Jump to content

OPabst

Developer
  • Content Count

    13370
  • Joined

  • Days Won

    80

Everything posted by OPabst

  1. Because we believe this topic has been answered we have closed it. If you have any more questions feel free to open a new topic.
  2. I only can say it for Ibiza: The Sim-wings Ibiza Professional Product for P3D V4, which has now also a Installer for V5, was selled after the new shop was in place, so if you don‘t have it in your order, you maybe have the old version which you can update with a reduce price to new V4/V5 Version. But you will not find a V5 Version in the „old orders“.
  3. Sorry Nixon, here is not the GSX support forum. But, even when hard to see on your PDF, the install Path GSX seams to report for Sim-wings Heathrow Professional looks like it is below c:\program files (x86), which is not the default path for addons in Aerosoft installers and absolut critical for Tools, which try to handle it. That you deinstall UK2000 after, not before you install another Addon for the same airport is critical too, but seams not to be the reason, why GSX fails. Please uninstall sim-wings Heathrow and change the install path on the page of the installer showing you the path to a directory like c:\P3DV4-Addons, outside pf any windows controlled system path. When this not help, contact the provider of GSX to explain you, what generate this error in there tool. (But it is funny, that GSX seams to try to create a file, that is part of another addon, which failed by the protection of Windows. In this case, Windows seams to work as expected, by the way.)
  4. Manuels are installed into the Mainfolder of the addons, are not part of the download Zip file.
  5. Any tool, which changes basic function of the Sim, like shaders, will effect the simulation, not always to the best. We only oriented to the default systembase of P3D and not to any manipulations.
  6. Because we believe this topic has been answered we have closed it. If you have any more questions feel free to open a new topic.
  7. No, there is no way in P3D to configure the use of runways based on the daytime. As the Option „both“ means, that both runways are open for Landing and Takeoff in the Afcad, the usage depends only on the wind direction. AI Traffic will use the runway which is the nearest one. So the realistic options are the others, but you need to select the correct one, before you start P3D, related to the operation time you fly there.
  8. I don‘t understand your problem. When a scenery is „technical deregistered“ there is nothing of the scenery to see, not only dynamic lights missing. You see the default or any other Addon you have installed for that Airport, which is maybe an issue itself. When you run the installer, the Registration is done automatically, when you finished the install of the charts and before you press the „Finish“ button in the installer. P3D must be stopped while install the addon, but that should be clear. To give us an overview, please make screenshots of all pages above the default enties of the World->Scenery Library Menu, save them as jpg and attach them here.
  9. Did you install the Addons below your Documents\P3D-V5 Addons folder? If so, deinstall them and use a Folder like c:\P3DV5-Addons as Installfolder for your addons. The Documents P3D folder are not usable for Addons, which register them via P3D Exe parameters. Also don‘t use folders below the Installfolder of P3D and Not a Folder below c:\Program-files or other windows system directories.
  10. Thanks Herman to clear it up. Only the „Groundtraffic Plugin and SAM plugin“ points to X-plane before. Have changed the title again, to make it absolute clear, base on other Products in the list. Maybe that could be used in future also for [P3D V4/V5] or [FSX] (when happen), so the naming of the Product will not generate confusions.
  11. Because we believe this topic has been answered we have closed it. If you have any more questions feel free to open a new topic.
  12. Because we believe this topic has been answered we have closed it. If you have any more questions feel free to open a new topic.
  13. Fix to Version 2.0.1.0 will be available via ASupdater soon as posible now.
  14. First, I could not reproduce any performance differences, when I change the Waterclass here. And that is what is to be expected. The name of the classdefinition is not relevant for anything within the Sim. And he don't render this class with "older" code. It is only a different parameter, based on the definition existing since long time. When you check the entries in the terrain.cfg you will see, that the only difference between the "Hydro_Polygons_Generic_Ocean_Perennial" named entry and the "Legacy_LandWaterMask_Water_NoFlatten" is the parameter ""FlattenMode=", which is in the Hydro_.... definition set to slope and in the Legacy... set to none The difference is only the the "Legacy_LandWaterMask_Water_NoFlatten" class, as the name says, don't flatten the mesh below the poly. Visual is no difference. So I don't see any reason, why this class should result in slow frames here. But, you can check it yourself. Make a backup of the LEPA_CVX-Terrain.bgl and replace it with the file in the attached zip. There I have change the class to Hydro_Polygons_Generic_Ocean_Perennial The file is not usable, as it flatten the cost, but to check if the frames are different, what I don't see here, you can make the test. When you remove the file, you will may not see the difference, as long as you don't go in detail. Without the file, the landclass of the island below the Photoreal ground of the scenery will be visable at some areas of the cost. The Waves are visable, but with the high resolution mesh it looks not very nice, if the waves will climb up the costline. You could not place the shoreline so exacly along the mesh of the cost, that it is looking good. So, I would not expect a differnce with the changed file, but as you seams not to use the default terrain.cfg (the texturenames are different to the original once), I could not say what changes on you system may be the reason for frame issues over the sea. Test Waterclass for LEPA.zip
  15. Eddf provide optional SODE Jetways with special Models based on real Types. GSX use Sode for Jetways too, so no need to use there not real Jetways for this Scenery. When you have problemes with GSX, please contact the developers of that Product.
  16. Because we believe this topic has been answered we have closed it. If you have any more questions feel free to open a new topic.
  17. The file system is not case sensitive. And now, we end the discussion here, otherwise I or Aerosoft send you an invoice about that. When Justsim is not „hurry with this“, then simple don‘t pay them for it (for you: don‘t buy there product). So last: no more questions about Sode internal issues and other product files here. For the moment, I look this topic.
  18. The question is, was is below the </Model> tag at the end of your „picture“. The next line should be the </Simobject> endtag, that close the <Simobject name=LTAI_Svet2“> starttag of this object. After that, the next <Simobject name=„LTAI_Grass“> should follow. But what we don‘t see, we could only make speculations. And, you know, that Justsim should solve your issues, you never could pay my invoice for that
  19. The picture is maybe not the best way to provide the issue and solve it, simple to attach the xml file here in the post could help better. 1.) The critical simobject is not shown completely, the end tag </Simobject> is missing. if it is not in the file, this could result in the issue, that SODE don‘t see the object with the name „LTAI_SVET2“ 2.) I don‘t know, if the naming in SODE is case sensitive, the ClientList has the Name in capitals, the Name of the Simobject is „LTAI_Svet2“, which is not the same, if the check is a case sensitive.
  20. Ja, habe mir EDDF und EGLL angesehen, da war noch eine nicht benötigte Probe drin, aber mit leerer ClientList <SimObject Name="EDDF" > <Placement Lat="50.033334" Lon="8.570555" Alt="110.95" Hdg="0.0" /> <Model SimTitle="12bPilot_SODE_Environmental_Data_Probe" > <EnvironmentalDataProbe ClientList="" /> </Model> </SimObject> Da macht die Warnung WARN SODE.XML : Environmental Data Probe 'EDDF': Listed Client SimObject '' does not exist in the XML! aber auch nicht wirklich Sinn, denn die interpretiere ich so, dass ein Objekt, das dort unter Clientlist gelisted ist, nicht im XML vorhanden ist. Bei eine leeren Liste nach einem leeren Objektnamen ('') zu suchen, passt das nicht wirklich. Wird aber bei LZKZ das gleiche sein, weil 'LZKZ_Kosice_rain' ist sicher wie bei EDDF der SimObject Name des Probe Objectes (wie bei EDDF), nach Listed Client SimObject steht ja auch nichts in den '' Anführungszeichen. Also eine Probeobject mit leerer Liste kann man einfach weglassen.
  21. Ok, had a look into the Avatar parts in V4.5 (is the same as in V5). The following step explain, what to do to use a Avatar beside the Aircraft to make your walkaround with it: 1.) Doublecheck, that the Enable Avatar Mode checkbox is selected und Options -> General 2.) While you select the Aircraft Vehicle, you can select the Avatar you want to use above the list (in V5 it is below as Mathijs shows on his screenshot) 3.) Check via Option -> Conrolls for the Key Assignments (1), enter in Search "Avatar" (2) and then check the Keycombi assigned to "Attach/Detach Avatar" (3), per default it is Ctrl+Shift+E 3.) When you sit in the cockpit, you now can press the the Keycombi (Ctrl+Shift+E) and the Avatar you select in Step 2 is generated beside the aircraft and you can now make your walkaround the aircraft. When you press the Keycombi again, you get back in the cockpit and the avatar is removed. I hope it helps and is what you have search for.
  22. I talk about EDDF and EGLL you have in your post, in case of LZKZ I am not envolved and did not see this Airport before. Ok, it is Aerosoft related, as they are the publisher here. And based on the name of the xml 'LZKZ_Kosice_rain' it could be expected, that in this case the Probe is needed. This developer needs maybe to fix it. But in case of EDDF and EGLL you listet too, no needs to fix anything. I have send Jeffrey (developer of SODE) an email, if he can remove the warning in case of no need of it and may change it to an Error, when a object is included, that needs the probe for it's function.
  23. No, you talk with the developer and he will not "fix" an non existing issue, only because the SODE code is generating a warning, simple not needed.
×
×
  • Create New...