shinkicker444

I have to agree with @Takadiurgathat the performance of YBBN is... not great. My performance numbers are pretty close to what they are getting as well, albeit slightly higher overall (using the High preset, with some tweaks). But the stuttering and hitching is very jarring. i9-10850K @4.89GHz RTX 3090 32GB DDR4 RAM 2TB NVMe M.2 SSD A personal nit pick is the lack of DHL branded building in the cargo area

I tried already, its how I got to show as much as it did. Since it wasn't showing them to begin with at all, but after fixing it it has them but it loads the wrong flight path. I don't think its an Orbx issue either, friend and I reported it MS Zendesk already. https://flightsimulator.zendesk.com/hc/en-us

I had an issue possibly related to this last night too, I had been flying into 1L recently and hadn't tried 19R until last night. I have reported this to Zendesk (since it might be an issue for them rather than Orbx) but shall share it here too. When you select the star GOMO1A for 19R (or even 19L iirc) it loads the arrival for 1L instead. This was with Navigraph AIRAC installed, without Navigraph you don't even get the choice for the GOMO1A arrival, or at least I didn't. Side note: Before YBBN was made available having the Navigraph data installed listed 1L/19R, but had a runway length of 0 since they weren't there, but with the YBBN addon it does list the runway length now - which I take to mean it is detecting them properly but there is an issue with incorrectly coded GOMOL arrival selecting the wrong flight path. Tried this with the TBM 930, A32NX and the HD787.

Thanks for passing it on.

Should be gate 24 is meant to be right on the end, not 23. Can't edit the post for some reason. Also for the fences, Its most egregious in my opinion near the domestic terminal where the public roadway curves near where planes are parked up. In the image here you can see the fence separating the service road and the public road. Also, where the Dash 8's are parked up there are light poles in sim that are a little too close to the planes and would need to be moved around a bit. Starting on the right of the image, that light pole doesn't exist but isn't too bad, the next one in from the right needs to be on the closest pointed corner of the next curved wedge over and the next one to the left needs to be moved over more towards the grass. Some extra screen shots, for things down near the cargo terminal for more detail.

Thanks for the response. I may add some to this list, but issues I've noticed with YBBN so far are: 1. Broken Jetways. The Jetways do not connect to the aircraft properly. For example with the A320 and the 787 it only comes about halfway down the door. The domestic terminal has a similar issue. Overall I think they need to be lowered. This includes the A380 jetways, the upper one is much too high. The angle of connection to the A380 would be too steep for IRL. 2. Jetways don't connect to the terminal buildings. Could probably fix it by having them partially embedded into the terminal. 3. Texturing on the jetways and terminal buildings is flat, blurry and lacking PBR details. Even the company logo's are very blurry. Windows on the terminal builds are also flat with no reflections (or very hard to see) or details. 4. Texturing on the ground is blurry, inaccurate and missing markings in places. This seems like a layering issue. 5. The terminal roads and ground is incredibly low quality resolution, and in the case of the overpass separating the GA buildings from the rest of the terminal doesn't look like an overpass and the carpark seems a bit dangerous. 6. Fences! There are no border fences around the airport. 7. Scuff markings on the ground around the terminal and on the runways need to be darker and more obvious 8. The cargo terminal is missing quite a lot of detail. There is a whole DHL setup on the left building that is just not shown at all in sim. 8. The gap between gate 23 and 24 feels a bit too close. According to google imagery gate 23 is right on the end of the protruding part of the terminal.

Yes, and it is sold by Orbx. If they want to charge nearly the same amount that Sydney does then it better be near the same quality as Sydney is. They don't have the excuse that Flytampa gets a cut of the funds either. Furthermore, why is it acceptable that Orbx in house developers being held to a lesser standard than the third party ones? All this tells me is that I can trust FlyTampa or Impulse or Drzewiecki to make the good stuff, and to avoid the in house products (unless they get a satisfactory review).

That's one of the things that makes me so angry about this is the fact I did pay full price, the equivalent of what Sydney cost. The fact that "team members" are dismissing criticism and locking threads (which is now open again, admittedly) makes me want to reconsider doing business with Orbx. I'd be fine with not having an interior, it'd be nice but it isn't a complete deal breaker. Even Sydney only has a small interior section rather than a fully modelled one like like... uh, Krakow. But the textures being so bad on the buildings and the ground and other external 3D modelling to make things not look like flat boxes along with the jetways not connecting and being placed too high all need to be fixed to make this remotely worth the full price.

I pretty much agree with everything you've said. I posted my thoughts here about the whole thing along with some others. But YBBN really does feel like quite the step back in comparison to other airports such as Sydney. I've seen it suggested that the reason for YBBN being lower quality is to aid in increasing performance due to the airport itself and the city pack too being close. But I find this reasoning to be somewhat disingenuous. Sydney is a far higher quality airport and its city pack is also much closer to the airport in addition to being also fairly high quality and performance is little different to other major airports crafted by Asobo, like LAX or JFK. This sim is built around pushing hardware and quality of visuals and the flight experience, and in that experience YBBN falls completely flat with what I have come to expect from Orbx. For those stating they got it for $10 due to the sale, that is irrelevant, its base price is $22, Sydney by comparison is $25. I would expect Brisbane to be the same quality as Sydney. But it is not by a long shot, as @Takadiurgasaid it seems like it is a port. To me it feels like it was done purely as a cost saving measure while still putting something out there because it won't be as popular as the more well known airports, even though it is a major Australian airport. Brisbane is not Gatwick, its not Narita, its not Sydney so a cheaper method was employed to save cost. That's what it feels and looks like even if it makes no sense and it is incredibly upsetting. I wanted and was expecting something like Sydney with the quality textures and modelling taking into account all the tech the sim has to offer, and this... just isn't that. The description on the store feels like false advertising. What PBR? I'm not seeing that in the panelling on the airport buildings? All I saw was blurry flat textures. The ground is just as bad if not worse. Effectively rebuilt the airport from scratch, it certainly doesn't feel that way. Hell, it should be brand new. Custom Jetways... that don't work properly. Comparing Brisbane to Sydney and Adelaide and it's night and day the difference and it really shouldn't be. I really hope there are some fixes and attention coming to it to bring it up to standard of what is expected in an MSFS airport.

Even so, it is not connecting to anything at the height it is in the game. It is nearly double the height of the 747 top passenger door, and A380's are pretty much the same height as a 747. So it may as well be for Saturn Vs. All of the jetways are too high at the International terminal, they need to be lowered. A320's which operate internationally between Australia and NZ, can't connect because the gates are too high as shown in my previous post. The 787, which also operates here, is in the same boat. Unfortunately there isn't an A380 in MSFS and as far as I can tell that jetway doesn't respond anyway, but we do have a 747 to try and compare. If this jetway worked and the plane was parked where it is supposed to be even then the downward angle on the jetway would significant, more than it is IRL. Compare the lower jetways with the height of the doors they connect then the upper one with the upper door, the overall angle isn't that steep on the lower doors while the upper door is a significant drop. Even the lower jetways in sim angle downwards when they don't IRL as seen in your image.

While I am happy with the new runway and having an airport better than the default I have to say I too am disappointed with Brisbane. From a distance it looks good, but up close it starts to fall apart. Especially the Domestic terminal. I don't know if the developers were changed half way through or if they ran out of time/money but the different between the Domestic and International terminals is quite large. But even the International terminal has some faults such as layering issues with the ground markings. For as long as this airport was in development (hell, apparently) I was expecting more. I had hoped that things like the jetways would work properly, that the markings on the ground would display correctly. In addition, I have to say the texturing is somewhat of a mixed bag. Some of it seems new and decent quality and other textures are very low quality and make me wonder if it was a port from a different version In addition to the previous post screenshot here are some more, spoiled for size. Jetways too high for type of planes that land at Brisbane. In correct layering for ground markings. The airline parking designations should be above the hash markings or like in the previous posts screenshots just missing all together. Also, extremely blurry. I really hope that this is rectified, because I cannot really recommend this to my friends until it is fixed.