mburkhard 21 Posted June 18, 2011 Share Posted June 18, 2011 I've bought Zürich 2012 and must say I am VERY happy with the visual quality, the modeling and texturing is superb, clearly the best looking LSZH scenery so far. And all this with an excellent frame rate. So thank you very much for this. I've found a couple of bugs and issues I would like to mention. Some are just details and others rather major ones that need an update. 1.: AFCAD / AFX file: This airport REALLY needs a multiple runway AFX file! It is impossible to handle the amount of traffic in Zurich if the aircraft are departing and arriving on the very same runway. The included AFX file results in a single runway for both, resulting in 20 aircraft waiting in front of the runway with no way of departure because there's always one on final. So we really need a second runway to be used. If you do not know how to make a multiple runway AFX file, ask Mike Strasser from Sim Wings, he knows. 2.: Again AFX file: Airline assignments are incomplete and erroneous. The ICAO code for Swiss Intl. Air Lines is SWR and NOT CRX. Yes I know it is wrong in UT2. Anyway, all the gates that have CRX should also get an SWR in addition. CRX is no longer a valid ICAO code. But you can leave it in, doesn't hurt. But it needs SWR. One World carriers should be at terminal 1, like BAW or RJA, also NLY. The ramp stands west of threshold 34 should be made bigger in diameter. Those need to be available for heavies. As it is now I have my Antonov 124 and the UAE government B777 parking at the new terminal 2 instead of the Whiskey-Stands where they get parked on the real airport. 3.: Just a minor detail: The ground radar on top of the ATC tower is not correctly connected to it's supporting structure, looks odd when rotating. 4.: The wind socks at LSZH are bright orange in colour, not red and white stripes. 5.: The taxiway signs should be done in better quality. The ones we see at present look like default ones generated by the AFCAD. They do not match the ones on the real airport and look very cheap compared to the rest of the airport. The real taxiway signs are of a darker yellow and darker red colour, and they are NOT black on the backside but grey. 6.: I've spotted some floating obstacle beacons, two in front of Hangar 2 and 1 in front of the prison. That's all for now. I hope those issues will be addressed in an update soon. Once again I want to point out I really like the overall quality of the scenery, I just want to help you make it even better, so that people will not go and buy that warmed up 2nd gen. scenery coming from FSDT soon... The single runway issue is really critical. I've ran the simulation during the time I wrote this post. The queue didn't get shorter at all, traffic has no chance for departure, so if the user wants to depart from LSZH while adhering to ATC, he will be stuck on ground taxiing for at least half an hour, no fun! Best regards, Markus 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deputy Sheriffs Herman 1591 Posted June 19, 2011 Deputy Sheriffs Share Posted June 19, 2011 Good eye, Markus. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Developer OPabst 2091 Posted June 19, 2011 Developer Share Posted June 19, 2011 I've bought Zürich 2012 and must say I am VERY happy with the visual quality, the modeling and texturing is superb, clearly the best looking LSZH scenery so far. And all this with an excellent frame rate. So thank you very much for this. Hi Markus, thanks for the feedback, I will pickup the parts of your list, where I was involved. 1.:AFCAD / AFX file: This airport REALLY needs a multiple runway AFX file! It is impossible to handle the amount of traffic in Zurich if the aircraft are departing and arriving on the very same runway. The included AFX file results in a single runway for both, resulting in 20 aircraft waiting in front of the runway with no way of departure because there's always one on final. So we really need a second runway to be used. If you do not know how to make a multiple runway AFX file, ask Mike Strasser from Sim Wings, he knows. Yes, that is a kown point. I made already some test with a "crossed runway" AFX, but the timeframe was very short and some issues needs to be solved, before a alternate AFX could be provided. At the moment I do the convert to FS9 for this Airport, there it is easier to test this config. But, it is impossible to buildup the original, very special, operation of LSZH in a single AFX. We don't have the crossed runway issue here, also the timerelated operation in LSZH is not possible to build up in FS9/FSX. The second limitation of FS, which will full effect the AFX is the "Close of runways on single sides", the FS is not handling. The operation of the 28 as single directed runway is not possible to build up in FS. The "star-runway" workaround to get multible runway to work in FS has also some unnice sideeffects. It would maybe possible to build a AFX, which can handle the standard winddirection from southwest correct, but this AFX will may not opterate the other possible winddirections. We will see, what is possible here. 2.:Again AFX file: Airline assignments are incomplete and erroneous. The ICAO code for Swiss Intl. Air Lines is SWR and NOT CRX. Yes I know it is wrong in UT2. Anyway, all the gates that have CRX should also get an SWR in addition. CRX is no longer a valid ICAO code. But you can leave it in, doesn't hurt. But it needs SWR. One World carriers should be at terminal 1, like BAW or RJA, also NLY. The ramp stands west of threshold 34 should be made bigger in diameter. Those need to be available for heavies. As it is now I have my Antonov 124 and the UAE government B777 parking at the new terminal 2 instead of the Whiskey-Stands where they get parked on the real airport. Can you provide me a list (or source) of the correct airline codes of the corrent (or better future) operations. The problem regarding radius is also an issue, specially in FSX. To get it optimized, you need to different AFX, related to the AI Addon you use. Many user have still WOAI in FSX, where the radius definitions of the AI Aircraft are total different to those of Mytraffic or UT2. Thats makes it complex to have a "for all" AFX. 4.: The wind socks at LSZH are bright orange in colour, not red and white stripes. I will change that. Is my info correct, that there are no windsocks at the runways (16/34/28) and only that once I add. I could not find any info's about that- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BernhardS 24 Posted June 19, 2011 Share Posted June 19, 2011 Hello, I also want to thank Aerosoft for this new MegaAirport. Before Zürich 2012 I used another payware airport for Zürich but I'm more than happy with the new Peter Werlitz product. In addition to what Markus has said before I just want to mention an issue which I find decreases the atmosphere of this wonderful product: it is those terrible attempt to increase framerates with squared wheels of the luggage carts and stairs. Surely this is no bug but a silly design fault. The models and textures of the other airport stuff are so good, so please please improve those wheels. Another small issue are the docking-guidance-signs. I don't know their special name but those are the sign, showing if you are to far left or right when parking at the gates. Those signs are made of little yellow and red points but from distance one cannot recognize them clearly. I have to zoom in when arriving at the gate coz I cannot identify what they are showing coc they are flickering very much. Bernhard Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
virtualstuff 76 Posted June 19, 2011 Share Posted June 19, 2011 Hello, I also want to thank Aerosoft for this new MegaAirport. Before Zürich 2012 I used another payware airport for Zürich but I'm more than happy with the new Peter Werlitz product. In addition to what Markus has said before I just want to mention an issue which I find decreases the atmosphere of this wonderful product: it is those terrible attempt to increase framerates with squared wheels of the luggage carts and stairs. Surely this is no bug but a silly design fault. The models and textures of the other airport stuff are so good, so please please improve those wheels. Another small issue are the docking-guidance-signs. I don't know their special name but those are the sign, showing if you are to far left or right when parking at the gates. Those signs are made of little yellow and red points but from distance one cannot recognize them clearly. I have to zoom in when arriving at the gate coz I cannot identify what they are showing coc they are flickering very much. Bernhard Well I dis agree here don't care for the wheels, but more important is FPS! Amazing scenery hated always the other Zürich for different reasons... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shaun Fletcher 570 Posted June 19, 2011 Share Posted June 19, 2011 Hello Bernhard, Round wheels = more polygons= more CPU processing = less frame rates = more complaints of a slow and sluggish airport. I'm sorry but you cant have it all ways 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mburkhard 21 Posted June 19, 2011 Author Share Posted June 19, 2011 Hi Oliver, Yes, that is a kown point. I made already some test with a "crossed runway" AFX, but the timeframe was very short and some issues needs to be solved, before a alternate AFX could be provided. At the moment I do the convert to FS9 for this Airport, there it is easier to test this config. But, it is impossible to buildup the original, very special, operation of LSZH in a single AFX. We don't have the crossed runway issue here, also the timerelated operation in LSZH is not possible to build up in FS9/FSX. The second limitation of FS, which will full effect the AFX is the "Close of runways on single sides", the FS is not handling. The operation of the 28 as single directed runway is not possible to build up in FS. The "star-runway" workaround to get multible runway to work in FS has also some unnice sideeffects. It would maybe possible to build a AFX, which can handle the standard winddirection from southwest correct, but this AFX will may not opterate the other possible winddirections. We will see, what is possible here. I know the runway concepts of LSZH are not at all AFX friendly, unfortunately. Whatever you do, here's the three guidelines I hope you can comply with: IFR traffic MUST NOT land on runway 32, this is completely unrealistic due to terrain and buildingsIFR traffic MUST NOT land on runway 10More than one runway has to be active Whatever else remains is ok, even if it's not consistent with a real runway concept. All departures on runway 10/28 and all landings on runway 16/34 perhaps? Can you provide me a list (or source) of the correct airline codes of the corrent (or better future) operations. Unfortunately the only professional source for the public was closed around a year ago, there had been a database by Eurocontrol which is no longer available for the public. Drop me an e-mail if ever you're not sure about a code, that's all I can offer right now. One airline flying to LSZH that had its ICAO code changed not too long ago is US Airways. Used to be USA, but now it's AWE. The problem regarding radius is also an issue, specially in FSX. To get it optimized, you need to different AFX, related to the AI Addon you use. Many user have still WOAI in FSX, where the radius definitions of the AI Aircraft are total different to those of Mytraffic or UT2. Thats makes it complex to have a "for all" AFX. I see your problem. However I strongly suggest to apply the FSX standards to an FSX scenery, and the FS9 standards for an FS9 scenery. I too use some FS9 AI models with my UT2 traffic, but I did change their radius to FSX standard. Those of us who stick to FSX standards should not be "punished" when buying a FSX-scenery just because some people still use FS9 models without modifying them. So please keep it standard and simple. FSX sceneries get FSX radius. That's what SimWings does and it would be nice if developers all could do the same. I will change that. Is my info correct, that there are no windsocks at the runways (16/34/28) and only that once I add. I could not find any info's about that- I know of no other windsocks than the ones you already added. Thanks for making them orange colour, this will help to actually see them If possible could you make the moving sock a bit larger? The size you have in now might be ok for a small airfield, but at a big airport they're so hard to see. At least the ones in LSZH are larger than yours. But that's just a detail, if too complicated I'm happy with the colour change. Thanks a lot, Markus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Developer OPabst 2091 Posted June 20, 2011 Developer Share Posted June 20, 2011 All departures on runway 10/28 and all landings on runway 16/34 perhaps? Ok, that is more or less the only possible variant. The FS is irgnoring the config of the "secondary" End of the runway. So it is not possible to close a single end of a runway for Landing or Departing, you can only close both directions. This is the problem for RW14/32, because, when you want to open RW14 for Landing, no chance to prevent landings on RW32. Some at 28, is it open for Landing, no chance to close RW10. I have made some test with a crossed Runway AFX in FS9 (will be the same in FSX), where RW10/28 is only open for Takeoffs. This works more or less OK, when the wind comming from Southwest (most case there), then RW14 and RW28 is used for takeoffs and 14/16 are used for Landings. But, it is not working korrekt, when the wind is from North directions, because then the FS will declare the RW10 for takeoffs, even when it has a tailwind situation. I don't prefer to provide a AFX Concept, where the user must replace the AFX File related to the Winds, because you may not know the wind of the destination, when you departure. So maybe it would be the best to have as default the Config (14/32 landing, 10/28 Takeoffs) and give the user the "Crossed Version" as Option, so if he want's to use it, he can replace the AFX, but must know, that it is "Limited" by the FS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deputy Sheriffs mopperle 4162 Posted June 20, 2011 Deputy Sheriffs Share Posted June 20, 2011 Regarding the airline codes, the FAA should be a valid source: FAA and here "Section 1" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Developer OPabst 2091 Posted June 20, 2011 Developer Share Posted June 20, 2011 Regarding the airline codes, the FAA should be a valid source: FAA and here "Section 1" Danke, aber es geht mir primär um die operative Zuordnung der Zürich anfliegenden Airlines und ihrer Positionierung an den jeweiligen Terminalbereichen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blackkat002 0 Posted June 21, 2011 Share Posted June 21, 2011 Sure wish Full AES worked with this airport. How long do u think for this AES update? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts