Jump to content
The simFlight Network Forums


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation since 10/16/2018 in all areas

  1. 3 points
    @Braf123456 is correct. If FT keep publishing airports with the same faults then customers are going to walk away from this product (as is evident in other threads). I personally think that the latest airport, EDDS, is the worst release yet. @FeelThere @FeelThere Ariel Is it really your business plan to keep dumping airports for T3D onto the market with so many acknowledged problems? Saying that such game engine deficiencies will not be fixed until the next version of Tower yet still releasing airports is disrespecting your customers. Is that a great plan for sales growth and an expanding customer base? I think not. Wayne
  2. 3 points
    Ariel, to be honest: If the sim engine accepts an instruction to vacate left onto a specific taxiway, but then decides to totally ignore it and vacates the aircraft onto another exit and even in another direction, said sim engine is pretty droppings-like, and it doesn't leave much ground to build trust on when you want us to buy the next version. I'm not talking about deliberate shortcomings that you condoned to getting the product out and refinancing the temporal (= monetary) investment you took to create it. Nobody expects you as an indy company to beat the big guys in the game market. But when your product accepts user input then it has to follow said input. (Except "pilot error" in this case is explicitly wanted, but then it has to be random, programmed that way - and you have to communicate that these errors occur intentional like the technical issues for planes in Tracon.) What do you think would players say about Microsoft's Flight Sim, if turning the dial for the altitude resulted in making a 180° turn? You already have done many things to improve the game, and I really appreciate that. Compared to the original one I bought a year ago, many things have been improved. But leaving flaws like these exiting bugs in doesn't leave a good impression when you want us to buy the next version that you're already investing time (and money) in. If aircraft touch down and creep to the next exit, I can live with that. If aircraft creep to their assigned exit at taxiing speed, I can live with that. That's the way you've constructed it to make it work. I can live with the pushbacks not being realistic (within a minute? oh, come on...). I can live with limited freedom at giving instructions. You found a solution to make it work, in general. That's okay. But NOT taking the exit that it was assigned is sloppy programming. The year-old issue with the spinning Deltas that fail at finding the leading link at Kennedy's M and MA ramps after pushback is sloppy programming. Sorry to be that harsh. But functionality has to ... well, function. It's okay, if you don't find the error without asking for more input from users and need more time. I'd totally accept an update that would only extend logging functions for those specific issues, and I'd gladly try to help by submitting more logfiles, if you need them. But accepting "defeat" by saying "we can't do it any better" is something that I'll definitely remember before buying the new version.
  3. 2 points
    For arriving planes the command to have planes taxi to the gate via an runway works with voice without problems. You just have to edit your tower3d.rec file. The problem is, that you cant use a taxi via runway for departing planes
  4. 2 points
    If they are going to continue making airports for the game they need to continue to update the game as well
  5. 2 points
    You're a little more tolerant than me - I can live with it because I have no other choice. Sadly though, it negatively impacts some airports so much (KSFO and apparently EDDS are prime examples) that it now has to be considered when deciding on any (if any) future purchases. FT has been responding next version to "general" issues for well over a year and drew the line in the sand with the last official update of Pro in March. Food for thought, you can only dangle a carrot in front of someone for so long. ☺️🥕☹️
  6. 2 points
    Can I ask, from the developers perspective, what exactly counts as a "major" issue? I ask because from a consumers perspective, what is happening currently in the sim are major issues! I was very serious in what I said on the "future airports" thread in that I am contemplating not making any more purchases (along with others I might add).
  7. 1 point
    Yes, I am using P3D4 and FSUIPC5 I just put socket.lua and a socket_core.dll in the modules folder. Required it with: local socket = require("socket") Have successfully tested to send UDP data
  8. 1 point
  9. 1 point
    Yeah but I really enjoy the game but there is to many glitches
  10. 1 point
  11. 1 point
    Sorry, what logging? Ah, are you saying something logs entries only when you use "ipc.setowndisplay" or, also at other times? I don't know what is creating those entries, nor what they refer to. FSUIPC certainly doesn't touch flight files, and in any case only ever uses Windows "Private Profile" functions to amend INI and CFG files, I don't know any way it is possibly to have more that one entry in any section with the same keyword. Using the same keyword replaces its previous entries -- there;s no other way to do that. Writing null removed the keyword entry. Whatever is writing those is not using those Windows functions. Also, in all my experience, special windows entries at the end of a saved flight file are created when the FLT is saved and reflect the state of that window at that time. If they are accumulating in an existing file whilst the sim is running then something else is doing it. I don't thiink either SimConnect or FSUIPC is at all involved in this. The keycodes must surely be all the same. Any differences are only in the shift codes available. There are actually errors there -- only pointed out to me very recently. I've corrected the document here ready for the next update. Here is the corrected section: The shifts value is a combination (add them) of the following values, as needed: 1 Shift 2 Control 4 Tab 8 not used 16 Alt (take care with this one—it invokes the Menu) 32 Windows key (left or right) 64 Apps Menu key (the application key, to the right of the right Windows key) NOTE that this is different to previously documented shifts – the earlier list was in error, having ‘Tab’ at value 8 and a second ‘Alt’ at value 4 These are the same as those listed in the Advanced guide for [Buttons] programming, but different to those for the Lua library event.key function and those listed in the Advanced guide for [Keys] assignment recording (the ALT and TAB being interchanged). All this is most unfortunate -- they are "historical", and originally based on Windows shift codes in the KEYDOWN/KEYUP messages. When I discovered these differences (long ago) it was far too late to change them. Pete
  12. 1 point
    I think Pete was talking about the runway as taxiway problem. Gatwick has two runways, one of those is mainly used as taxiway as Pete already mentioned. In tower3d pro it is not possible to have a departing plane taxi from the gate to the active runway via an inactive runway. If you have a look at this map, you can spot runway 08L/26R which is mainly used as a taxiway and which is very important in real life. With the current limitations to the game it will not be possible to use this runway as it is being used in reality http://www.ead.eurocontrol.int/eadbasic/pamslight-D186466FB77F377A53E23954AFFB0579/7FE5QZZF3FXUS/EN/Charts/AD/AIRAC/EG_AD_2_EGKK_2-1_en_2018-05-24.pdf One way to make this possible in the DLC would be to have only one runway and replace the other with an normal taxiway or to change some things about the engine to make it possible to taxi on runways. The second option would be the better one, but as it has been mentioned before, there will be no changes to the current engine anymore.
  13. 1 point
  14. 1 point
    Not really pics OF planes, but it's not every day you get to FL470. The winds were nasty yesterday, my friends. Only 99 knots yesterday up there....they were as high as 160+ knots during our climb to FL400. Went way up to get us home. I didn't fly this leg...I got the one going out with 160 knots straight on the tail!! lol My phone just did not do the sunset justice. It was beautiful! It's a bit wavy from distortion of the windscreen.
  15. 1 point
    Since we're on the topic of aircraft performance, maybe someone could address the *cough* insanely slow *cough* acceleration of some of the corporate jets on takeoff. You'd think they were a 747, lol.
  16. 1 point
    Absolutely agree with Pete. If the current engine can't be fixed and the airports are being released the way they are, I won't buy new airfields anymore unless they get a very very positive feedback/review. I will wait for a new version without these massive issues, which lead to problems on every airport, even if the airport itself has a very good design. I do appreciate the effort that is made to include the community regarding liveries though! But I don't need colorful planes if there is no proper airport to control them on. Jonas
  17. 1 point
    Can I ask how EGKK is implementing the second runway? In reality Gatwick has 2 runways but "Although Gatwick has the main runway and the ‘reserve’ or northern runway, they cannot be operated simultaneously. The northern runway is normally only utilised during the night when maintenance on the main runway is planned.", source - p3. At the moment, I am personally reluctant to buy any new DLC due to them always having issues with airports that are released and I know I am not alone with this feeling from talking with other MP members as well. I feel more like a BETA tester than a consumer. Rather than enjoying the sim I find myself feeling very frustrated and utterly disappointed most of the time. On top of that, the latter takes away the enjoyment of the sim completely. Developers then make changes (which takes time understandably) to try to resolve the issues at one airport but in return causes more issues elsewhere. Due to the latter, new DLC's on the way are already flawed with issues that are already present in other airports. Sort this out developers!
  18. 1 point
    I am sure KMIA will come eventually. It was one of the default airports in Tower2011. Andrew
  19. 1 point
    Single vs. multiplayer mode makes no difference. It doesn't affect landing distances nor the way planes pushback. 🙄
  20. 1 point
    How about KMIA (busy, many international flights, interesting layout, penalty box, one holding bar for either 12 and 8R, seven cargo areas, the tower sitting above terminal D) and PHNL (many new airlines, island hoppers, optional military flights via Pearl Harbor/Hickam AFB, two "runways" for water planes - 4W/26W and 8W/22W -, the tower being mid-field with a nice view overlooking a pretty small terminal, runway 8R/26L being built into the Pacific ocean) ?
  21. 1 point
    A simple ask ... Please use the format (or spreadsheet) provided in the first post for livery requests. Otherwise they will be ignored. Thanks!
  22. 1 point
  23. 1 point
    My two cents would be to put more effort into either releasing a new version of T3D, or correcting the current version instead of continually releasing new airports. I really don't want to come across as bashing the Devs at all- it's a great game, with tremendous amounts of detail and, no doubt, a ton of work and man-hours involved! Bashing is not my intent, and I hope it's constructive. What I mean by my opening statement is I would like to see them correct a lot of the headaches that we're dealing with in the current version, such as the slowww pace of exiting the runways, etc. I just downloaded KSFO an hour or two ago and spent this time playing it. If you're trying to run a normal flow (Arrive 28L/R, Depart 1L/R), it's pretty much impossible to play it. I have planes lined up on the 1s for takeoff, but I can't get them airborne because the planes take two weeks to turn off the runway, or they exit the runway PRIOR to crossing 1L/R, which is unrealistic. There's no way you can launch planes unless you get lucky and have a decent gap on arrivals. I'm experimenting with other runway configurations...I think the game allows for that (normally there are some runways they don't really use due to terrain), but it's frustrating to spend more money and find the problems are still there. More airports are certainly GREAT!!! However, I'd like to see the root of the problem fixed before releasing more airports, but again, that's just me.
  24. 1 point
    After reading comments on this forum/Steam and experiencing landing planes "slowing to a crawl" at KSFO impacting departure management, I thought I'd take a deeper dive and look at he plane speeds at various points in the landing process. I did a similar exercise about 4 months ago - https://forum.simflight.com/topic/84430-tower3d-pro-anatomy-of-a-landing. (1) Touch down - this is the point where altitude was zero and tilt was zero. All planes hit the same spot, but, obviously, at different speeds. In my test, the 753 was traveling at approximately 108 knots, 73G at 109 knots, CNJ at 107 knots, and E75 at 96 knots. (2) Slowed down to 44 knots - after touch down planes begin the slowdown process to 44 knots. This occurred at different points based on the plane type and landing speed. (3) Successful landing - after reaching 44 knots planes would travel a little further down the runway before the successful landing message was displayed. (4) Begin slowing down to 19 knots - planes would maintain 45-48 knots until it was time to slow down to taxiing speed (19 knots) in preparation to exit the runway. (5) At 19 knots - after reaching 19 knots planes would maintain this speed until exiting the taxiway and preparing to stop. The attached images demonstrate the above using T as the exit taxiway and J as the exit taxiway on 28L. In briefly testing landings on 28R I experienced similar results. 28R@Q was similar to 28L@T and 28R@T was similar to 28L@J. I don't see a FeelThere SP addressing this at any point in the near future so I think my strategy would be to exit planes at 28L@T and 28R@Q - especially when running the normal configuration of 1s as the primary departure runways and the 28s at the primary arrival runways. Craig Note - this test was conducted using Tower!3D Pro version 3.2d, RT version sp6v5, and the initial release of KSFO.
  25. 1 point
    IVAO Airspace File (2018-10-01) * New October 2018 New !!! Newer IVAO Airspace data available. You can download the file here: http://fscommander.com/files/fscivaodat.zip Les nouvelles données IVAO espace aérien disponible. Vous pouvez le télécharger ici: http://fscommander.com/files/fscivaodat.zip Neue IVAO Airspace Daten erhältlich. Den Download finden Sie hier: http://fscommander.com/files/fscivaodat.zip Volker
  • Newsletter

    Want to keep up to date with all our latest news and information?

    Sign Up

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use. Guidelines Privacy Policy 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.