Roger Wensley

Anybody willing to slightly modify an AI standard engine DC3 to a turboprop version? Only the front of the engine pods needs to be modified; none of the engine controls or performance to be touched. rogwen at rogers.com

Anybody willing to slightly modify an AI standard engine DC3 to a turboprop version? Only the front of the engine pods needs to be modified; none of the engine controls or performance to be touched. rogwen at rogers.com

Can't help you with that but thanks for posting it. These postings all confirm that buying MSFS 2020 in 2021, AFTER they sort out the problems, is a good idea.

Ha! My memory dredged the answer up out of the muddy depths. Put the parking brake on with control-and-full-stop while in cockpit view. Then use the mouse to click on the oil pressure gauge and the dip stick becomes visible.

Can anyone remind me of how one checks the oil level in the Aerosoft Piper Super Cub? Something to do wit the parking brake? I just totally forgot how.

Of course, as soon as I posted that message the forum came up with other related suggestions, and there it was, Genesis Terrain Mesh!

I am trying to remember the name of the terrain mesh that we all used to buy for FS9. It was recently mentioned, I think in the forum, as not being available anymore. Give my memory a large jog please?

Rockcliffe2

 

I wish I could say the same about CYRO, where I learnt to fly! It stopped me purchasing MSFS2020 until I have worked out how to upgrade Rockcliffe to the standard of my FS9 version. That "guessed" club house?!?

If we take 2020 apart and look at separate aspects of it then we can see that some of it works well and other parts do not. From the posted comments it appears that installation is sometimes iffy. And then getting 2020 to just recognise the pedals and joystick you already have can be a total failure. There are also complaints about getting 2020 to actually work. Of course, is this for 1% or 20% of the down-loaders? We don't know, but it appears that there are possibly some causes for complaint. For me, the main complaint is the failure of scenery standards between the flying view (which is mostly excellent though with some complaints about particular details) and the view upon landing at a stock airfield. Suddenly one is back in stock FS9 or FSX, or worse. The "imagining" or "guessing" the appearance of an airfield building is not a success, despite the prerelease fanfare. A hangar, yes, but why at 90 degrees to the correct siting? And if I showed you the "imagined" club house at CYRO you would fall apart laughing. It would fit well into a Disney cartoon of a toadstool house. If there was a simple programme to be used for siting a purpose-made building into the simulator and deleting the existing at the same spot I would not be complaining. Or even better, not purpose-made and to be selected from a library of hangars of different colours and sizes, so that everyone could update their airstrip. I have looked at what is involved in making scenery for 2020 and it is not for the average scenery maker who was busy with FS9. So until this simulator is completed, updated, and satisfactory in all aspects, I close the hangar door.

Everything written here is relevant and correct. What spoils MSFS2020 for me, and by spoil I mean really disappoints, is the airfield scenery from under 1,000 feet. Flying to a destination is great. Arriving at the destination and landing is like finding you are in an FS9 or FSX stock airport, at best. If I showed you the "guessed" clubhouse at Rockcliffe in Ottawa compared with the actual building you would fall apart laughing. This contrast needs fixing, and if there is no way to improve the guessing system then it needs a simple and easy to use programme for placing modeled buildings into the scenery.

Howlak: Yes, I know there are freeware 2020 airports, but I am interested only in Canada and Alaska where I have flown for real. So I expect to have to make them myself.

Wout123: I won't fly happily around until I can land at a real airfield that looks like I know it should!

Hmmmmm, a deathly silence.......

I will definitely not be buying 2020 unless I can be sure that I will be able to make scenery and update stock airports. Which raises two interesting questions:

 

(1) Is there already in existence a programme like SceneryGenX (used for FS9) that is designed for 2020 scenery making?

 

(2) Is there already in existence a programme like FS Design Studio (used for FS9) that works for making 2020 scenery objects such as hangars?

 

Given that there is already scenery for 2020 that can be purchased and some that is free, this suggests that programmes must already exist but raises a third question:

 

(3) SceneryGenX was free and FS Design Studio was not expensive, but will 2020 programmes be affordable for the individual to make free scenery?

 

I would like some input on this, if possible.

He now said that the SDK is way complicated and wouldn't even start to explain how or why; for which I was thankful.

So, you were even more disappointed with the scenery. Ah well........ FS9?

Don't ask me what is more complicated, I only know how to make FS9 scenery!

I understand, from someone who has made scenery for a number of years and for different flight sims as opposed to only FS9 (which is my situation) that he has investigated making 2020 scenery and dismissed it as a possibility, as it is way complicated. So, freebies made by individuals as opposed to companies are likely to be in small numbers.

It is clear that while flying in 2020 the sim is visually really good when outside of large city areas and flying over the suburbs and countryside. The problem that arises when going below 1,000 feet to land at, for example, Rockcliffe CYRO, is that the airport buildings are then seen in 3D close-up. If they were only hangar buildings then the "guesses" made by the sim would probably be closer to the truth, but the museum buildings at Rockliffe are more complicated. And in fact the one hanger that is replicated is at 90 degrees to it's true direction. The overall effect is that the "wrong guesses" overwhelm the "nearly-right" building shapes and I was left thinking that there is little difference between 2020 stock airfields and FS9 or FSX stock airfields. Which is hardly surprising, when one considers it all. I am used to seeing CYRO with 100+ parked planes, fences, etc, both in real life and in FS9. This was a disappointment, even though to some extent expected.

Working now. Don't ask me, I have NFI.

A second idea; that the texture selected no longer exists in my FS9, so there is nothing to show up and be seen? But I tried two different ones when the first one didn't work and got no results. Try another ten maybe.

One thing occurs to me. It may all be working, as far as FS9 reading the bgl goes, but if for some reason the "position" of the terrain is generated incorrectly by EZlandclass then the scenery is showing up somewhere else. I will try to check this, somehow.

Tom, I am putting the airfields (SceneryGenX) and the airfield grass (SBuilder) and the terrain (EZlandclass) into the same scenery folder. All the others are read by FS9 and show. I also just deleted EZlandclass and downloaded and installed it again, v2, which is what I had before. Same result, nothing. I also tried with terrain in a separate scenery folder and installed in the FS9 scenery library; nothing. I really cannot figure out what might be happening, or how, let alone WHY NOW, as I have changed nothing. I also tried it in a different area, for no logical reason except hope, and no result.

hgschnell, I will look at that, but right now I have been brought to a halt on these small BC airfields by the terrain texture problem described in the adjacent post.

Thinking about this, I now suspect that this is an FS9 "numbers" problem. A few years ago I could not install new scenery in the FS9 library, and found that there is a maximum number that can be installed; 1,100 or 1,200, around that kind of number. I solved that problem by putting all my Ontario scenery into one "RWOntario" folder and deleted all the single airport listings from the library. In fact I did the same for British Columbia, Alberta, etc etc. I do not believe that I have reached, again, that 1,200 limit (or whatever it is) for scenery library entries. I am putting the new and small BC airfields into one folder and not registering them individually in the library, and when I remove and replace the airfield grass in the correct position using SBuilder then that bgl works fine. When I use EZlandclass for surrounding terrain then the bgl does not work at all. Puzzled. Ideas?

I have used EZ landclass for years to easily modify the terrain types close to the airfields I made. It is functioning now as it has always done in the past: fill out the short questionaire regarding scenery name and location (get from FS9) and which folder to keep scenery in and which FS9 or/and FSX is it for, and then open the grid, locate FS9 in one of the grid boxes, number the box as per terrain you want, save, create the scenery bgl, then exit the programme. Put the bgl in a live scenery folder, go to the location and see the result. Except there is no result?!? Can this be an EZ landclass malfunction, or an FS9 one? Any ideas?