radeon29

yes, there is a tag there(below under the spoiler I posted more .xml code). yes, but they are not in a hurry with this, and I myself am interested in finding a solution, thanks for helping. it is interesting, it looks like it really is so but not in all cases, a riddle... I changed only: LTAI_SVET to LTAI_Svet2 and now there are no warning now: --- but why then no warning for LTAI_SVET, because the naming(letter size) is different(.xml=LTAI_SVET, SimObjects=model.LTAI_Svet)?:

I also thought about it, I specifically conducted this tests and it turned out that it does not matter. you made me think again and oops, it turned out that on the contrary there was an excess tag, because it was already higher then it is not needed again: or did i do it wrong? p/s yes, I did it wrong, this is another SIM object and I should not have deleted the closing tag: ERROR SODE.XML : Failed to load file 'C:\ProgramData\12bPilot\SODE\xml\LTAI.xml

yes, I already fixed it for myself, although setting AcftType = 'NOT DEFINEDALL_ACFT' I think was intentionally done by the developer(this was done intentionally for some purpose), but it doesn't seem to work correctly... I already fixed it for myself, the problem was a text error, tag closing was not performed correctly: ; "/> was "/> should --- I have a more serious problem, neither I nor the scenary developer(AS non developer this) knows the solution, everything looks right, but we get a warning: WARN SODE.XML : Environmental Data Probe ‘LTAI’: Listed Client SimObject ‘LTAI_SVET2’ does not exist in the XML!

ok, I’m waiting, will be good if the soda developer, can remove the warning, I also wrote him, thx!

the developer of specifically this scenary is Maxim, he said that he is looking for a problem, I already found this: extra characters caused a problem... SODE warnings are probably not just(senselessly) created?

Hi Oliver ! yes sorry, the first one by mistake, this refers to JustSim. the second problem is exactly your scenario, I already fixed it, I already wrote to the developer, I think he will soon find it the same. well let's call it a problem, but no matter how we call it, it should not be... I fixed it myself, I think the developer will see this message and make a fix for everyone.

Yes, the new soda has been substantially changed, newest AS scenary for P5 now give an error: EDDV [13:03:56.846] DEBUG SODE.XML : Building List from File 'C:\ProgramData\12bPilot\SODE\xml\JustSim_EDDV_VDGS.xml' [13:03:56.848] WARN SODE.XML : [VDGS] SimObject 'VDGS GATE 16', Stop@22.600000: AcftType='NOT DEFINEDALL_ACFT' is not supported by SODE! --- LZKZ [13:03:56.903] DEBUG SODE.XML : Building List from File 'C:\ProgramData\12bPilot\SODE\xml\LZKZ_Kosice_rain.xml' [13:03:56.903] WARN SODE.XML : Environmental Data Probe 'LZKZ_Kosice_rain': Listed Client SimObject '' does not exist in the XML! --- EDDF [13:03:56.746] DEBUG SODE.XML : Building List from File 'C:\ProgramData\12bPilot\SODE\xml\AJS_EDDF_SODE.XML' [13:03:56.747] WARN SODE.XML : Environmental Data Probe 'EDDF': Listed Client SimObject '' does not exist in the XML! --- EGLL [13:03:56.761] DEBUG SODE.XML : Building List from File 'C:\ProgramData\12bPilot\SODE\xml\AJS_EGLL_SODE.XML' [13:03:56.762] WARN SODE.XML : Environmental Data Probe 'EGLL': Listed Client SimObject '' does not exist in the XML! --- It seems that testers did not check these scenary with soda, although the release of the new soda was a very long time ago, already on May 12!

Hi! I have not performed this procedure for a long time and just forgot it ... what actions must be performed in order to be MCDU offered optimal cruise altitude in case of activation of an alternative route?

Yes, I know this, usually use the base airport elevation. in this case, because there is a high elevation difference between the runway 96 to 37ft, this is probably the right option, ok...

Aerosoft 49ft Correct 95ft please check it.

Yes,it is🙏 Or🤗 I suggest just adding a second AFCAD to switch it through the configurator before starting sim. For your part, only make a new AFCAD with an angle of 3.2, and I will set all other navigation as in truth. How do you like this idea?

One of the problems has been fixed in the latest update, but nothing was said about papi angles? How to switch them from 3.2 to 3.0 (and vice versa)? unrealized?

i confirm, in the latest update, DME was added but the problem of markers is not solved;)

nevertheless you can use my adaptation for P5, but you will need the original installer and recording prepar3d v3 for install the scenary base: -fixed navigation aids and ILS -fixed vector data -default bridges excluded -added wind socks and glide transmitter -add Dynamic Lighting (credit to inibuilds) https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1pvhuBK9fZSZHq6ogQ7gTqrlTGtLAb9JV?usp=sharing

use this free utility to find conflict easily: https://www.aero.sors.fr/hfiles/BGLFacilityScanner.zip