" Missing " textures when installing the A320NEO CFM

[John Glanville 821]

Just received this PM an to be honest had never noticed this before now but there again I spend more time painting than flying the Bus anyway .

 

• TheKordulka
•   
• John Glanville

Hello sir. I find a bug in your repaints. Look for the screenshot  pls . Back interiors of fuselage. Fix it pls. regards

Please login to display this image.

 

 

This is not a bug but an oversight on Aerosoft's part as the textures are not included in the Base textures . It all goes back to the addition of the A320 CFM sharklets model that was an update for the AirbusX . The A320 CFM has the only textures where NEO is added to the texture names when sharklets are used .When uploading repaints it is " normally " only needed to upload the paint textures , all others are taken from the Base textures folder ( this is why there is a texture.cfg )  .

There are two solutions to this " problem " .

1. COPY the following textures : AIRBUS_EX320NEO_INTERIOR_C.dds and AIRBUS_EX320 NEO_INTERIOR_L.dds from the Texture.Aerosoft_DAERO_SHARKLET folder and PASTE them into the folder where the textures are missing .

2. COPY the same textures : AIRBUS_EX320 NEO_ INTERIOR_C.dds and AIRBUS_EX320 NEO_ INTERIOR_L.dds from the Texture.Aerosoft_DAERO_SHARKLET folder and PASTE them into the Aerosoft Airbus A320_A321 Base\Texture_Fallback_A320 folder .

 

Maybe something to add to the TO DO list for SP4 .

 

 

[LeCoyote 42]

Hi,

 

Just out of curiosity, where does one get the NEO? As far as I can tell, the Airbuses sold by Aerosoft are equipped with the standard IAEV2500 and CFM56, NOT the CFM Leap or the PW 1000G. Is there a different product that has the NEO?

[Edit] Ok apparently the so-called "NEO" is the Airbus X 320 with standard CFM engines and sharklets, so not a NEO at all

 

Cheers

[John Glanville 821]

And the point of your post is ? As far as I can see , it has absolutely nothing to do with missing textures , or a possible other solution .

That Aerosoft decided to use the term NEO ( as in NEW ) for the sharklet version expansion back in 2010-2011 for the AirbusX has of course been commented on often enough in the past and by using the SEARCH function you could have discovered this all by yourself , without having to comment in an unrelated topic .

Instead of " splitting hairs " about the naming of a model , just be grateful that the " sharklet " model was added in the first place .

 

[LeCoyote 42]

I was just genuinely curious in case I had missed a different product. Thanks for the unwarranted flame, sorry for not having read the entire forum before posting a factual comment. Gees.

[John Glanville 821]

Funny how you are able to alter functions for the Bus but can't find your way around the site or use a Search function . As for your " factual comment " , again , what does that " factual comment " have to do with missing textures ?

If what I wrote is considered to be " flaming " , try reading some of your earlier posts . You were not exactly being diplomatic with your choice of words regarding Aerosoft's lack of urgency in fixing issues that you find important . The Bus is without doubt , totally unflyable without having the cabin temperature issue fixed amongst  others . You are of course totally ignoring the statement made several times by Aerosoft that any improvements made during development of the A330 will be implemented ( where applicable ) into the A320 / 321 after the A330 is released with SP4 .

 

It's been posted elsewhere that we have to make allowances for new members but being " new " to a forum does not limit the ability to read ( as far as I know ) and when reading a book you don't start on the last page , so why do it here ? Lots of pages ? Your time more important than others who do take the time to read ?

 

If you have an issue with a post there is a " Report post " button next to the time stamp .

[LeCoyote 42]

"A320 Neo Aerosoft" yields 2385 results, most of them about repaints. I am sorry to say I did not read all of them and failed to see the post you are referring to. You are, however, wrong to assume I did not search.

 

I was fully aware my initial question was only remotely related to the topic of this thread. I was only hoping the off-topic aspect of my question would be overlooked. Clearly, I was very wrong. I found the answer to my question soon after asking it and thought I would edit my post just in case. In your view, that was clearly wrong too.

 

My initial posts were indeed a little harsh, I acknowledge and regret that, in hindsight. I am sorry you thought it would entitle you to show your contempt and rub it in my face. As you say, "funny" how you chose to disregard the fact that I have changed tack since then (and received encouraging words from Aerosoft and other members).

 

It was never my intention to upset anyone with my question. I resent your answers as I feel the aggressiveness in them is unjustified. I hope we can get past this though. If not, this will be my final post in this topic.