Jump to content

Mega Airport Schiphol: Initial Release Issues.


Er!k

Recommended Posts

This one of the worst sceneries I have ever bought from Aerosoft. I have a framerate of just under 4 fps in dusk. In daylight I get around 10 fps. And I have a top-notch PC here with i7 core OC to 4.0Ghz, 12 GB ram and a GTX480 card with FSX running on a SSD disk. Normally I run at no less than 30+ fps elsewhere, even in dense sceneries like US CIties sceneries from Aerosoft. Where have all your beta-testers been when this scenery was approved for release? Does the developer of this scenery use the latest tools for optimizing sceneries or is this just a "bad" portover from FS9?

I should really hope that Aerosoft takes action here and deliver a scenery that works more or less for FSX. This one doesn't live up to todays standard you would expect. As it is today it is a ripoff. I'm really sorry for my words here, but this is pure frustration after waiting for so long for this release.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Developer

This one of the worst sceneries I have ever bought from Aerosoft. I have a framerate of just under 4 fps in dusk. In daylight I get around 10 fps.

I only want to comment this part of your post, because this include a part, where we just found a problem, which is fixed now, did you take the time to check that before your post?

The rest of your statements may be related to other things and is not part of my question.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I only want to comment this part of your post, because this include a part, where we just found a problem, which is fixed now, did you take the time to check that before your post?

The rest of your statements may be related to other things and is not part of my question.

If you mean the eham_rwys.bgl file you posted here? Sure, I have replaced that with the new one. I have also tested Afcad v2 file as well. No positive results here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd like to know the answer on Rob's question too, Aerosoft.

I think the airport is looking quite good now. No stutters and texture issues here, with an almost clean FS9.1 install on an OCéd E8400 (3,8Ghz) with 4 gig's of RAM and Win7 32bit.

My only issue is the fact that the taxiways along runway 06/24 are seem to be made of dirt. This was announced, but not solved in the update. It is crucial!

Is there anyone here able to tell me how I can fix this problem temporarily, while waiting for Cornel?

I and Jeroen Eekhof are right now working on a package with improved AFCAD's for the FS9 version, with 100% correct gate assignments. Also some bugs will be removed, and runway use will be more realistic.

Expect release here on this forum in a few days.

Rgds,

Erik

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Developer

My only issue is the fact that the taxiways along runway 06/24 are seem to be made of dirt. This was announced, but not solved in the update. It is crucial!

Is there anyone here able to tell me how I can fix this problem temporarily, while waiting for Cornel?

Please check here: http://www.forum.aerosoft.com/index.php?showtopic=36293&view=findpost&p=237700

Problem fix yesterday.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oliver, I think that is a fix for a completely different problem for FSX, not FS2004?!

When taxiing over the taxiways along runway 06/24 in FS2004, your aircraft is bouncing along and brown mud is showing at the wheels.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Developer

When taxiing over the taxiways along runway 06/24 in FS2004, your aircraft is bouncing along and brown mud is showing at the wheels.

Ok, was the same runway :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This one of the worst sceneries I have ever bought from Aerosoft. I have a framerate of just under 4 fps in dusk. In daylight I get around 10 fps. And I have a top-notch PC here with i7 core OC to 4.0Ghz, 12 GB ram and a GTX480 card with FSX running on a SSD disk. Normally I run at no less than 30+ fps elsewhere, even in dense sceneries like US CIties sceneries from Aerosoft. Where have all your beta-testers been when this scenery was approved for release? Does the developer of this scenery use the latest tools for optimizing sceneries or is this just a "bad" portover from FS9?

I should really hope that Aerosoft takes action here and deliver a scenery that works more or less for FSX. This one doesn't live up to todays standard you would expect. As it is today it is a ripoff. I'm really sorry for my words here, but this is pure frustration after waiting for so long for this release.

Fred, I understand your frustration, but I can asure you that with the rw mod from Oliver, this scenery has very good framerates.

Your system can run this very easily.

The best you can do is uninstall it, clean your register and defrag you c drive with a good defrag program.

Your FSX drive is SSD so do not defrag that one.

Than reinstall MAP Schiphol X and use Olivers file.

Your framerates at night should be over 20.

Mine is and I use an outside view stretched over 3 monitors.

Bear in mind that compared to other airport Schiphol has a lot of parking spots.

Setting MT to 30% gives me more aircraft at Schiphol than 50% with Frankfurt.

Aerosoft stands for high quality addons and Oliver proved that again by solving this on a sunday in his spare time.

That is first class service to me :clapping_s:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi there,

Everywhere where I taxi and Land in this scenery, I get my default textures (like parkingplaces, taxiways, and runways) flickering through the Aerosoft Scenery.

As example :

post-29186-127892591697_thumb.jpg

Anyone has a solution ?

Greets,

Sébastien Bourier.

Btw. The scenery is running better now something like 20 - 30 fps :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mabye there is an error in the AFCAD, a missing taxi link?

Iets anders dan: Erik, ik ben erg benieuwd hoe je het baangebruik aan gaat pakken. Ik heb namelijk een correcte AFCAD voor de FSX versie gemaakt. Het lijkt mij leuk om ervaringen en technieken uit te wisselen, misschien kunnen we elkaars AFCAD nog verbeteren... Zou je mij een PB kunnen sturen met je email addres?

Alvast bedankthappy.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Have you used another AFCAD in the past for the default scenery? Please check that. If so, delete that AFCAD.

Also make sure that MAP Amsterdam is higher in the Scenery Library then any other scenery covering the Netherlands.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oke, it's very weird then. As fare as I know, the AFCAD controls the taxiways you drive on. Mabye is a mix up with the heights. It could be that there is an terrain exclude missing?

Oke, Ik heb hem ontvangenhappy.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Developer

I understand the confusion. :)

You can't give me a hint how to fix this myself?

Can you please try to place the BGL in the attached File in the EHAM Scenery folder.

It's a quick and dirty test, non official and not fully tested. But in my small check, I did not have any dirt in the area around the RW24 anymore in FS9.

I don't expect any side effect, but you never know. So take it with care.

EHAM_HARDEN.zip

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hello Sébastien,

Do you have any meshes installed if so try disabling them, also try disabling any other 3rd party scenery in the scenery library except for EHAM and then check it.

Don't have any meshes installed except NL 2000 v4, have checked them out also and even that doesn't give a solution. Also 3rd pary scenery is no chance for because I don't have any EHAM scenery.

Maybe someone know how to install EHAM aerosoft above NL2000 v4?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can you please try to place the BGL in the attached File in the EHAM Scenery folder.

It's a quick and dirty test, non official and not fully tested. But in my small check, I did not have any dirt in the area around the RW24 anymore in FS9.

I don't expect any side effect, but you never know. So take it with care.

Hi Oliver,

Maybe it is quick and dirty but it works perfect, taxi-problems along runway 06-24 are gone.

A big thanks,

Rob

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Shaun, Oliver, other Scenery Experts ...

I have a problem with one of my own programs which I don't understand and for which I could therefore use some advice, please.

The FSX EHAM scenery has the usual AFCAD type BGLs -- the main default one being AFX_EHAM_02.BGL. Like most such files is starts off with all the usual deletions, eg.

Delete all taxiways!

Delete all runways and starts!

Delete all taxiways!

COM: Delete all frequencies!

before going on to defining the runways, taxiways, gates and frequencies. So far so good.

But there is also a file EHAM_EXCL.BGL. This too does all of the above, AND goes on to define some of the same things as the main AFCAD -- a bunch of "false" and closed runways 10 x 10 feet, the same COM frequencies, and the same 101 taxiway names. But no real runways, no gates, no actual taxiways.

Now, with the files as they are, installed by default, FSX works fine and shows all the Gates in its selection drop-down. However, my utility program "MakeRunways", whilst mostly working, loses all of the Gate data. Examining why, it is because in alphabetical order "EHAM_EXCL" is processed AFTER "AFX_EHAM ...". The redefinition of the Taxiway Names without also the Gates and other taxipath details causes my utility to reset those and not reconstruct them because the data is then not there.

Now, the mystery. If I rename the EHAM_EXCL file to "AAA_EHAM_EXCL.BGL", so that it is processed first, my utility works correctly, but now FSX fails to display any gates in its selection drop-down! Maybe it has other things wrong too?

So what am I not understanding here? Is FSX processing things in REVERSE alphanumeric order -- all the evidence I've ever seen before suggests not. And certainly, for many years now, my MakeRunways results have agreed with FS9 and FSX results with alphanumeric order being used.

I've not yet tried simply disabling the EHAM_EXCL file, but I will. However, my real concern here is to understand why is happening, why the difference?

Help me please.

Best Regards

Pete Dowson

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Developer

Hi Pete,

I try to take a look to this file, have a littebit problems to decompile it, but as fare as I can say: This file is Bull...

It should only have the exclude area's included, but as it seams to be made from a "Afcad", there are lot of unneeded and incomplete thinks in it.

I will try to fix it, otherwise Cornel must start to do his work himself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi there again,

Have made another screen to show you.

Now you also can see the NL2000 v4 textures showing op on the right. But on the left top you see the Aerosoft texture ways, and normal textures from Aerosoft.

Still didn't found any solution does it has to deal with some configuration settings like Texture resolution ?

Image :

post-29186-127893971432_thumb.jpg

Greets,

Sébastien bourier

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Privacy Policy & Terms of Use