|
Post by hermankreimes on Oct 1, 2009 12:47:54 GMT -5
OK, thank you JohnL for your input. I will start to modify LFPO today. It should be interesting to see how it will go. I have not done to much tinkering or tweeking around with FS files.
According to the instructions, nothing will change until you click the "save" button which allows one to do a bit of experimenting.
Cheers; Herman
|
|
|
Post by hermankreimes on Oct 5, 2009 19:10:17 GMT -5
Hello Harry;
Just wanted to let you know that I have made the changes to LFPO,Orly AFCAD to modify the 26\08 runway length from 7,866ft. to 10,982ft. as indicated in Flight International for the year 1963. I feel pretty confident that F.I. is a very reliable source. I left the runway width at 150ft, otherwise at 197ft it would have overlapped the underpass bridge at about the midpoint of the runway.
I also added some additional runway markings because I felt that by 1963 Orly would have had the same standards as other major international airports.
Let me know where to send the AFCAD so that you can have a look at it.
Regards; Herman
|
|
|
Post by Tom/CalClassic on Oct 5, 2009 19:24:36 GMT -5
Hi,
While England was already marking their runways with touchdown marks, etc. and the KIDL new runway 4/22 had them painted on, most runways were still pretty bare in 1963.
Hope this helps,
|
|
|
Post by Harry on Oct 6, 2009 13:27:20 GMT -5
Hi Herman,
I've send you a PM.
Kindly regards
Harry
|
|
|
Post by hermankreimes on Oct 6, 2009 16:00:41 GMT -5
OK thanks Tom. I will revise the AFKAD for Orly and just include the aiming point markings.
Herman
|
|
|
Post by Defender on Oct 6, 2009 16:29:31 GMT -5
Tom,
A postscript on this topic.
I seem to remember reading somewhere that although both the AFCAD and ADE runway markings programmes have only the FAA style touchdown markings (single rectangle) available, there is an option somewhere with the ICAO/European markings (three offset rectangles). Are you aware of this and do you know how to source it?
Bill
|
|
|
Post by Tom/CalClassic on Oct 6, 2009 20:13:36 GMT -5
I would think that it was automatic when the airport was in Europe?
|
|
|
Post by Defender on Oct 8, 2009 11:26:26 GMT -5
Tom,
You say,
"I would think that it was automatic when the airport was in Europe? "
Not as far as I can see, unless I'm doing something wrong. Are you saying that if for example you use ADE to add a runway to a default airport in Europe, the touchdown markings will appear different from those on US default airports?
Bill
|
|
|
Post by Tom/CalClassic on Oct 8, 2009 12:08:10 GMT -5
Hi,
I really have no idea - that was just a guess...
|
|
|
Post by hermankreimes on Oct 8, 2009 18:04:36 GMT -5
Hello Tom; I have an incident here that really puzzles me ?? As you are aware, I am in the process of modifying the runway length on the 1963 Paris Orly airport scenery. I downloaded the scenery from flightsim and installed it in FS9. I proceeded and performed the modification and then did some test taxiing and flying and everything looked pretty good, however I was'nt happy with a couple of things so I deleted everything and I started from scratch. Then as I was doing another test flight I noticed a considerable change in the RW 26\08 tunnel\underpass scenery. To be more specific, there were light posts and a concrete barrier partially across the runway and the concrete underpass was out of place. It looked almost as if the whole airport had shifted to the east. I do'nt get it, I used the same scenery as before yet something is different. Have anyone come across a similar problem? Any suggestions would be appreciated. I have tried everything that I could think of. Herman
|
|
|
Post by hermankreimes on Oct 8, 2009 19:22:34 GMT -5
Hello Bill;
Could you let me know if the chart you have indicates RW 26\08 having a displaced threshold at the 26 end in 1965. Thank's
Herman
|
|
|
Post by Tom/CalClassic on Oct 8, 2009 19:27:57 GMT -5
Herman,
There is something in FS - if you do it, the library objects will shift on you (up and down too). But for the life of me I can't remember what it is. Harry or Wolfgang?
|
|
|
Post by Wolfgang on Oct 8, 2009 22:44:51 GMT -5
Hi, hmm, not really I would let the scenery as it was in your case. Are these differences in length worth the trouble and work ? Maybe it is better to work on a small new project to get some skills in using the tools, because Orly is a very complex design. I worked a bit with it in the beta phase, and if I changed some to the better, it gets worse on another place. just my two cents Wolfgang
|
|
|
Post by emfrat on Oct 8, 2009 23:07:56 GMT -5
Hi All - I came across the same thing when I made a second install of FS9 for Classic stuff. The problem is related to the TERRAIN_MAX_VERTEX_LEVEL in your fs9.cfg. I think for Orly to work it needs to be set to 19. I had mine set to 21, same as my VFR install, but there was no underpass and I had some sort of rogue carpark floating on the taxiway. At work, and trusting to memory, but I just remembered I posted here about it: calclassic.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=chat&thread=753&page=1Hope this helps MikeW
|
|
|
Post by Tom/CalClassic on Oct 9, 2009 10:28:05 GMT -5
That was it, thanks. I guess that shouldn't be your problem...
|
|