[jhb_airlines] Re: IVAO

  • From: Gerry Winskill <gwinsk@xxxxxxx>
  • To: jhb_airlines@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Sun, 26 Aug 2007 19:32:04 +0100

What a very pleasant surprise! Well, for me, anyway.

One of the most depressing areas of FSX has been Ronaldsway. With FSX installed my bootup situation looked a disaster area. Most of your lighting poles were about 50' in the air. Many of the buildings were two dimensional, etc etc. There was no alternative but to disable it and, when visiting Ronaldsway, put up with the Ghastly Default version. In the case of your long cherished version it looked as though nothing less than a complete re design could improve the situation.

When you asked the question about the taxiways I thought a re enable was worth a shot, since the SP1 had gone onto my system, since I suffered that first trauma.

Having re enabled IOM Alpha, I started at Andreas. That didn't look too promising, mainly because a few textures were missing and some large grey rectangles present. I'd hazzard a guess these might be trees.

Having taken off from Andreas I did a touch and go at Jurby. It looked much better, though the runway height was a bit out. The textures of hangars, Jurby Church etc were spot on. The only two points that struck me were that the radio transmission mast was a bit ephemeral and its light had far too large a halo.

The trip down the West coast, in this evening's failing light, was brilliant. In the GenX area it really is debateable whether Autogen is worth pursuing. At low light angles the ground features look almost three dimensional. With the GenX mesh in use the coastline is spot on, whereas VFR GM had you needing to work the oracle with a new coastline. The West coast's cliffs and beeches are damned near perfect.

I followed an AI onto 08 ILS. It was soon apparent that your buildings and lighting were in the right place, on the deck. The textures were perfect and, particularly in the case of King Williams, look better than in FS9.

The only insect in the ointment is the runways. Taxiways are fine but all runways are in steep sided 20 foot gorges. Back on the apron and the AI are all correctly parked. There was just one, with just the tip of a tail fin showing. Perhaps it had parked itself on the edge of the adjacent runway.

I switched to the VFR Terrain Mesh but there was no change.

It's well worth taking a look at, since only the runways need changing.

Hope you find an irresistable urge to do a MacAlpines job. Come to the aid of the country!

Gerry Winskill


bones wrote:

The only headache I see with the mix of default and my IOM scenery is that
Taxiway B and 17/35 in the default are in the wrong place - about 200m too
far east. My IVAO sector file has the correct layout so, for most aircraft,
I see them taxying across the grass.

I presume the incorrect layout exists in FSX too?

bones

-----Original Message-----
From: jhb_airlines-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:jhb_airlines-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Gerry Winskill
Sent: 26 August 2007 17:05
To: jhb_airlines@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [jhb_airlines] Re: IVAO


I left Jersey for Barrow, this morning, as a French flight arrived. The
only hiccup, almost certainly down to our using different sceneries, was
that after announcing he was clear of the runway, I had to wait as he
appeared to backtrack along it. I suspect he was using Default scenery,
since VFR GM shows that to be constantly adrift from the real tarmac. No
lag; he turned off at the moment he said he was.

Gerry Winskill


bones wrote:

I'll be online for a couple of hours for testing.

The session last night was quiet until both Mike's turned up. We had
time to run some tests and these proved very enlightening. Mike Lucas
was using my EGNS scenery with an airfield altitude of 33ft and Mike
Brook was using UK2000 scenery with airfield height of 58ft. Despite
this variation in airfield elevation both aircraft saw each other
correctly sitting on the ground. The floating aircraft syndrome that
plagued PCI seems to be resolved in IVAO.

Both pilots also saw each other in the correct aircraft types (as filed
in the flight plan). The third PCI annoyance of lag also seems to be
absent in IVAO.

These are strong indications of a superior simulation and, as Mike said
last night, this would have made a huge difference to our flyin at
Woburn some months back. To eliminate lag alone would have made that
session really good fun.

What I would like to do is organise a session at Ronaldsway with as
many JHB aircraft as possible. This would test the session nicely and
we could see if any problems arise from this. The big question is
whether pilots have a spare evening free in addition to Wednesday night
so we can run the test. The UK night on IVAO is normally each Tuesday -
is anyone free this week for a run?

bones
bones@xxxxxxx
http://fsaviation.net













Other related posts: