Will this be the end of Golden Wings?

[Deleted]

Alejandro Ramirez drew my attention to this very special website:

redwing-copter.com/1935-airflieds/

Indeed a very interesting approach to reviving interest in vintage aviation. This MSFS program might create a particular enjoyment, but certainly at the expense of Golden Wings, which already has only an insignificant fan community.

I can only repeat that this is extremely unfortunate. Then I can't imagine that it can be much fun to fly from an airfield of the Roaring Thirties straight into the hyper-represented world of today. It lacks the simplicity of the retro world that Golden Wings can offer.

It will again take years until something comparable in scope and diversity comes about.

I also don't understand why Golden Wings wasn't able to come close to catching the interest that still exists in Combat Flight Simulator, for example. After all, it is also about preserving and appreciating aviation history.

Bernard

[Tom/CalClassic]

It is unfortunate that this segment of the sim is falling away, but as the typical user generation ages out it is inevitable. I think the military side is holding up better due to the interest in younger people of the tools of war. The civil side seems to hold no such interest.

[Al]

Hi Bernard, I think Tom is right in general. Not only is GW aging but so is the FS9 platform. I do have a golden wings setup on my system and while transferring everything to my new machine I fired it up and tested it. Sure looked good and running it at 80fps made for some fun test flights. However, for me it’s a time thing, I have all three sims (FS9, FSXSE and MSFS and they all run great with sliders all the way up so that is taking time and the biggest time sucker of all is having got into scenery building. I haven’t flown a route in years much less fired up GW. I’m guessing others are having the same issue with all these choices but it’s nice to know it’s sitting there when I want it. I will post some pictures some time of my custom stuff but right now Travis AFB is sucking up my time, this one has been a nightmare for various reasons but hopefully about to tame this beast.

Al

[Tom/CalClassic]

Sorry it's such a problem, but I know the result will be stunning.

[Al]

Thanks Tom, hopefully so.

[Deleted]

It's simply shameful how little credit is given to all the work of Bill Lyons, Tom Constantine, Alexander Belov, Dennis Simanaitis and many others. Not long ago they were praised and their creations were talked about and appreciated. Today they are only good for the virtual wastebasket! Travel Air, Piper Cub, Golden Hawaii: forgotten everything?

Bernard

PS: lt very likely has something to do with the fact that many of the former members have unfortunately turned away from this forum.

[Jorge]

GW3 is -- and has been -- the basis for the Platinum Wings update/changes I've been working on for several years now. It hasn't been constant, by any means, but it's coming along. I just haven't posted anything since I didn't think there was anything worth posting for a while.

With all the changes to FS9 in general over the years (HDEnv2 by Pablo Diaz, EnvTex, SweetFX shaders, etc.), there's a chance that GW3 in general can still have a "niche" in our simming world. After all, it wasn't until recently that I found the 2019 video on "How to Make FS2004 Look Great for Free" over on youtube. Most of PW is done using info from there as well as tips from several forums. The main difference is that I used a basic GW3 install instead of a basic FS2004 install. I then removed the airports and navaids using an FS9 version of the FSX method I've described elsewhere to create the base PW install.

I don't have the computer horsepower to run FSX at max, much less MSFS.

As an example of my computer's age, I found an old box of CD's and stuff a few months ago cleaning out a closet. Among them I found a boxed version of X-Plane 9. I installed it just to see if it would run. It was marginal, but a little smoother than FSX -- but not by much. When I went online to see if there were any add-ons, almost everything was tossed YEARS ago to make room for the newer stuff of X-Plane 10 -- which is now getting erased from on-line sites to make room for version 11. Besides, most of the stuff was payware from what I saw.

So ... uninstalled it and saved disk space for FS9/FSX again.

I have tweaks and textures installed that have made FS9 much better than anything I have on my system short of IL2:1946 with the B.A.T. mods. If I can get most of the changes to FS9 done, I'll see about posting a "how-to" guide to "updating" GW3 to PW standards -- if you can call them "standards" to begin with, that is.

The Golden Age isn't gone, because if it was they wouldn't be trying to incorporate it into MSFS. The only bummer is that most -- not all -- of the people interested in that era probably don't have the computer "horsepower" needed to run it effectively, that's all. Hence why we're still with GW3 and why an FSX "pseudo-retro" has been asked about recently.

Jorge
Miami, FL

[jsaus]

I’ve just Instaleld GW, added in some airports / airfields and some vintage aircraft. I’ve forgotten how fun it is.

I’d love to see the how to guide. I hate seeing modern airports with it mixed so a way to remove them and the Navaids for FS9 would be great.

[Deleted]

Glad to hear you enjoy Golden Wings!

I have already given the advice at other sites to delete all AP9xxxxx.bgl files in the Scenery folders (Afri, Asia, Aust and so on)  as Jorge also recommends in his said FSX thread. But for no obvious reasons this has been ridiculous therebeen in a well known flightsim site. There are supposed know-it-alls everywhere!

On the other hand, I would leave the AB9xxxxx.bgl as they at least offer the ground textures for backdated airports. I also left the Navaid (NAV9xxxxx.bgl) files to ensure a certain orientation while searching in the map.

GW3 deletes the default buildings only with corresponding sceneries. This means that the buildings remain at all other places. These could be eliminated by deleting the respective OB9xxxxx.gel files. Unfortunately landclass objects such as Empire State or Chryler Bulding would disappear. too The only help is to gradually exclude default buildings while using tools like ExcBuilder or ADE.

Bernard

[Tom/CalClassic]

Bernard, are you sure that’s right, that signature buildings are contained in the OB files? I haven’t really looked at this so you could be right, but I always assumed they were part of the New York.BGL, etc, files.

[Deleted]

Tom, well that's what I thought too. I again deleted all OB9xx.xxx.bgl files in GW3 Scenery/name folder, and that's the result:



Don't ask me why the landlcass buildings aren't generated by city file as you assumed.

Bernard

[Tom/CalClassic]

Too bad...

[Tom/CalClassic]

ModelConverterX shows me that that the relevant buildings are indeed in NewYork.BGL. But their placement must be controlled by the files OB9NAME0.BGL and OB9NAME1.BGL, both of which contain only placement information, not objects. The files OB9NAME3.BGL and OB9NAME4.BGL appear to contain all the default terminal objects in the region (over 160 of them).

After testing, I found I was able to remove OB9NAME3.BGL and OB9NAME4.BGL (to remove the objects) but leave OB9NAME0.BGL and OB9NAME1.BGL in (to provide the placement for the remaining objects in the city BGL files) and this kept things like the Empire State Building, but removed all the default buildings at (for example) KFRG (Republic Airport in Farmingdale).

Hope this helps,

[Tom/CalClassic]

PS. These copies of the city files like NewYork.BGL could be modified by MCX to remove any modern buildings you don't want. Very easy.

[Tom/CalClassic]

BTW, make sure you back up all these files before trying this. I actually just added .inactive to the 2 OB file names to inactivate them, instead of actually removing them. Much safer.