• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


pracines last won the day on April 24

pracines had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

1 Neutral

About pracines

  • Rank
    Advanced Member

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling
  • Location
  1. Thanks for the update Simon!
  2. simmarket has stated since, that they completely trust the CC company that they use, so I will never buy from simmarket again.
  3. Simmarket issues that I have had with simmarket twice in the past as well. There is no way I can now justify making any more purchases from simmarket ever until this is rectified and there is concrete evidence that this issue is solved. The potential for simmarket to lose all credibility is at hand, but I do not want your company to have any issues as a result - hence this note.
  4. My understanding is that MakeRunways was out before FSUIPC 5, or does it need more work?
  5. Simon, As always I appreciate your efforts, and thank you for the true marvel we call STB. Paul Racines
  6. Its like a well oiled machine.
  7. Pete has completed the fixes for MakeRunways, and it is ready for P3Dv4.
  8. I so appreciate your kindness and hard work Pete. I'm Looking forward to buying the new FSUIPC5. Paul
  9. Hi Pete, I have an interest in using RCv4.3 for ATC in P3Dv4 and was wondering if you foresee this as a possibility. I see that you intend to create FSUIPC 5 and was wondering, would a new 64bit version of MakeRunways be necessary, or would the current version work? For all I know there is a new scenery folder structure in P3Dv4 that does not play well with the current make runways and was wondering what the possibilities were. Of course I use several add-ons that require MakeRunways like STB, and FS captain among a few others. People don't realize how invaluable such utilities are, until they realize it. lol Thanks, Paul
  10. Unsure about what the default AI performance will perform like in V4, but UT Live performance in P3Dv3 has been very good for me. I intend to get V4 the very moment it becomes available, once I get up and running I will give you a brief report on the performance and I will include my specs. Paul
  11. I agree with your general assessment Simon. P3D v4 is the product that carries the long standing history of continued development, friendly to 3rd parties from the smallest to the largest, and customer satisfaction. I have no power over Lockheed Martin and whether you get on the beta team. If you have tried the "contact us" method with all of your credentials, I cannot see why you would not be quickly welcomed. As such the only thing I can do is pray. Try again in a day or two. STB is much more valuable to me than most other add-ons, in the top 10 out of thousands! Maybe my prayer will be answered favorably.
  12. I think this is a case where a programmer needs to ask themselves; ok, this happens in real life like this, so how do we make this happen in our simulator like this? i.e. If that 747 is there at a gate for 2 hours then that company 747 that just landed will have a space to park, because in real life that is the way it is. -Are there enough parking spaces? -Do we have the proper scale? -What airlines use what gates? -Is the time clock correct? right now its slow. Can it be synced to the PC clock speed for accuracy? It may not matter or this may be a key as to schedule issues when one controls traffic for double or triple shifts :-). Unsure how, but schedules have to do with time/speed/distance. If one or two of the factors are correct but 1 is off or any combo of discrepancy, then possibly unforeseen issues can arise....just a thought. -Ok lets make some over flow parking for contingencies - real airports have this, we should too. -Lets go further, if it gets backed up enough and spaces become even more limited what happens in real life? Well there are holding pads/pens, and then the consideration of adding more commands to allow for a very rare case. -Then even dive in real deep - like a "check for updates" option, if there is a schedule update (and there should be something like minor quarterly updates), then that update needs to verify the airports can properly support the schedule changes, just like a real airport manager has to do; make necessary changes to gates or even entire terminals. To be clear, I don't expect this to happen overnight or even in a service pack next year, but really these are the kinds of things that could have been implemented way before T!2011 was in alpha. Here we are in 2017; surly schedule/parking issues are a top priority, for they are at the core of what this simulation is all about. This post is not designed to judge or criticize, but to encourage greater heights, and I do not mind growing pains. Yes all this is easier said than done, but there is no need to be afraid of good ole hard work, for it always pays off.
  13. Craig, This is exactly why I went to Mr. Parker instead of even trying to be "responsible" and go through any kind labor providing details, logs, examples. Unless you have a "name" (clout), FeelThere is simply not willing to entertain suggestions of possible improvements. They are just too busy with an agenda (of making new airports & SE ) that does not include allowing for suggestions to be even looked at or discussed. I thought Mr. Parker could help, maybe he can't, who knows. Avwriter, Caution is welcome, but that response statement began and ended with that caution alone, therefore ending the response as caution being the final possibility. This is a forum and people get time to think about what they write and read over it. A Log file was attached but was not even mentioned by FeelThere and that communicates a lack of interest, so Avwriter you are being "fair" to Vic without fully understanding the conversation so far. FeelThere did not say, "we will look into it" or elude that this a continuing discussion, so where is the fairness to Craig? Therefore, Craig correctly evaluated the response as close-minded, yet he remained kind and still willing to support the flawed product. So when looked at with closer attention Craig was really the fair one in this exchange. We should not be bringing in past or other topics to evaluate or cloud the facts of this specific topic/exchange. For all, Tower 3D is a most awesome concept, it has potential to be much better, and I hope FeelThere succeeds at making it much better, however: Its a total shame that a developer cannot at least respond in this case with a little interest (1 or 2 quirks!) in our complete satisfaction. The fact is Tower 3DPro is devalued greatly (essentially an over priced game!) w/o Nyerges, yet time and time again its the customers fault for buying real traffic & color. An add-on which only serves to make Tower3D better has been a mistake, all because FeelThere cant seem to adapt to the demand that the add-on requires. We customers have to bare the burden. So we all have to ask, is this the way it should be? I always like to give companies a chance to do the right thing, when they do, they succeed, when they don't, we customers have an arsenal of tools at our disposal to make companies either go out of business (ACES found that out fast!) or wallow in unsuccessful attempts to remain in business. No company is bigger than their to debate this, anyone?
  14. Its very interesting. I always started the shift at 04:00AM and the airport had a few planes on the terminals and ramps. The airport would be empty by 10-11 am and zero activity for the rest of the day. Taking a clue from your posted schedule, I started the shift at 07:00AM and a world of difference, a very full ramp and terminal. The schedule remains active thru a few hours (until about 1300) and still not as busy as the schedule you list. A bug or just an accepted fact? At least I know my installation was/is ok and I'm not nuts. Something is amiss and I will see about this log and try to prove there is a problem that needs to be fixed. Thank you for taking the time to post that schedule Craig, it contained the clue I needed.