crbascott

Vic, you keep coming up with the right answers. Keep it up! 😀

You're funny. 😂

The views from the tower cab look great. Hopefully there will more great views and enhanced zoom functionality.

I know what you meant, I have a “little experience” with backend databases. My point was no matter what scheme you come up with (numbers, codes, etc) it ultimately has to tie back to ICAO code because that is really the only primary data point that is readily available from the original data sources (FA, FR24). I’m hoping we can get granular than just the terminal level.

I really don't think ICAO vs IATA is the issue with airports. The real issue is that the airport files included in Real Traffic have been around since T!2011 and are terribly inaccurate - containing both bad and obsolete data. From my vantage point, I've never seen a holistic effort to clean up these files. If it were up to me, these files would be blown up and started over.

Using a number ID is fine but at some point it has to link to an ICAO (or IATA) code because, as you alluded to, that's all the data source will have. Other special considerations need to include special liveries and terminal/gate assignments. You didn't go into that but I believe your approach can handle that. However, if it's a number ID or ICAO based value that I conceptualized a few pages ago it doesn't really matter.

To give us cargo planes they had to do something “quick and dirty” since modifying anything in the current version was, sadly, out of the question. For the next version, there’s no reason (and excuse) for quick and dirty solutions. I provided a conceptual approach a couple of pages ago, so I think a clean solution is doable. We’ll see what FT comes up with.

Agreed, using IATA codes is and would be a mess. Actually, the ICAO codes alone are not the best solution either especially when it comes to differentiating cargo vs commercial and what carrier a regional airline is operating for. Hopefully, FT will come up with a good solution for the next version ...for the record, I'm not a fan of the current approach of using fake ICAO codes for cargo.

I've never run the installers as admin and never had problems. As @EliGrim mentioned, this case and most other installation issues are due to the user choosing the wrong install location. We can only hope for intelligent installer(s) with the next version.

Deleted my reply. Looks like the issue was solved in a 25 post thread on Steam. it appears the RT installation did not go into the correct folders as indicated above.

Looks like FedEx has some smaller planes operated by other carriers. But, they would still have the FedEx livery. https://www.planespotters.net/airline/Federal-Express https://www.planespotters.net/airline/United-Parcel-Service-UPS

It’s either all old or all new for a specific airline/model. Not exactly what I’d call “the odd one” or realistic. But it’s all we have at the moment. It will be interesting to see how they address the RT/RC product in the next version. The current approach they’ve used since T!2011 definitely has its limitations.

To be honest, if it was in the correct folder you'd be able to see it. Keep in mind, the "correct folder" may not be the default folder that the installer displays.

This is the first post I've ever seen on this forum with someone complaining that people aren't making enough custom schedules. Very sad! Keep in mind this is a 3+ year old game , a lot of the new airports don't receive much attention or fanfare. KDFW specifically is too big for this game engine. It can't be played realistically - both operationally and traffic wise. Plus it is predominantly one airline. But, since you are a Dallas homer and the only one complaining, you should should definitely make your own custom schedule. However, now's not the best time for custom schedule making unless traffic density isn't a priority.

It will make them more of a mess than they already are - at least as far as Tower!3D goes. Unfortunately, regional airlines are already a pain to deal with in the Terminal file. At LAX, Compass flew for both AAL and DAL but you can''t differentiate between the two without making up IATA/ICAO codes and sacrificing liveries. Skywest already flies for United at LAX and there is already a lack of parking spots in the UAL terminals. With Skywest adding DAL flights, it will just add to the ever increasing gate availability issue we have to deal with in T!3D, I made a wishlist item to handle regional airlines better ... I hope it sees the light of day.

You can only go back two weeks at the airport level.

Hopefully they’ll deliver more than just those two things. 😉

Selecting calm won't change the wind direction, but it will allow you to choose whatever runways you want. if your "problem" is the actual wind direction is not what you want, you're out of luck. Maybe the next version.

Looking at the log it looks like you've tried EXIT AT TAXIWAY. I think one of the following two commands should work: VACATE RUNWAY LEFT ONTO TAXIWAY P2 TAKE NEXT AVAILABLE EXIT ON LEFT. I think timing is key though. I believe the commands need to be issued before the successfully landing message. But, then if you can't get them to taxi via the south loop it's all moot. 😞

I'd rather have the ability to create liveries ourselves - like we had in T!2011.

Yep, sadly with the game's flaws you have to sacrifice reality for playability. That's why what I used to think was a sim is now just a game.

Yep, they are only operating on the east side right now due to the lower traffic levels. Actually, If you want to try and replicate real life this is from the KDFW D-ATIS - "ALL ACFT LNDG RWY 17C EXIT LEFT AT P2". They take the high speed exit at P2 and then take the P, ES, JS loop. Not sure if the game will handle this left exit very well though.Plus, this game doesn't recognize a high speed exit as all planes come to a stop. Regarding 17L landings, it would be best to post a log file and then we can determine where the issue is and if there is a possible solution. More than likely it is a bug. I have my doubts it will get fixed but if it's airport related maybe there's a slim chance. During the interim you could try just issuing a TAXI TO TAMP VIA ER command and see what route it draws. Then as it approaches P, try sending it around the loop.

Yes - anyone and everyone with the non-Steam version has this issue.

For each Real Color pack there are two files. So, no, don't remove either one of them. For KPHL, you are looking for airplanes_texpack02 and airplanes_texpack02.manifest. Note: the number in the filename could just be 2 instead of 02.

Also, you never want to buy from atcsuite.com because you always have to pay full price. Feelthere.com has occasional sales. Caveat emptor.