Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Donations

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

13 Neutral

Profile Information

  • Gender

Flight Sim Profile

  • Commercial Member
  • Online Flight Organization Membership
  • Virtual Airlines

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Wow. One has to wonder how much beta testing was done given all of those misplaced taxiway hatch marks.
  2. Yeah, that's all fine, except that in this case, it had nothing to do with my system or anything else on my end. The problem, as now acknowledged by the developers, is exactly as I described it to be. I wouldn't come on here and publicly accuse the developers of mislocating the airport unless I was sure that the developers had mislocated the airport. The developers have now acknowledged that they did, indeed, mislocate the airport, and are working to correct it. Massive kudos to them, as this sort of problem often goes unaddressed and uncorrected. I've been in this hobby for over 30 years since I "borrowed" a copy of MSFS3 from my then-girlfriend's father and installed it on my own home computer. I've built three full-scale simulators (two of them back in the days before it became "mainstream"). I think my post count of 17, 18 or whatever it is now shows that I'm not coming on here randomly throwing around baseless accusations, nor am I really interested in arguing with people who have a, shall we say, rudimentary understanding of how this software works. My original post on this topic was meant to serve as nothing other than a note of caution to other people considering this scenery, and nothing else. Now that the developer has acknowledged the problem and is correcting it, I don't think there's anything else left to be said.
  3. That's good (for you). It also doesn't mean that there aren't others out there having problems, and I don't think it's a good reason to start accusing people of having agendas or whatever. Anyway, as far as RNAV approaches go, 02C is the worst (offset probably about 100ft to the right of centerline). The biggest location shift is north/south though, by probably 300-400ft. If you position your aircraft on taxiway NC3 (the first cross-field taxiway north of the terminals) and juxtapose your position onto a Navigraph chart, it'll show your aircraft sitting inside the end of the Terminal 1 wings. These offsets, while maybe not a huge deal to those running stock P3D, definitely affect not only the people running live injected traffic, but also those of us who are running P3D as scenery generators and powering our setups with various different simulators. I have a 747-400 sim running Aerowinx PSX, which uses the NavBlue nav database, meaning that EVERYTHING including all ILSs and runways are positioned according to their real-world counterparts. That makes it pretty easy to realize when a P3D developer has displaced the airport, as when I load up 02C, the two right main landing gear are sitting in the grass; and when I load up 20R, the airplane is sitting in the grass 300ft prior to the runway threshold. Now, I'm not saying Imaginesim is alone in committing this sin. Not at all. As I mentioned, FSDT's CVYR scenery is a good quarter mile west of where it's supposed to be. Aerosoft's ENGM is offset north by a few hundred feet, enough to make the airplane take out the approach lights trying to do an autoland from one end, or float 1/3 of the way down the runway from the other. Simwings' PANC is the same. I guess the most encouraging thing is how many developers get it absolutely perfect, as I have about 600 third party airports in my sim and those are the only 3 with problems that I can think of off the top of my head. Most are pretty much perfect.. within a few feet or so either way, anyhow.
  4. From Imaginesim today on Facbeook: Just to keep you up to date. We're currently working with Navigraph to sync our new WSSS with their AIRAC cycles and correct the location issue. More news when we get it. They also state in the comments that the patch will hopefully be out in a few weeks. Kudos to Imaginesim for stepping up and fixing the issue. Also, those of you who felt the need to rudely attack those of us in this thread who pointed out a legitimate problem with this scenery can start apologizing now.
  5. For someone with over 2000 posts on here, you have a pretty poor understanding of how P3D works. When, in your undoubtedly long history of flight simming, have you ever seen a mesh, AFCAD, or scenery priority conflict that shifts an entire third party airport? These scenery objects are hard-coded to a particular lat/long and for them to haphazardly start shifting about by several hundred feet from system to system is impossible. The fact is that the airport is displaced on everyone's system, but many users aren't going to notice it because they're happily flying the built-in P3D ILS (which is also shifted) and their AI traffic follows the paths on the included AFCAD which is shifted yet again. It's only when one starts laying the airport on top of other non-shifted addons (such as Navigraph charts, the VATSIM Singapore guys' controller screens that were previously referenced or, in my case, flying ILS approaches in Aerowinx PSX) that the problem becomes apparent. Oh well, at least it's not FSDT's CYVR which is about 1/4 of mile west of where it's supposed to be.
  6. Sorry for the confusion. The PSX I'm using is actually the Aerowinx 747 simulation linked above. I have no experience with any PSXtraffic program or anything like that. The airport is definitely displaced and, in my case, the resulting problems have nothing to do with traffic. It has to do with flying the RNAV approach to runway 20C and breaking out of the clouds 100ft right of the runway centerline when one should be perfectly centered. The VATSIM Singapore guys have already put out a statement about the airport displacement stating that, while they'll attempt to work around it, it's really not possible for them to know which taxiway a user is on since their equipment doesn't line up with the Imaginesim airport. As mentioned upthread, their ZSPD scenery has the same displacement problem, which has never been corrected. It's a fine looking scenery, and most of the location problems are overcome by flying the built-in P3D ILS, which is shifted along with everything else, allowing for nice approaches. As approaches like LPV (which are RNAV approaches essentially with ILS mins) become more common, these offsets are going to become more problematic. The navdata in your sim, in that case, isn't going to shift just because the developer couldn't be bothered to put the airport in the right spot.
  7. I'm using PSX too, which is how I originally noticed it. Can you try putting the airplane on the threshold of 20C (in PSX) and report back? On my setup, that puts the right gear in the grass.
  8. The scenery looks great and all that, but the developers have mislocated the airport (I would estimate 100 feet west and 200-250 feet south of where it's supposed to be). This obviously isn't a big deal when using P3D's internal ILS, but it certainly is when flying RNAV/RNP approaches where the runways are misaligned. The problem also shows up when using Navigraph charts with Simlink. I was taxiing on NC3 earlier and Navigraph showed my airplane crashing into terminal 1. Really disappointing.
  9. I'm certainly no FSDT fan*boy, but blaming them for ORBX Socal's performance shortcomings is asinine. Socal grinds most systems to an immediately unflyable state whether FSDT LAX or anything else is installed or not.
  10. 1/2 refresh rate in NVI has no effect on P3D as this only works with applications that run in true full screen mode (not borderless window mode as P3D runs). Limiting frames is what's keeping your sim smooth, as it's essentially limiting the output to half your 60Hz refresh rate anyway.
  11. Well, the title of the thread is KGPI Previews, so....
  12. Looks fantastic! Can't wait to fly in there!
  13. Any AM setting on my i4790K with HT on (116 seems the "best") increases FPS by probably 10-20%, but causes very noticeable stuttering, especially once away from the airport at higher altitudes and speeds. I'm willing to live with slightly lower FPS (I run at 50Hz which locks the FPS at 50, and I maintain that 99.9% of the time) to avoid the terrible AM-induced stutters.
  14. I had a lot of blurries that were frustrating me to no end, as they were happening when sim performance otherwise was smooth as silk. One day after months without success, the lightbulb went on and I changed my mesh resolution from 1m to 5m (there's no 1m mesh in P3D anyway). Boom, blurries resolved.
  15. Installed both the city and airports earlier. What fantastic scenery. No noticeable impact on FPS either. I did have a pretty large patch of missing autogen on the hills overlooking BFI (northeast side of the airport). I'm using T2G KSEA, layered below the new Drzewiecki scenery as mentioned up-thread, and managed to solve that by deactivating the KSEA-TERRAIN entry for the Taxi2Gate scenery. No noticeable ill effects around KSEA after having done this.
  • Create New...