leuen

The only way to resolve EVENTUALLY the problem, could be a curved approach. Without such a procedure, the approach to Kai Tak wouldn't be possible neither. Bernard

At least it moves! But I'm still struggeling with textures.

Thanks Christian. I tried to rename sim.cfg to aircraft.cfg, as it should be named for FS9. But it didn't work neither. I presume, that this model isn't suitable for FS9 anyway. Bernard BTW, nice to hear from you. I already had seen your name and red your comments before at Flight X and Flightforum. How times goes by!

Has anyone tried to use the AI version of Erwin Welker's Queen Mary? Even it it seems to be forseen using the AI ship with FS2004 as well, it doesn't work. Probably it might be due to the missing aircraft.cfg. I would be grateful for any advice. Bernard

Thanks for your tip. I have been at the site before and at least could copy the map showing the whole trip. I will try to create an AI flightplan based on this information. There just would be waterfields, and some are already done for Imperial Airways seaplane traffic. Bernard

The file 'cobham27.zip' available here, relates Alan Cobham's flight around Africa done in 1927. Bruce Kennewell mention in his readme the following link to get flightplan informations: http://henrycrun.spaces.live.com/default.aspx Unfortuntely this link is dead. Even Wayback Machine could't find it anymore. Did anyone got its contence some several years ago? Thanks for any advice. Bernard

The following might be an other approach: I'm running FS9 in different classic and GW3 vintage environments with the same fs9.exe. I just rename - scenery.cfg - texture folder - aircraft folder There wouldn't be a problem to have classic and vintage aircraft in the same folder. I have the better overlook with two separate ones. The sceneries are saved in different folders too and are managed by scenery.cfg anyway. Running FS9 this way, allows to share all the same tools. Bernard

No, you're absolutely right. I deteled some days ago the 1965 traffic like this. The reason for that? The aircraft are simply awfull. Installing this freeware program is purely time waiting. Bernard

Sorry, but I think this thread now should be closed. I wasn't aware that it would get out of control this way. Initally I intended to initiate a serious discussion how FS9 still could be kept alive, compared with the actual MSFS2020 mania. Obvisouly this finally has been misunderstood. Not very pleasant for this forum! Bernard

Don't be humble, Dedl! As long as we haven't seen something equal to what was and still is possible with FS9, I am really confident! Bernard

Thanks for your interesting and motivated statements. Nevertheless, all these addons you mention remain just selective improvements. It's an indubitable fact that GW3 is mostly limited to several dozens U.S. airfields, fortunately once very nicely done by a couple of meritorious 'The Old Hangar' supporters. But as we know, vintage flying was already done in the whole world. The deficit is obvious. I could admit that vintage world isn't such attractive and fascinating than hyper photorealistic environments. On the other hand it suprise me that f.i. the CF2 community still remain quite creative. Probably boming towns and aircraft carriers might be more exciting than flying slowly and thoughtfully over sparsely populated landscapes! So let's improve GW3 as best as we can. Every new and especially innovative input will be higly welcomed and appreciated. Bernard

Yes, and that's very anoying while used to edit airports with Flight1 AFX and its WYSIWYG interface. Bernard

I use one and the same FS9 for two different versions: classic (CalClassic) and vintage (GW3). To start one of them, I just rename following: - scenery.cfg - aircraft folder (two separate folders for better overview) - main texture folder Scenery Addon folders will be actived by the different scenery.cfg. That allows to use same AFX, IS3, TVB, Traffic Toolbox, FS SmartVIEW and weather tools. It works perfectly, and could even be expanded with additional versions. Bernard

Robin, these all are nice sceneries, indeed. They are there since several years. Where are newer creations? Even CFS1 and CFS2 get more recent addons. Bernard

Vintage flying: you brought it to the point. Just some very few, like Robin here, are still interested to keep the Thirties in the air. It might be nice to fly vintage aircraft with FSX or P3D for time to time. However, it's by far nicer and much more funny to have them in appropriated environment. But since The Old Hangar has been abandoned, vintage flying almost disappeared. That's an unfortunate fact. And I'm not a did-hard, BTW. Bernard

I always thought that what are called 'crosswind runways' are runways which are crossing together and both could be used by AI traffic with additional invisible runways settings. Or am I wrong about that? Bernard

With ADE I ment Afcad. The second term seems to be considered as oldish. Anyway, I suggested to use the default Afcad and deactivate the addon and see what happens there. I reallly doubt that any will be able to let AI doing correct and acxeptable approachs, landings and take offs at Lukla. If someone likes to let them flying through a lot of mountains, than of course it will be absolutely ok. In a way it's like flying at Arctic circle, at least with FS9. Bernard

Instead spending a lot of time for clarifing whether it's legal or not to modifiy ADE, I would suggest to use the default Afcad and let an AI flying there. I guess the matter will be off the table very fast. Bernard

Sorry, but what would be wrong to do privately things for somebody else? Even more for a very old FS version and for a probably no less old addon. There are generations since 2003, and nobody cares two hoots about it anymore. Bernard

You might add gates with any ADE tools. There is a grass strip by default, which should be completed too. But anyway, I would be extremely curious to see your AI traffic landing and taking off there. Bernard

The topic of "AI traffic in the mountains" has interested or occupied me for a long time. Because wherever mountains rise high, no sensible AI flight can be designed. There are a few files that allow a curved approach. Above all for Kai Tak, but then also Samedan and, as here, Innsbruck. The only problem is that the plane has already made its way through mountains miles before. Curved approach or not. Some time ago I searched how to fly beginning Sixties to the newly build Nepalese airfield Lukla with AI. The only solution was the helicopter and some waypoints in order o fly to the airfield from the plain and through an open valley. But because AI only use departure runways in one direction, the helicopter would then have flown straight into the mountain and crash. The solution was two Afcad - one for the approach, the other in the opposite direction for the departure. During the night the AI ​​is changed so that on the other day the helicopter is in the same place as the one that flew to the day before. It will look like that: The first Allouette on landing ... and the second on departure back to Kathmandu It does not work or works very poorly with other machines. And the flight is not that absurd, especially since an Alouette III set a landing record on the 6,000 meter high Deo Tibba in the western Himalayas in the early 1960s. The main aim was to impress the Indian Air Force as a potential customer. BTW, I'm really surprised that some uploaded here Nepalese AI traffic which in most cases won't work. Bernard

Native AI for sure. But the flying world would be rather poor while just using such aircraft. Especially in a retro or vintage environment. Like Guenter Kirschstein I use more than 1,500 "stearable" aircraft, ships, helicopters, cars, and balloons as AI. The only thing I couldn't got in the air is the Bristol Sycamore. Bernard

It isn't that bad. I just said, I let them flying as AI. Until I killed sound and panel, it was a normal aircraft. It would be disrespectful to say something else. Bernard

Mine is without sound and panel anyway. Bernard

That's all informations I have: // This is Basler Turbo-67 for FS2004 [fltsim.0] title=Basler BT67 AWI Polar 5 sim=Basler_BT67_v1.1 model= panel= sound= texture= kb_checklists=BT-67_check kb_reference=BT-67_ref atc_id=C-GAWI atc_airline=Alfred Wegener Institute atc_flight_number=11 ui_manufacturer="Basler" ui_type="BT-67" ui_variation="AWI 'Polar 5'" ui_typerole="Twin Engine Prop" description="Basler BT67, Polar 5 des Alfred Wegener Institutes Bremerhaven\nPaint for FS2004" Bernard