Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by Loke

  1. Jo Erlend, Stubborn me, but I still think the aprons are way too coarse, like sanding paper. And that detail1 texture...doesn't that one affect a LOT more than your airport? If memory serves, thats what I saw. I don't think it's wise to modify more than just the airport in question. I want my other textures to stay like they are. I think there must be an option to have smoother aprons...without doing anything to detail1.
  2. Trackrecords proves nothing to me. Absolutely nothing. My only proof is what I already bought, which are a few SLOW sceneries from AS, ESSA being one of them, until I removed the animated (stuttering) stuff. I only hope I can put my own Stavanger scenery to rest, wishing the upcoming scenery gives a frame rate as good as the excellent visuals, which of I'm impresed with.
  3. And still it is senseless, no way around that. It IS possible to do a commercial scenery with options for better frame rates. And more should also be done, to assure the airport is up to date with the latest navaids changes, and that navaids are correct. I know a tiny bit about such, after making 30 FSX airports... Before I buy these days, I therfore listen to the end-users of the scenery, not to salesmen or official reviews ;-) I am eagerly awaiting this scenery, but rock-hard investigation will be done before purchasing.
  4. Picture no. 10 from the start of this thread: I hope to see less angled taxiway centerlines in curves, if possible. I even prefer MS aprons with rounded lines, instead of such angled lines seen here. Lines are also a tad too angled at Gardermoen X.
  5. I purchased the rights to upload my final work to two servers, that's all. If any are to take over, they have to pay at least the same amount of money as I did; maybe even more, as I think payware and freeware might be two different worlds. Me, I am not going back to oldish FS9 tools in order to make better ground marking and such, waste of time. I am happy with Gardermoen as is. And I hope people would stop shouting about FS9. Who needs a "simulator" that "flies" an object along a vector. FSX is way better. All in all the MSFS series is a lie anyway...every "plane" is a tweaked Cessna. I hope MSFS dies and somebody else start making a decent sim. This is also the reason I don't put too much effort into MSFS in the future. Holding back, waiting...
  6. Yes, it was too bad not having a Gardermoen for FSX, and that is why I put all the effort into it. The airport is also very good-looking, with all the wood both on inside and outside. And from top-down, it looks like an oasis. It is inviting you to fly there! And it would make the missing connection to Værnes. Plus seventeen custom-made airports are in my AoN package, so there are much more than default only in Norway as of today. There are also a couple of airports from NA to choose from. Plus a very nice, upcoming photoscenery for Tromsø ENTC. I am currently working on a gmax terminal for that one. Slow going, but in progress
  7. Oh well, in that case, you should check out Airports of Norway 2.91 as well as the new 20cm Gardermoen photoscenery available at flightsim.no. I made that stuff, with a little help from my friends. Take a peek, this photoscenery cost me 2800 NKR and it is worth it. It's sharp from zero feet and all the way up. But that project is growing over my head, and I have not time to make it perfect. So go ahead and pass me. Because I have wanted Gardermoen with tons of extra details since Fly II (made Gardermoen for that sim too!). Bottom line: My Gardermoen scenery is FAST. So I challenge you to make it at least as fast as I have done, if you ever start on it that is
  8. I am sorry to hear about Dieter He made a difference, upping the quality, doing things right. I found out. For rudders, use exponential. For helicopters (tail rotor), use logarithmic. Thx for the link.
  9. Hello Shaun, You are quite right. Their home pages are, as I can see, more or less "gone", and those pedals seems to be a well guarded secret. What a pity, as the beat everything else in the market in quality and precision. I will research myself back to the correct curves to use, no problem
  10. I have been flying the top notch PMDG planes since Fly II. Now I fly ERJ-145 while waiting for the NGX. But even if they "have it all" I like to fly simple now and then, using VOR's and manual approach to get the feeling of the plane. Now I see the chance of getting a "decent" bus. So I am looking forward to this one...ready to purchase here!
  11. I use the excellent rudder pedals Simped Vario Pro/USB, without toe-brakes. I think they are about 6 years old by now. The manual is "subtle", and the shots of the curves almost unreadable. I have forgotten which curve to use (off course not linear, God forbid), but should I use exponential or logarithmic? I can not remember which one was for helicopters. If memory serves, I should stick to exponential. Cheers,
  12. Thank you, Shaun. My data is sent! Cheers,
  13. I just installed Stockholm Arlanda X, and now I want the patches. I boght it as download version from Flightsim.no. The installer name ends with FSX.v100.exe. When I try to register it your pages say "wrong mail or serial". I have double checked, and it is not wrong. Hope you have a solution! By the way. Is the stuttering at that airport fixed? I see stuttering, especially when an AI car is moving arround, very erratic in its moves. If you know a way I can stop it, that would be appreciated. Cheers,
  14. Oh thanks, I saw the other post about this to my surprise. It is not my eyes that are the problem, it is the processor (neurotransmitters) that interpret certain colours badly. I always truggle with those coloured letters at the doctor's office as well, and those letters are big Cheers,
  15. Bruce, OK that is your opinion. But no matter your opinion I don't give in to that fantasy the market decides for me. Why? Simple. I do not care about the market for a fraction of a second. If the market do not like I don't make it AES compatible, well, I just do not care. If this is a "problem" the solution is quite easy: Do not use my scenery! And if you do not I don't care anyway. So Bruce: You may think the market decides, and thats ok. I think different. Let's agree to disagree, because you can never turn me around anyway heheh! The "fantasy" says the market decides...but that will never have something to do with me and what I make. I am outside this, which feels great. Oh and by the way. Many users don't care about static contra dynamic. Some wants to fly in a movie. Others just wants to fly from A to B and just see a decent scenery, without it having to be like a Disney film, right? You have to understand this: Originally I made all this just to get a "decent" FSX in Norway, for myself only. I did not think about sharing for a split second. In time I understood I might be stupid of me not to share it with fellow simmers, and here I am :-) Not planned at all. Seems it grows over my head no matter what I do. Jo Erlend: I did not want to pop in here, in order to let your terrific scenery (which I have had the privilege of betatesting) bloom in this thread whithout interferring. But I felt I had to respond to a question. I respect hard work no matter if it is payware or freeware, and you know that. I highly recommend the Værnes scenery. It is incredibly good, and the landings from east can be quite a struggle (as my stomach tells me now and then real-life). Try it with Norway Scenic and Norway Quality Mesh. Suddenly you are very close to "Tongass" standards.
  16. First, take a peek at this thread: http://www.forum.aer...showtopic=27861 I think the comments are childish. I thought I knew some of the people there but obviously not. I develop Gardermoen ENGM for FSX, and have just finished all the gates with double-layer glasses. It has been a transparency Hell, and a very tough job, making things possible even if ACES broke transparency with SP2. I am a Freeware developer. I work half my life at sea, world wide, and often loose the net out there, meaning I have only half the year at home to nourish my hobby, not a full year like other people have. Check a few pics of the scenery here: http://www.flightsim...522424#comments No, I am not going to animate the gates. I already have ENGM with 14000 vertices and 16000 faces. I develop 16 other airports at the same time. I do all this alone. I am not even remotely interested in animation plus tons of extra work. So if you want animated gates, you'll have to make them yourselves, and do not blame me for saying no. This is my hobby and I decide. If the "market" should "decide" it is no hobby no more. AES looks nice (though I don't use it), and cheers to Oliver PS: You'll get three animated gates (50-51-53) anyway. Kindly delivered to you by Microsoft.
  17. Thx for the feedback, Shaun. I stubbornly maintain the Captchas (on many sites in general) are too difficult to read. Maybe it would help to make them a little bigger ByTheWay: Your F-16 is great, it reminds me of Falcon 4. I wonder if it would be possible to get a Norwegian one with only a few Sidewinders or Sparrows, and no extra tanks (also on the visuals)? I don't care much what's real or not regarding weapons load, just like flying "light". Preferrably a neutral livery, not a tiger. I also like things "clean" Cheers,
  18. I have purchased the F-16 for FSX, nice bird. But in order to get an update I had to make yet another login...adding to my soon two A4 pages with logins and passwords. OK I can survive that maybe. The issue that made me real mad is the stupid security code on the registering page. My eyes are quite good, but still I had to try 7 times before I got it right. I hope you can clear that ankward window up a little, so that people can actually read the code... I am now up to 1.21. Just want to mention, for the Norwegian 658 model, the ATC code is 685. I fixed it myself in the cfg. Cheers,
  • Create New...