Jump to content
The simFlight Network Forums

pracines

Members
  • Posts

    77
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    7

Everything posted by pracines

  1. This seems to be a case where I failed to use the Lorby export tool prior to running MakeRunways. I must have been too excited to get flying to SEQM that I missed a step I never missed before, I don't think so, but its possible. RC4.3 now sees SEQM normally. However, a freeware product called Destination Finder 2.0 that uses MakeRunways and its own database maker (FSXDATA.CSV) still does not see SEQM. But I'm not so concerned over that, as LNM does the job, plus you have given way too much time on this. I may have to move to newer ATC / utilities as the P3D world changes. Thank you Pete.
  2. Well not "responsibility", but it is the only scenery package that has not automatically copied over to RC43/data in my 15 years of Radar Contact. When you mentioned a BGL may be responsible (I think unconventional is possibly a better word) , I thought that it may be something Flightbeam would like to know. The only file I have had to copy over (instead of manually editing each flight in the RC UI) is the F4.csv as FSAerodata has been updating the frequencies as needed with each new AIRAC. ---------------------- Ok, so I just ran MakeRunways from P3D directly (to P3D) and also from the RC3.4 rebuild DB method (to RC4/data). Now wouldn't you know it, SEQM is not even in the R5.csv anymore. I know for sure it was there - I'm using the find feature. I have no other programs running at all. Here is the STATISTICS bgl SEQM_ADEP4_DS_04_W_STATICS.bgl
  3. R5 and XML both have SEQM - R4.CSV is the one that does not have SEQM. If it possibly matters, in my quest I also discovered that F4 F5 G5 Helipads T5.CSV all contain SEQM. I personally have no problem sending the BGL, but I've never had to send a BGL file in my experience, particularly from a licensed piece of software, and am unsure of the legal ramifications (if any). Please advise if I should ask permission from Flightbeam. Just covering all the bases. **** Hold on - I found a piece of info that likely makes this more a Radar Contact v4.3 issue than a MakeRunways issue. In double checking all the CSV files in my P3DV4 directory the R4.CSV there, it does have SEQM, and yet the same date R4.CSV in the RCv4/data directory does not have the SEQM entry. Must have to do with the rebuild database batch program in RC4.3. I would never have guessed that would make a difference especially with a single airport. I suppose it just a matter of copying the good one from P3D over to the Radar Contact/data directory. But if we should still alert Flightbeam about this for some reason that they can/should correct, I will communicate with them unless you think its best to contact them yourself about it, based on how complicated it may be.
  4. Apologies, the sheer size of the runways.txt kept me from opening it as a simple txt (notepad) file (taking forever to load) so I went RTF fast. I did not realize it would be difficult to open for you, sorry. Here it is in a simple txt - no need to even zip up. version 4.8.7.1 - reverified, redownloaded, and reinstalled twice last week, trying to cover all the basics. seqm runways.txt
  5. Yes, the P3Dv4 airport selection does show the SEQM airport, the runways, that helipad, gates, and GA parking on the dropdown selection list. The airspace and runway is indicated on the map as well. There is a pretty huge section for SEQM and related to that, the closure of SEQU following (just incase its something to do with that), so I will attach that section in a zip file. SEQM runwaysTXT.zip
  6. Yes I get SEQM in runways.txt but I need it in the csv files. I have all my programs set to run as administrator - that's like breathing to me 😃. I have P3D installed in C:\Prepar3D v4 Initially I figured it was a simple fix on Flightbeam's end, because I have been using MakeRunways and Radar Contact for what seems to be about 15 years w/o any problems. Been through the Orbx global/vector phase, Ray Smith afcad phase, payware and freeware, FSAerodata, all w/o a single issue. SEQM is the only roadblock. I will look further into Lorby and see if I can figure this out. I'm almost due for a total system refresh, so not too big a deal - I will just use default ATC to get to SEQM until then. ------------------ Thanks for the ideas gentlemen.
  7. I was wondering if anybody else has had no success getting MakeRunways to output R4.csv info for SEQM. Radar Contact still has no info on SEQM - I tried (trying anything I can think of) with and without the Lorby AO export tool. It must be something simple I'm missing, but rebuilding a RC4.3 database is as simple as it gets. I'm using MakeRunways version 4.8.7.1 and even when run from the P3D directory directly it does not pick up that SEQM is there, however, SEQU is still there in the R4.csv I have a post in the Flightbeam forum to see if anybody there has insight into something with the scenery itself. I'm at a loss.
  8. It was me then...I thought the initial sentence was a "history lesson" and the second sentence was a "new possibility" with the M4.csv file. So I thought the info was being pinched from M4🤡😄
  9. Yes I did mean the /+T parameter. I figured it was me. I don't own EFB, I use Navigraph Ultimate, and I only own RC4. After all the trial and error trying to get /+T to function, I was surly stumped. Thanks for looking into this. HiFi, PMDG, and the P3D SDK (World\Traffic) all use Airports.dat someway, could they be used in some way? *** never mind on the last question**** I checked them - no TA TL info
  10. I'm using MakeRwys version 4.8.6.1 and following the directions exactly, the m4.CSV file remains unchanged. I have tried the CMD as admin console window method and creating the shortcut method running as admin (check box and right clicking). I tried both methods without running as admin. I tried exporting the library via the Lorby-SI and tried it w/o exporting the library. The original m4.CSV is copied from RC4x/Data to P3Dv4 root and after running MakeRwys it remains dated 1/6/2006, yet all the other CSV files in the P3Dv4 root show modified today 9/1/2018. Are we positive the parameter works in version 4.8.6.1? Does anybody else have this parameter working? if so can they just attach their M4.CSV here?
  11. simmarket has stated since, that they completely trust the CC company that they use, so I will never buy from simmarket again.
  12. Simmarket issues that I have had with simmarket twice in the past as well. https://www.avsim.com/forums/topic/513102-credit-card-stolen-after-a-simmarket-order/#comment-3650479 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.
  13. I so appreciate your kindness and hard work Pete. I'm Looking forward to buying the new FSUIPC5. Paul
  14. 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
  15. 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.
  16. 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 customers......care to debate this, anyone?
  17. 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.
  18. Hi Craig, thank you for your response. There certainly is not 100 flights at TIST in 3Dpro with the Nyerges schedule that I see (100% setting). There are no GA flights. I get the 1 Jet Blue arrival and 3 major (AAL/DAL/JBU) carrier departures in the morning. 3 or 4 minor carrier Cessna departures and a couple minor carrier Cessna arrivals until about 10:00-11:00am. That is it for the whole day, and I did not touch the schedule file. Flight Aware may be correct in the schedule they provide but it is not reflected in the sim. Maybe the actual schedule file is correct, but the program is not reading that file correctly. Since it is so easy to mod schedules - why don't FeelThere/Nyerges do this? Since its so easy, surly we should be getting free quarterly updates to the schedules. Well you will find that FeelThere/Nyerges will disagree and that modifying the schedules is not so easy when you suggest that to them. I know all my options, I'm actually trying to do this project a favor; your less than positive thoughts about Nyerges schedules are just 1 example of many other things that could be much better. The FeelThere & Nyerges relationship seems to need assistance of some kind as well. Maybe there is a simple fix that I'm unaware of, but I have SP1a and I know for sure that I installed Real Traffic/Color correctly. I just bought this on 3/21/17 and would like to enjoy it, but so far its been more problems than fun. These problems are not the result of me not knowing ATC procedures - I know ATC procedures quite well, I fly for real. Maybe I just have to get used to the deficiencies that veteran FeelThere customers have been living with. It can be better though, you said it yourself, and its up to FeelThere/Nyerges to take action. The problem is, they wont listen to me. There is a focus on releasing more airports and that is understandable, but I'm new to this program/sim and TIST is where I should be practicing, this is my point. If this were a $10 game, I would not have bought it in the first place or I would be completely thrilled with the quality. Since it's more like $70 with FeelThere/Nyerges combined, there is no doubt we should expect more, and by doing so we actually assist FeelThere/Nyerges whether they believe it or not.
  19. Updating the schedule to reflect, or at least mimic real world operations will at least live up to the goal of the simulation. TIST as it is now is like a secret military installation that has some people come and go in a restricted block of time and that is it. If the schedule would reflect non scheduled (random) GA ops and also include recent commercial ops schedules for the full 24 period, TIST could be very fun and rewarding. But to just simply abandon TIST because KLAX is available or that KATL will soon be available is not good business. TIST was one of 3 airports included in the base package, surly we should be expecting it to at least be close to real world ops. I possibly understand why TIST was included; its like a basic C172 (TIST) being included in a flight sim, we have to learn the basics before going on to the 747's (KJFK tower). But to make that C172 (TIST) into a kite (too easy/very boring) is not good for business. The Tower line of products are not doing very well on Steam, but if a little attention to this topic and keyboard shortcuts could be attended to, I'm certain positive reviews and sales will sharply increase for Tower 3D pro. The product has excellent potential. I know you don't work for FeelThere, and I very much appreciate all your hard work that has gone into all of these ATC programs, as well as the time you take on the forums. FeelThere will not listen to me, but they will likely listen to you. Please consider helping revive TIST from the dead. I realize Nyergens plays a part in this equation, but maybe if you can convince Vic, Vic in turn will convince Nyergens. If I can master a more realistic TIST at 100%, then I will be able to move up to say KSAN, and then KPHL etc., but as it is now I have little desire to bother...another potential life long supporter, with great zeal, will be lost unnecessarily. Thank you for any consideration.
  20. I know- and FeelThere/Nyerges makes it even worse; a few sparse flights in the morning until about 10am and absolutely nothing else. We must ask what was the point of including this airport? And why does Nyerges have to be begged to update the schedule?
  21. The conversation about recording macros using a gaming keyboard is not precisely "back on topic". Although the work-around is great, its useless to those who have standard keyboards. Paul
  22. This is another perfect example as to why Keyboard Shortcuts would be of great service. Kev you are very correct that Tower 3D expects way too much from users. I don't think any of us want it to be necessarily easy, just reasonable. Currently we have to lower the traffic, find 2-4 MP buddies, or stick with TIST. Paul
  23. Good thinking TJ and Willem, I don't consider the need for keyboard shortcuts either cheating or too much to ask. The more automated that repetitive commands can be made, the safer it is for all of them virtual planes. Why make controlling aircraft more difficult than it needs to be? Its not like we have a staff of professional ATC controllers helping us, but set real traffic at 100%, voice alone with the feature set as it is, can be very unrealistic. If it were this difficult in real life, millions would die every year in plane accidents. Tower 3D Pro has us handle ground and tower frequencies at a major airport during peak hours. To make a program favor only voice or fall back to the endless mouse click method, puts a needless limit on this simulation. I hope FeelThere will reconsider adding keyboard shortcuts to the common commands. I understand Multiplayer can alleviate the workload, but personal schedules are always an issue in my experience. One truly begins to understand why airports like KLAX have 3 ground controls facilities for West, North, and South, plus separate tower control facilities for North and South. Paul
  24. Could keyboard shortcuts be added? - mouse clicks with the command bar is not sufficient (airports get too busy) for those who do not wish to or cannot use speech. Paul Racines
×
×
  • 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.