Jump to content
The simFlight Network Forums


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Posts posted by winsaudi

  1. Craig,

    Thank you.


    I hate these stealth releases, here again it seems that those that bought through a 3rd party (Steam in this case) get updates before those that buy from your website (the loyal ones that give you a bigger margin) who get to 'suck the hind one'. Also, my question above still stands, what else has the SP fixed apart from stormy weather loading?


  2. 4 hours ago, Braf123456 said:

    I wish they would do a international airport 

    Aren't all of the airports available so far 'international'.  I guess you mean 'non-US' but Vic has hinted that some are in the pipeline.  But I'm with you on this, I also look forward to the release of an airport that is not in the US. Variety is the spice of .... T3D Pro.

  3. Craig,

    I'm lucky enough to have a powerful Alienware system but I have not tried stormy weather at the airports listed by Beardy.  I just trusted him when he reported a more widespread issue but Vic's solution was for one airport.  Mine was not an evidenced based comment I will concede.  Maybe one day we can chat about this over a beer?

    For younger readers, other refreshing beverages are available.


  4. On 3/28/2018 at 11:40 PM, BEARDY said:

    I'm not sure if this will be of any help but the following airports all stop loading for me at 72% using Stormy Weather.


    Hi Vic,

    Given Beardy's comment that this 72% hanging issue is more widespread than just the Bay Area, what are the plans to fix it at KJFK, KLAS & KSAN?


  5. On December 26, 2017 FeelThere_AJ posted: Actually, the game is optimized for 6 Hours gameplay.

    Then on January 12, 2018 FeelThere (Vic) posted: This issue came up after the last SP because we got many requests for extending the original 6 hours gameplay to 8 hours.

    So since an SP released between those 2 dates the optimized game play has been increased by 2 hours, from 6 to 8.

  6. G'day Kev M,

    I don't know if Nyerges Design (ND) is a one-man show by Gabor or if he is part of a bigger team, but either way a bit of cross checking of liveries & models versus the schedule before publishing would prevent the sorts of errors that you mention.  For example, why include a BAW 77L in the KSFO schedule without that model being included in the texpack resulting in albino aircraft? A simple cross check would have revealed that discrepancy.  

    Now on to your suggestion which does have some merit, however ........ (here it comes!) if there is a visual difference between variants of one aircraft type I for one would like it included in RT & RC add-ons.  Continuing with the example above, if there is an external difference between the B77L (777-200LR) and the B772 (777-200/200ER) let's have it in RT/RC.  One of the best things about Tower 3D is, well, the 3D. That's one of the features that places it well above other ATC simulations, so why not take advantage of it?  However, if there are no external differences then ND could have copied the BAW 772 model and renamed it BAW 77L and we would probably not be having this discussion.

    I hope that didn't come out as a rant (I do have those on this forum occasionally!!) but rather as an appeal for realism and better quality control by ND.

    Cheers Kev!


  7. John,

    Real Traffic does include that cargo airline, it is in the airlines text files for KSFO and KPHX. 

    KSFO has the B762 & B763 and KPHX has the B763, but a GTI B744F is not included.  If I remember correctly the B763 is in a bright yellow DHL livery, I haven't 'controlled' at  KSFO yet so I have yet to see the GTI B762.


  8. Craig,

    I agree to your disagreements.  However, I prefer to use random weather so I have to cope with whatever the sim gives me and I like to run one 24-hour cycle (in bite sized pieces) at one airport before moving on to another. However, the sim's random winds seem to be overly strong and do not reflect prevailing winds so the RL preferred runway configurations are often unworkable.  Shall we end this here to avoid boring the other forum members? :)


  9. Craig,

    Again I disagree with you (this is becoming a habit). Aircraft will not taxi to a runway with a strong tailwind factor "Take-off is delayed, the crosswind is too high" and on short finals after being cleared to land on a runway with a strong tailwind the aircraft do not land "Going around, the crosswind is too high".  So in this sim the wind does have an effect which is why it is so annoying that it seems to be modelled incorrectly.

  10. Craig,

    For once I disagree with you :)

    When I ignore the annoyingly non-prevailing and overly strong winds that are all to common in T3DP when random weather is selected I often get pilots refusing to taxi because the “crosswind is too high” (that should be tailwind). Also aircraft go around from short finals for the same reason. It is a rather annoying ‘feature’ of the simulation that Is high on my ‘please fix list’.


  11. ml0130,

    From the FT webpage about Real Traffic: "Real world schedule, airline and visual model for Tower! 3D. The Real Air Traffic add-on brings realistic worldwide schedule for Tower! 3D"

    If that actually said truthfully "An add-on from at least 7 years ago (from Tower 2011) with a slightly updated package that is OK but has many errors" would you buy it?

    I would not, but that's what we've got.

  • Create New...

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.