Jump to content

wolfko

Members
  • Posts

    3,640
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    9

Posts posted by wolfko

  1. Blackshark AI have a contract with MS/Asobo and contribute a major very important part for MSFS.

    I highly doubt that the terms of contract with MS/Asobo will allow them to work with Unreal Engine or LM on products which are in direct competition to MSFS. And IMO Blackshark won't have any interrest to swap MSFS for P3d. Why should they?

  2. 1 hour ago, carlosqr said:

    Maybe it can be added as optional in the configuration panel of the product in Central in case there are people not interested in adding it. I think all will depend on how nice it looks there, based on its possition it looks like it kills a bit the facade of the terminal so it would be nice to have the option to have it or not

     

    Cheers

    Carlos

     

    Carlis, I have been there last July and as @ESGG Spotter said, it looks like to be a permanent structure. 

    Following your suggestion one could demand a panel for removing any structure at an airport, which is not to his liking.

    • Like 1
  3. On 11/23/2022 at 11:17 AM, jgoggi said:

    Please, see in the other thread why it IS correct...

     

    And hete is just one exsmple I found after a quick search why it is not correct. In this thread there are at least two reasons mentioned for a missalignement of PAPIs an ILS.

     

    https://aviation.stackexchange.com/questions/33125/why-would-a-papi-and-ils-glide-slope-for-the-same-runway-not-coincide

  4. 1 hour ago, jgoggi said:

    ... because if you are on it you have to see 2 reds and 2 whites.

     

    The above is not correct. On short final at many airports there is a discrepancy between PAPI and ILS indications in real world. This is stated in quite a few YouTube tutorials about flying ILS approaches by real world pilots. Then the ILS signal is lower then the PAPI path.

     

    On long finals it very often is the other way round, because it is quite a difference in height sitting on a 747 flightdeck or in a Cessna 152.

     

    So generally PAPIs are more applicable for smaller GA planes rather than airliners

     

    But I cannot specifically comment on LIEO, becauseI don't own this scenery.

  5. 7 hours ago, Erdinger said:

    I have reinstalled and twice. I bought KORS from Orbx, so it is noy a marketplace install

     

    As promised, I have checked my installation of KORS and as you can see from the screenshot below I see the same "ghost" aircraft on the apron at the Southern end of the airport. So there is no benefit in reinstalling, because this seems to be a glitch in the Orbx scenery. I have never parked my planes at this part of the airport before thus have never realized this issue.

     

    Edit: at the other parts of the airport the satellite ground imagery is covered with kinda "hand made" texture overlay (as you can see from the parking area at the left edge of my screenshot) thus the burned in planes and other artefacts are not visible.

     

    image.thumb.jpeg.c0769a95638f2ef0943f4df8204c38a5.jpeg

    • Thanks 1
  6. This issue can be seen at many airports, mainly default ones, where satllite images or areal photos are used for the ground rextures. What you see are just the aircraft, which had been parked there, when the image was taken. These images usually run through a photoshop cleaning process to get rid of such artefacts before used in a sim. I wonder that this has been overlooked at an Orbx airport. Since Doug isn't seeing these planes it might be that you have a mixup of default and Orbx textures. So maybe a fresh install of KORS might help.

     

    PS: I'll later check how my installation of KORS looks like.

     

     

  7. 10 hours ago, radartom2 said:

    Nope the Kiwis are not happy.

     

    Whats up with Orbx thinking that the New Zealand Local Legend 8 Aircraft currently in development by Orbx
     

    De Havilland DHC-4 Caribou

     

    Please Noooo  :banghead::banghead:

     

    The Orbx CEO Anna Cicognani and powers that be appear to have got it wrong.

     

    The De Havilland DHC-4 Caribou is not a well known aircraft in New Zealand and was never flown in New Zealand. It's Not a Kiwi Local Legend aircraft.

     

    The De Havilland DHC-4 Caribou is in fact an Australian Local Legend aircraft that's seen service with the Royal Australian Air Force DHC-4 Caribou as per the wiki link.

     

    The DHC-4 Caribou should not be promoted as a New Zealand Local Legend aircraft.

     

    Orbx being an Australian company is misinforming the Global Flight Sim Community and Microsoft/Asobo by misrepresenting the Kiwi's in New Zealand through claiming that the DHC-4 Caribou is a known local legend aircraft in NZ when it's in fact not.

     

    Shame on the Orbx CEO Anna Cicognani

     

    The Kiwi New Zealand Local Legend iconic aircraft unique to New Zealand Aviation History would either be the Fletcher FU-24 agricultural aircraft made in New Zealand. that are use for aerial topdressing throughout New Zealand.

     

    or

     

    The New Zealand SAFE Air Bristol Freighter  that moved rail freight from Wellington (the North Island) across the Cook Strait to Blenheim (the South Island) and back, using Bristol Freighters, starting in 1951. The airline later reconfigured its aircraft to accept palletised cargo loaded on patented "cargons". This was a first anywhere in the aviation world. Watch the YT video Bristol Freighter: "20,000 rivets flying in close formation."

     

    Orbx has failed to do their Homework on the New Zealand Kiwi Aviation History when developing the next MSFS World Update 12 for New Zealand.

     

    The Kiwis are indeed Not Happy with the Australian Orbx Team for not doing their NZ Aviation History Homework.

     

     

     

     

    I am pretty sure it is solely Microsoft's decision (maybe partly also Asobo's) what will be included in a World Update. Orbx is just one of the companies executing MS' plans.

     

    • Like 1
    • Upvote 1
×
×
  • Create New...