|
Post by braselc5048 on Mar 17, 2014 16:27:40 GMT -5
Sadly, a correction - LeGuardia is not, in fact, particularly compatible, and actually needs a lot of work done. I've actually created fixes for them, a bunch of .bgl files to stick in the folder, although I'm not done with one last nagging problem. Once that's figured out, I'll upload them. I had to update the terminal and the PAA hanger, which if the creator would give permission, I could upload.
--Le Gaurdia required redrawing the coastlines of the entirety of New York Harbor, which I actually invested the time and did. AFCAD, exclusion, coastline and the like are all fixed. Then I decided to go and improve every pier and dock in the harbor, had a bug trying to create buildings from stock materials in SBuilderX (since forgotten), figured out the solution for it, tried adding apron tarmac for the piers, and... lost interest. Right now I went back to an older version that leaves the harbor the way it was before, or at least I 'think' it's the right version. I've also discovered that the CalClassic library has scenery object which would be extremely useful. Right now focusing on improving the street side of Le Guardia, which is stalled due to lack of having a utility to place objects.
Likely beyond my ability to solve is the Marine Air Terminal. Simply put, there are issues involving the precise location of the coastline having moved some, and the terminal building is partly over the water. The easiest way to fix it would be for whoever still has the source files to simply move the building slightly. --Solved
Paris Le Bourget: I discovered on a dawn flight that on one of the runways, there's approach lighting right in the middle of it. No idea what to do to fix that.
Le Bourget was fully fixed, updated and uploaded as a FSX airport. Except it's not on the scenery page of this website, for some reason.
|
|
|
Post by jacklyon on Mar 18, 2014 4:07:04 GMT -5
Yep I will like to make the fsx conversion for La guardia too, sadly i not have enough time theses days
to many works in progress..
|
|
|
Post by leutnantwerner on Mar 18, 2014 5:39:07 GMT -5
Hi, this is what i have done so far to convert KLGA to FSX. There are still some nasty coastlines to remove and i don't know if the airports forecourt looks realistic. Cheers Bernie Attachments:
|
|
|
Post by leutnantwerner on Mar 18, 2014 5:57:28 GMT -5
... and this is KSFO. Some of the original scenery objects were removed because of incompatibality. I should reactivate them with the new CC FSX standard libs. Cheers Bernie Attachments:
|
|
|
Post by braselc5048 on Mar 18, 2014 9:34:53 GMT -5
I managed to keep the water inlet behind the airport, which is almost too bad, as the modern highway looks perfect there. Seems like we need a division of labor, since we only need one conversion, and we have several people working on it. I've nearly got the area streetside of the airport done, and I've got the buildings updated. leutnantwerner - any chance I could have a copy of your land/water change (separately, with none of the other changes, it's just a personal preference thing for the modern highway)? Also, how about your change in the coastline at the Marine Air Terminal on its own, with no other changes? Or would that be too much additional work?
There seems to be two ways to go from here: your landclass fix for the street side of the airport, or my flatten and exclude fix, keeping the water. You seem to have gotten the coastline at the Marine Air Terminal fixed, and that seems to be the biggest piece of work. How about we take your land/water edit (on its own, no other changes), and use some excludes of mine, keeping a section of the modern highway? And somebody needs to fix the edge of the aircraft parking (minor fix)?
Alternately, you street side of the airport fix looks pretty good, although keeping the modern highway might be nice. How about you upload your update, and we go with yours?
|
|
|
Post by leutnantwerner on Mar 19, 2014 7:26:46 GMT -5
Hi, here another view from the Marine Terminal side. All has been done with ADEX only, a bit quick and dirty, because of a lack of time. If you really want to continue with it just pm me your e-mail adress and i send you the ADEX3 file. Cheers Bernie Attachments:
|
|
|
Post by tigerlily on Mar 24, 2014 6:00:19 GMT -5
I just want to say that I appreciate all of the hard work going in to making the Great Cal Classic Library of scenery compatible with FSX. I have both FS2004 COF and FSX running on my machine and I love flying in the backdated 1959 Era. Having the ability to do so in FSX is a goal worth reaching. I would offer to help but I know nothing about the creation of scenery. Many thanks to all involved in this project.
Capt. Sara
|
|
|
Post by deltalima on Jun 23, 2014 1:48:11 GMT -5
Hello! Have never felt my screens were worth much. But since having a new PC, FSX runs really sweet. Here's DX10, with Scenery Fixer, Milviz F-86 making do as an FJ-4 Fury - at of my favourite Calclassic sites ... Chase Field TX. Loving all the NAS in Texas (and of course, the airports). Thanks Juan, and all the great folks here. If even another couple of classic NAS/MCAS ever materialize, I'll be your biggest fan. If a single Canadian airport comes, then my bucket list will be complete ... LOL! cheers, dl
|
|
|
Post by Tom/CalClassic on Jun 23, 2014 10:14:24 GMT -5
I have a thought on the "concrete tails" that extend into the asphalt tarmac at Nice. I think if you add another blue node in the taxiway near the dividing line between asphalt and concrete, and make the taxiway link on the concrete side into Concrete (and the link on asphalt into Asphalt), that might help. You will probably have to move that new node by trial and error until the problem is minimized.
Hope this helps,
|
|
|
Post by yesimmagirl on Jul 5, 2014 5:58:35 GMT -5
I'm having SO many issues with LAX!! I could cry. There are trees everywhere! The grass between the runways looks like ground texture!
|
|
|
Post by yesimmagirl on Jul 5, 2014 6:10:53 GMT -5
I guess i don't fully understand how FS2004 and FSX don't play nice together! I really want my World to stay in the 1960? Should I just buy FS 2004 and fling FSX over a ravine?
|
|
|
Post by Wolfgang on Jul 5, 2014 9:56:14 GMT -5
Hi,
if you only want to fly in the 1957 - 1962 time frame, then I think it's best to use FS 2004. Some sceneries are made compatible with FSX, but most not. I for myself will not make the switch to FSX in the foreseeable future. Also I do not plan to update my old sceneries or new sceneries to FSX. And as far as I know, most of the 60ies scenery developers ( Tom, Mike, Harry, Jaap and others ) will also not switch the next time. Try it with FS 2004 and the things will get much easier. I know, some people think the other way, but fact is, the sceneries are made with FS 2004 and are fully compatible with it.
Cheers Wolfgang .
|
|
|
Post by FSMuseum on Jul 6, 2014 3:34:50 GMT -5
If I'm not badly mistaken, I believe most of my sceneries can/will work at least mostly with FSX.
|
|
|
Post by deltalima on Jul 6, 2014 9:30:13 GMT -5
With all due respect to Wolfgang and friends, I believe it's very feasible to enjoy the CC in FSX - and have done so for over 5 years flying almost exclusively only 50s-60s aircraft out of (mostly CC) airports and bases.
First, I appreciate his work immensely, and obviously recognize that FS9 is their sim of choice - and that at the end of the day, operability in FSX is something I see as a blessing - not something I take for granted. As in, I take for granted that an FSX native addon will work, whereas I hope the CC addon will work. If they don't, I see it as either a challenge to try and resolve - but not as a deficiency in the product. So the key is simply managing my expectations.
Most have turned out fine out of the box, and a few I've had to do some workarounds in ADEX for. Some have never worked - and just chalk up it up to a way more than half full glass and carry on.
Important caveat - when I transitioned, a big personal sticking point had been not being able to have Golden/Silverwings autogen in FSX. I finally decided that the benefits were worth the switch - but to Wolf's point - that is an immersive part of the classic period, and some may not justify the downside of modern autogen. Again, I accepted the trade off and moved on. Pivotal factors for me were moving carriers, and no FL100 ceiling - 50s-60s naval aviation and 60s NASA being one my big interests. Over time the latter outweighed the former.
I will check LAX next week and report back. I'm still in the midst of a new rig reinstall.
Again, just noting it can be done - if one manages expectations, and can tweak with some tools like ADEX and AIFP.
Cheers
DL
|
|
|
Post by Wolfgang on Jul 6, 2014 10:45:14 GMT -5
Hi,
I don't want to put up a controversial discussion about FS9 and FSX. I only stated that most classic sceneries are build up with FS9 and if you want it easy with install and use, FS9 has to be your choice. It's difficult enough for beginners to get all things sorted even with FS9.
With FS9, you have not to deal with incompatibilities like missing airport polygons, wrong texture format, missing excludes etc.
Yes, if you know what you do, and fiddle a bit around with DXTBMP, ADE, SBX and MCX, you get a 100% compatibility with FSX.
But I think the question is, how to deal best and easiest with the CC stuff.....and the answer is FS9. Also no one has said, you can't have both. Some user here choose FSX for modern stuff and FS9 only for the classics.....
Cheers Wolfgang
|
|