noted YMML V3 - The Australian Virtual Aviation Communities View

[QFA1213]

Orbx,

Thanks for doing YMML V3, It’s a great scenery and brings so much life back to the classic airport. Myself and a few friends spent yesterday afternoon exploring the airport. The quality is amazing, especially the better textures and performance however even in our short time testing, the amount of errors and bugs made the airport feels rushed and untested. I was initially going to post the this here but a friend persuaded me to contact Turbulent First directly first, their reply overnight to the issues was as below:
 

Quote

"I'm going to forward you to Orbx on this one as from what I can see, your issues are with the buildings models, which we have not touched.

http://www.orbxsystems.com/forum/forum/5-orbx-support-forums/

Can I please stress that Turbulent Designs was asked, by Orbx, to create a new ground poly, add three buildings (The new control tower, Terminal 4, Pier G and the carpark) and improve performance.

If you have issues with anything besides this, please bring the issues up with Orbx.”

 

 

Below is the list of bugs/errors/suggestions we sent to them:

 

 

 

 

We’ll start our trip around Melbourne from Pier F which is terribly modelled. The physical signs in the scenery are all one bay off and don't match the APX or the Ground Polys. E.g. Bay F13 called Bay F15

This applies to all gates on the F Pier but Gate 12 and partly to Gate 11.

 

 

 

While we are at Pier F, Bay 11, 13 have a yellow bin for the rear boarding almost on the taxiline which can be seen above.

 

 

Moving down to the G Pier, while I haven't been to YMML recently myself, the others I have consulted either live in YMML or have visited it in the last few months even using that terminal. We are all agree that the modelling of this pier is below the standard of the rest of the airport. While the actual shape of the terminal is correct, the textures on the building look nothing like the actual airport. The yellow barricades are all also missing. The poles with the gate number are also missing the pier in the name, as shown in the picture poles should be "G45, etc" not "45".

Flight Sim

Real Airport:

 

 

Notice the difference in the textures of the building, they look like completely different buildings.

 

 

To the other side of Pier G now and Bay G44 also has a staircase in a terrible location where aircraft would hit it when using those bays.

 

 

Before we move back up, I and the rest of us that have tested the scenery have no taxi signs what so ever, this may be due to requiring a newer library or similar that hasn’t been released yet, however, none of us currently have any taxi signs at all.

J Holding Point to 34

This image also shows the 3D grass extending out over the asphalt which as covered in a separate thread uses more than a 1GB alone of VAS when enabled.

 

 

Moving back up to the E Pier, Bay E8 is terribly aligned making it impossible to park in the bay:

This is the one error that if nothing else is fixed I expect this to be fixed. The gate is just terribly lined up. The jetway is also a moving type not a sliding one.

 

 

 

While we are looking at poorly aligned bays, there are many issues with the actual stop lines for the bays:

Completely missing: B24, C1, C2, C10, C11, C12, D2, D7, D10, E4, E6, F13, F18, G51, G52

Way too far forward: C7, C9

Way too far back: E1, E3, E5, E7, E9

Too many stop lines: B29 (Q400, maybe 737 bay with way too many lines):

 

 

Back across to Pier D and Bay D17 also has a baggage cart too close to the main taxiline:

 

 

Moving around to B21, the Maccas sign visible it also very poorly made, especially when compared to V2. The new sign is a flat 2d texture with no transparency.

 

 

Back across to Pier C, the guy on the baggage loader between Bay C7 and C9 appears to be floating if the GSE is disabled while the ground crew is still active.

 

 

I would also like to question why the docking system has been removed from all the bays? This system was working and I see as a downgrade.

 

Finally, what/are any static aircraft included as the option in the control centre doesn’t seem to do anything (Or am i just not looking hard enough)?

 

The following are more wishes than bugs: the white pushback lines are not modelled in the GP and the aircraft names beside stop lines would be nice.

 

I hope this is taken as constructive criticism as its meant to be, thanks for your time.

Brendan - presenting feedback on behalf of many Australian Virtual Pilots living across Australia.

 

[QFA1213]

I know, I am still nitpicking, but a few more things:

• C7 isn't aligned with the groove in the terminal: http://prnt.sc/c3sm99
• The GSE on the west side of Pier C is all JQ equipment, any chance they could be replaced with belts and the rest of the stuff used on the B737: http://prntscr.com/c3vzxa

Is there any chance the APX could be simplified around the taxiway joints (only ones near Apron):

The blue spots below are major pushback locations for all of Pier B/C and GSX completely glitches on on corners like that and surely it won't change AI behaviour that much. This occurs throughout the airport. I've also noticed this coming out of bay C2.

 

 

 

 

 

I've realised that most people won't have the effort/time to read the whole post above so below is a summary, I've ordered it from most important to list important:

Errors

1.  Taxi signs missing

2.      Terminal 4 (Pier G) - Yellow Barricades missing, poles very different and most importantly building textures.

3.      Pier F - Signs for the bays on the terminal are all one off to the west excluding F12 and partly F11. (F13 is called F15 and so on)

4.      VA E8 Gate misaligned with terminal (Almost Impossible to park/looks very dodgy)

5.      Maccas sign looks worse than V2 (2D texture with no transparency.)

6.      Various objects blocking normal aircraft operation (G44, D17, F11 & F13)

7.      QF C7 as discussed above

8.   JQ objects at QF Pier C west side

9.      Many stop line issues (B29, C1, C2, C7, C9, C10, C11, C12, D2, D7, D10, E1, E3, E4, E5, E6, E7, E9, F13, F18, G51, G52 )

 

Questions

·         Docking System present in V2 removed????

·         Is the lone QF 737 by the hangers the only Static Aircraft? 

 

Wishes (Never going to happen is it)

·         WHITE pushback lines

·         Aircraft name beside stop lines

 

Thank you to whoever takes the time to read this, I do understand that majority of these errors are just too minor to be fixed but every little thing makes a big difference to some of us, especially those of us based in Aus and that fly the Milk Run regularly (Sydney <-> Melbourne - the 3rd busiest air route in the world).

Brendan

Note the following errors in the first post:
Static aircraft - one has been found at Maintenance
B29 is Q400 max.

[capt sl]

hope someone responds to this as there a quite a few glaring flaws

 

the static aircraft - don't know how many  there is in total but I saw 1 around the maintenance hangar  at the southern end of the airport. 

[Edward Boyte]

Hello,

 

Great report! Will help a lot with the 3.1 patch.

 

I'm the APX developer for YMML v3 with Graham's assistants. I can only answer APX (afcad) related questions/problems etc. 

 

2 hours ago, QFA1213 said:

Is there any chance the APX could be simplified around the taxiway joints (only ones near Apron):

I'm working on this as we speak and testing the custom push backs with GSX.

 

2 hours ago, QFA1213 said:

Is the lone QF 737 by the hangers the only Static Aircraft? 

Yes. We decided not to place static airplanes at the gates where the AI or user aircraft will park. However, it looks like people want statics at the gates?

 

3 hours ago, QFA1213 said:

B29 is Q400 max.

Thanks will try and solve this issue.

 

 

Cheers,

Eddy

 

 

[creppel]

1 hour ago, Edward Boyte said:

 However, it looks like people want statics at the gates?

 

Cheers,

Eddy

 

 

 

Thanks, I don´t need statics. But as an option always nice.

The missing taxiwaysigns and the wrong signs at Terminal F should really be noticed on testing...

I would like to have SODE gates.

It is often that folks who know the real airport very well have more to criticise as someone like me who doesn´t compare so much which the real thing. Of course I like it as real as it gets.

 

[QFA1213]

As above I actually prefer not to have statics at the gates so I can park at the same location as the real flight. I just raised it more because Initially, I didn't think the option in the control panel actually changed anything. Maybe statics could be added to some of the remote bays? (D13, 15, 17, 19, F25, F26, G57, G60, G54).

 

Just throwing it out there that if you want help tweaking GSX/APX for YMML I had set V2 and a few other major airports to use it and I've had quite a bit of experience with ADE and I'm more than happy to spend my free time doing that.

[gumbypickett]

7 minutes ago, QFA1213 said:

As above I actually prefer not to have statics at the gates so I can park at the same location as the real flight. I just raised it more because Initially, I didn't think the option in the control panel actually changed anything. Maybe statics could be added to some of the remote bays? (D13, 15, 17, 19, F25, F26, G57, G60, G54)

So long as there is a control panel with the option to turn the static aircraft off.

Personally I avoid using static aircraft, it takes away the realism for me.

I also notice some of the Qantas domestic stands never seem to have Ai traffic

park there ie C8,C10.

cheers

Gumby

[stewamar]

Great job Brendan (QFA1213) on a great summary of YMML V3 improvements. Can I add to the list please….
 
Another part I am disappointed in is the lead-in strobes for runway 34. The YMML V3 manual states the scenery was designed against the 3 March 2016 charts so I would hope these would be included (as they have been in operation since the late 1980’s).
 
I have read the YMML V3 PDF manual and checked the ORBX YMML V3 control panel and there is no option to turn these on if they are an option (in real life they flash whenever RWY 34 is active)
 
Is there any possibility for these to be included in the first patch (if there is one required) please?

[flyguy737]

I just upgraded to V3 and all I can say is WOW fantastic the ground looks so much better. I understand there might be some issues but personally I love it now when I taxi or depart or land YMML is so much more like those other great products out there. Well Done ORBX noe PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE do the same with YBBN and the others that didnt get the magic touch.

 

Well worth the extra 10 bucks!!!!

[wolfko]

On 10.8.2016 at 3:17 PM, Edward Boyte said:

Hello,

 

Yes. We decided not to place static airplanes at the gates where the AI or user aircraft will park. However, it looks like people want statics at the gates?

 

 

Cheers,

Eddy

 

 

 

Yes, would love to see statics at the gates in all the famous Orbx static glory! One of the reasons why I love Orbx-statics (beside their incredible looks) is that their impact on FPS in my rather ancient sys is much lower than the impact AI cause.

 

I don't understand, why there is an option to select static aircraft in the control panel, if there are no statics except for the one at the hangars. I actually thought there is a flaw in my installation, seeing no statics and was about going to start a support topic, when I stumbled over this thread.

[John Dow]

On 11/08/2016 at 10:56 AM, stewamar said:

Great job Brendan (QFA1213) on a great summary of YMML V3 improvements. Can I add to the list please….
 
Another part I am disappointed in is the lead-in strobes for runway 34. The YMML V3 manual states the scenery was designed against the 3 March 2016 charts so I would hope these would be included (as they have been in operation since the late 1980’s).
 
I have read the YMML V3 PDF manual and checked the ORBX YMML V3 control panel and there is no option to turn these on if they are an option (in real life they flash whenever RWY 34 is active)
 
Is there any possibility for these to be included in the first patch (if there is one required) please?

 

This was raised in testing and the dev confirmed there is currently no technology in FSX to include those strobes, unfortunately.

[capt sl]

just want to add the light pole just to the left of gate D12 maybe slightly in wrong spot as the wing tip of aircraft slices through it as it parks on to the gate or pushes back 

[stewamar]

7 hours ago, John Dow said:

 

This was raised in testing and the dev confirmed there is currently no technology in FSX to include those strobes, unfortunately.

G'day John, thank you to you and the team for considering and evaluating the original request. It's a pity but I will really enjoy this new update anyway!

Regards,  Martin YBLT

[QFA1213]

18 hours ago, capt sl said:

just want to add the light pole just to the left of gate D12 maybe slightly in wrong spot as the wing tip of aircraft slices through it as it parks on to the gate or pushes back 

 

I was just looking into that then, What aircraft were you flying. That gate is max 62m wingspan and that means only the 777-200/200ER/300 can fit the 200LR/300ER have longer wings. Aircraft that can park there are A332,332,343,342,B741-B743 and all smaller aircraft. I will download a 777-200 later today and test it but regardless i still think it will be very close.

[capt sl]

1 hour ago, QFA1213 said:

 

I was just looking into that then, What aircraft were you flying. That gate is max 62m wingspan and that means only the 777-200/200ER/300 can fit the 200LR/300ER have longer wings. Aircraft that can park there are A332,332,343,342,B741-B743 and all smaller aircraft. I will download a 777-200 later today and test it but regardless i still think it will be very close.

this was an ai aircraft  . Jetstar  787

 

I  checked with a flyable freeware 332 /772as well .

[QFA1213]

Okay, must be off as well as the parking size wrong.

[sidfadc]

I've just jumped onto the forum to say I have purchased YMML today and have no taxi signs whatsoever!  I can see the OP has posted this as well.  Is this a bug affecting everyone or something on my end.  If it's affecting everyone it's a pretty big bug imo!  Considering I've paid £25 for this airport the quality control seems a bit sub par ORBX usual standards.

 

Also in the control panel I can choose Level 1 - 4 for cars, all 4 levels are selected by default  Thing is I don't see any 3D cars at all in the carparks around the terminal.  They appear as flat objects/sprites which look like cars looking straight down but not when your close up?

[John Dow]

7 hours ago, sidfadc said:

I've just jumped onto the forum to say I have purchased YMML today and have no taxi signs whatsoever!  I can see the OP has posted this as well.  Is this a bug affecting everyone or something on my end.  If it's affecting everyone it's a pretty big bug imo!  Considering I've paid £25 for this airport the quality control seems a bit sub par ORBX usual standards.

 

Also in the control panel I can choose Level 1 - 4 for cars, all 4 levels are selected by default  Thing is I don't see any 3D cars at all in the carparks around the terminal.  They appear as flat objects/sprites which look like cars looking straight down but not when your close up?

 

The taxiway signs were a V2 libraries issue and a patch is being tested as we speak.  

[sidfadc]

Ok thanks

[sidfadc]

What about the cars issue, this is what I see in my scenery...

 

 

In my other ORBX airports I have nicely modelled 3D cars.  The control panel suggests this is the case as well, I have all 4 levels ticked but the airport is devoid of anything with 4 wheels lol.

[B77X]

Great review I hope all these issues are fixed in a patch sometime. Will make the new version almost perfect.

[MichaelYSSY]

Yes, I don't have any Taxi signs either.  I can see them in the scenery texture files but nothing on the airport :-(

 

Michael

[Russell Linn]

On 14/08/2016 at 0:05 PM, sidfadc said:

What about the cars issue, this is what I see in my scenery...

 

 

In my other ORBX airports I have nicely modelled 3D cars.  The control panel suggests this is the case as well, I have all 4 levels ticked but the airport is devoid of anything with 4 wheels lol.

Do you have the latest orbx libs installed?

Thanks,

Russ

[sidfadc]

Hi Russ,

 

Yes 160708?  I last ran this after the migration fix came out a few weeks ago though.  I didn't want to risk running it again after installing YMML in case something broke.  Do you recommend I run it again?

 

Thanks

[QFA1213]

Just another thing that I've noticed.

 

The night lighting doesn't include the alternating (yellow/orange) with the green on taxiways meeting runways, I believe all major Australian airports have this:

 

Just found the first video at night that came up in a google search: 

 

 

[John Dow]

1 minute ago, QFA1213 said:

Just another thing that I've noticed.

 

The night lighting doesn't include the alternating (yellow/orange) with the green on taxiways meeting runways, I believe all major Australian airports have this:

 

Just found the first video at night that came up in a google search: 

 

 

 

I'm not a dev but I suspect this would be an FSX coding issue, requiring a special project by someone to implement a non-standard item.  Same as the R34 approach strobes maybe?

[QFA1213]

Using default things it is impossible but when using custom lighting like YMML I believe its just changing a texture. I know Flytampa YSSY lights are similar to that used in YMML V3 and they have got it to work. There are also a few freeware libraries that included these lights to place.

[capt sl]

thx for the patch. ( great to have taxisigns back and the texture issue near R27 fixed)

 

but just wondering is that all that will be fixed to what has been mentioned here?

[John Dow]

1 minute ago, capt sl said:

thx for the patch. ( great to have taxisigns back and the texture issue near R27 fixed)

 

but just wondering is that all that will be fixed to what has been mentioned here?

 

I think you can safely assume that is the case for the forseeable future.  The devs only have limited resources and budgets, and while the aim is to get it as real as possible there will be compromises in any scenery.

 

 

[capt sl]

well that would be somewhat disappointing then . while I wouldn't at all expect everything that's been mentioned here to be corrected , would have hoped that things like the missing stop lines and gate signs not matching the ground numbering would have been

 

 

[wolfko]

On 12.8.2016 at 3:25 AM, John Dow said:

 

This was raised in testing and the dev confirmed there is currently no technology in FSX to include those strobes, unfortunately.

 

Hm, but Jarrad will include these kind of strobes in his upcoming Innsbruck scenery though!

See post 125 in this topic: