery on the other hand will use OpenStreetMap data to place buildings and forests (and optionally fallback to the default scenery where there is no data), so it's more accurate where data is available. However, the buildings don't look as nice unless you're using a ready-made W2XP scenery such as xEurope which has custom artwork for the buildings.
  6. tonywob

    Orbx True Earth for P3Dv4

    Quite a few assumptions and incorrect information going around in this thread. ORBX have not given up on P3D or lost interest. The apparent effort and interest in X-Plane is because there are new developers (including myself) working solely on TrueEarth regions and porting airports, they have not taken people off P3D to work on X-Plane as many are saying. The P3D versions of the TE regions are also being worked on, and it is not a shift in focus of the company etc..
  7. tonywob

    Nail in coffin AFS2...?

    Well, to be specific, creating TrueEarth regions is hard and time-consuming work. It took me many months to get the first part of England ready. In order to get more out at the rate customers expect, they need more developers. The developers will be simulator agnostic, since the work description is to help out on stuff that could be used on any sim (e.g. Editing orthos). As for details or specifics, I'm not allowed to discuss what products are coming and for which simulators, just that ORBX are in this for the long term 🙂
  8. tonywob

    Nail in coffin AFS2...?

    Your statement implies they are taking on 10 people to make products solely for X-Plane. This is incorrect, they are taking people on to work on TrueEarth regions which could imply all 3 simulators (they don't mention the simulator). ORBX are also looking for people who can convert airports to XP11, and these are seperate tasks.
  9. tonywob

    Nail in coffin AFS2...?

    This is incorrect. ORBX are looking for people to help on the TrueEarth regions, and people who can convert airports to XP11
  10. tonywob

    Nail in coffin AFS2...?

    Ah thanks Ed, then it's not the same survey that Navigraph alone did last year. So the results should be pretty interesting.
  11. tonywob

    Nail in coffin AFS2...?

    If this is the same survey Navigraph published last year then the survey would likely only be done by people who are aware of it or use Navigraph's products. Their customers are typically study-level aircraft users (or hardcore simmers), where the majority of these products run on P3D followed behind by X-Plane. Since there aren't any Navigraph products for Aerofly, the results would be pretty meaningless, and simply would be a survey of what sims Navigraph customers use. There are a lot of users we never hear from, who never post on forums, who probably just enjoy the default aircraft or one or two low-end addons. The userbase is probably bigger than we know, and really the only reliable way to get the real figures would be to have them from LM, LR and iPacs directly, which as far as I know, have never been published. Edit: Poor JV, seems everything he posts is subject to detective work and lots of scrutiny 🙂
  12. tonywob

    Gatwick for XP?

    This is because the PP airport doesn't have facade exclusions set, so you're seeing generic buildings from TrueEarth showing up. PP have said they are working on a fix to this, but also in the SP1 update for TrueEarth, all these generic buildings will be removed.
  13. tonywob

    Nail in coffin AFS2...?

    Nope, that's an important point to make and I hadn't realised this myself :). So then Steam stats might give a general picture, but by no means show the whole picture
  14. tonywob

    Nail in coffin AFS2...?

    Regarding the steam stats, FSX and X-Plane likely have significantly more than listed on Steam, since they're available outside of that platform. AF2 afaik is only available on Steam, so those stats would seem to hold more weight. Nobody really knows how many P3D users there are, but due to its price and general availability, my guess it's still behind FSX, but ahead of X-Plane.
  15. tonywob

    Nail in coffin AFS2...?

    I think the problem with this is that those freeware developers are still stuck using their SDK. There is presently no way to compile imagery without passing them to their SDK which is horribly slow. 3D models and placement files all need to be compiled via their SDK tools. I think the simple fact that iPacs won't document the native file formats greatly limits the creativity of many developers who are trying their best out of a bad situation. It took someone to play around with undocumented features to generate their own DEM/mesh because even that wasn't documented at all, and reading through their forum I get the impression that iPacs tolerate tinkering but really don't like it or encourage it. I often see these developers/enthusiasts requesting file format documentation, and the requests are always ignored.. You could argue that it's no different on P3D because that requires an SDK and intermediary file formats, however the SDK is very well documented, and the tools provided are generally fast and work well, and the developers will help out. From my work creating tools to generate scenery for both P3D and AF2, P3D is by far the easier and more pleasant sim to develop for. There is also a reason tools like Ortho4XP, World2XPlane exist on X-Plane, and that's because the file formats are open, documented and Laminar Research encourage it and help out. Not helping the freeware community out will only hurt in the long run, especially on such a young platform. The strong freeware community is IMO what has driven X-Plane forward to become something popular flight-sim companies want to develop for.