BrianV Posted February 11, 2019 Share Posted February 11, 2019 Hi, I just installed the new KSUN but when selecting parking spot 1 (small airplane) it places it underground (see picture). However, if I select active runway as start position elevation is fine. Any ideas? Thanks... Correction: my fault, I was loading it from PlanGv3 that allows me to choose parking spot 1, if not using PlanG but P3D directly this parking spot is not an option. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Valisen Posted February 11, 2019 Share Posted February 11, 2019 Yeah I am having issues as well. No parking spots available and terrible issues when I load in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Simjockey Posted February 11, 2019 Share Posted February 11, 2019 Similar experience ... P3Dv4 only sees N, S and SE parking yet Aivlasoft EFB / GSX sees a whole slew of parking spots (maybe the original P3D airport parking?). GSX handling vehicles and crew/Passenger buses all arrive below the level of the airport. I can see the 'ghost' of the vehicles arriving and hear the passenger loading soundfile. Regards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neil Posted February 11, 2019 Share Posted February 11, 2019 Same experience as Valisen, elevation issue with active runway, parking options not listed at startup. P3D 4.2 installed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neil Posted February 11, 2019 Share Posted February 11, 2019 Quick update, changed parking to helipad, and everything looks good, not sure about active runway. Awaiting the fix. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
supernova52 Posted February 12, 2019 Share Posted February 12, 2019 I am not having an elevation issue with the airport. (P3Dv4). However in the ADE file the starting runway points are reversed. Also every time I "go to airport", my aircraft appears at 5800 ft., some 500 feet above the runway. I edited the ADE file to correct the runway starting points but have not tested it yet. Not sure why my starting point is 500 feet in the air. Like the sloped runway, bummed about AI traffic. Ken Transaction ID: 5c61eb22177eb Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hobbseltoff Posted February 12, 2019 Share Posted February 12, 2019 I don't have the elevation issue but I took a look at the AFCAD and can confirm there are no parking spots, I have Global Base, OpenLC NA, VECTOR, and FTX CRM installed. Also please make the static CRJ a separate option.instead of grouping it in with all the other aircraft, that thing is ugly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hobbseltoff Posted February 12, 2019 Share Posted February 12, 2019 I am seeing elevation issues with the animated people though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darren Howie Posted February 12, 2019 Share Posted February 12, 2019 Same here and yes make the RJ n option i already lose spots to static traffic with UTlive. No elevation issues except the GSX bus being underground and no parking spots in drop down... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greg Jones Posted February 12, 2019 Share Posted February 12, 2019 Hi guys, As KSUN uses a 3D mesh to replicate the sloped runway and differing elevations of the airport, we need to make a unique type of APX which does not provide the usual parking options. A legacy of the ESP engine is that it doesn't allow for native sloped runways. Although we can create an APX for the airport, it will always be flat. Runways, taxiways, parking positions and fuel triggers will always be at the same level. The only option that can have a different elevation is a true 'Start' point which is different to a runway or parking position. These Start points are not connected to the APX's taxiway/runway/ATC system and so do not allow for AI. Obviously, this isn't ideal and if it were in any way possible to make the sloping runway work with AI we certainly would - believe me, this would save us from a massive headache. Although the Start points should work perfectly, we noticed during development that some smaller aircraft would fall the platform on loading. We made some changes to the terrain and on the strength of testing feedback, believed that this was resolved. I'll go back and try some different aircraft again in case we missed something. As far as the number of parking positions is concerned, I believe that Plan G uses it's own database of airport facilities (or perhaps one that is generated on installation). Given that KSUN doesn't, technically, have any parking positions, the two will not match up. Again, if there were any way around this, we would have implemented it. Also, there's a limitation on the acutal names that can be allocated to Start points. The only allowable names are runway designations and compass points (ie N, NE, NW etc) which is why the list appears as it does. The name that we have used refer to the location of the parking area in which you will start. Each Start position will be aligned with a ground marking (with the exception of the hangar start). For those of you still experiencing issues on starting under the platform, please ensure that your mesh is set to 5m. This is the same requirement for all Orbx products. Setting to a different number is likely to cause issues (not just at KSUN). The static aircraft can be disabled via the control panel. At present there's no option to only disable the CRJ but we may add this in a patch. I've checked, and indeed the runway ends appear to be incorrect. This will be rectified in a patch. Hopefully this gives some insight into the hows and whys KSUN works in the way it does. One last thing, we looked into the option of creating a 'Flat' version of the airport (similar to the option for EGPB Sumbugh) however this would require an entirely different set of compromises, all of which would result in product was not up to our vision for the airport. Cheers, Greg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neil Posted February 12, 2019 Share Posted February 12, 2019 Thanks Greg for the clarification, a really great scenery. Only one glaring omission, no airport coyotes (that I have seen)! We even have them at my local airport CYVR! A western North America feature. Once again very nicely done, and it good to hear about some of the challenges that developers face. Cheers Neil Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
supernova52 Posted February 12, 2019 Share Posted February 12, 2019 Thanks for the reply Greg. The aircraft I use as default is the P3D A36. Changing to one of my addon aircraft worked and the "go to airport" ended up at ground level. I think your next airport should also be in Idaho. (Boise!!) Just my 2 cents. Thanks, Ken Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M-Sauce Posted February 13, 2019 Share Posted February 13, 2019 I would prefer a flat option. Until P3D properly supports sloped runways, I don't think all these compromises are worth it. Losing AI is a big feature loss, IMHO. The majority of airports in sim are not sloped even though in real world the runways are. Unless you are making an airport where a sloped runway is the main feature, like Courchevel, I just don't think it is necessary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Dow Posted February 13, 2019 Share Posted February 13, 2019 14 minutes ago, M-Sauce said: I would prefer a flat option. Until P3D properly supports sloped runways, I don't think all these compromises are worth it. Losing AI is a big feature loss, IMHO. The majority of airports in sim are not sloped even though in real world the runways are. Unless you are making an airport where a sloped runway is the main feature, like Courchevel, I just don't think it is necessary. I love the sloped runway! For the missing AI I just pretend it's a quiet day mid week. Variety is the spice of life and it's so nice to fly into a runway that makes you do a little bit of adjusting as you prepare to kiss those wheels gently onto the tarmac. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Russell Linn Posted February 13, 2019 Share Posted February 13, 2019 21 minutes ago, M-Sauce said: I would prefer a flat option. Until P3D properly supports sloped runways, I don't think all these compromises are worth it. Losing AI is a big feature loss, IMHO. The majority of airports in sim are not sloped even though in real world the runways are. Unless you are making an airport where a sloped runway is the main feature, like Courchevel, I just don't think it is necessary. The main features that make KSUN, KSUN would be removed if we were to flatten the airport. KSUN stands out because of the different levels in terrain. Without that, it'll just feel like any other airport and many of its visuals just wouldn't look right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Urmel81 Posted February 13, 2019 Share Posted February 13, 2019 Hello, An option for both groups will be great, like in Sumburgh. One ai compatible, one with sloped rwy. You'll have always some problems with sloped runways, even with no ai. Orbx can't change it, only LM can do that. For a lot of users, like me, it's a NO BUY airport, because of this feature. Please change you static aircraft concept Turbulent Designs, make it seperatly, airliners, cargo, GA. Like other orbx developers. That will be great. Thanks Urmel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Urmel81 Posted February 13, 2019 Share Posted February 13, 2019 3 minutes ago, Russell Linn said: The main features that make KSUN, KSUN would be removed if we were to flatten the airport. KSUN stands out because of the different levels in terrain. Without that, it'll just feel like any other airport and many of its visuals just wouldn't look right. KSUN will also look fantastic without an sloped rwy. That's not a must have for every airport. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Russell Linn Posted February 13, 2019 Share Posted February 13, 2019 29 minutes ago, Urmel81 said: KSUN will also look fantastic without an sloped rwy. That's not a must have for every airport. I'm aware that it's not a must have for every airport. We set out to make KSUN as accurate to the real thing as possible, so we opted to create a custom mesh to reflect the depth of the airport in reality. I appreciate that you. personally, might like it anyway, but we're reluctant to spend that amount of time in redesign and compromises when the result would be a heavy visual downgrade and a loss of "charm" in comparison to the real world airport. Thanks, Russ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Urmel81 Posted February 13, 2019 Share Posted February 13, 2019 1 minute ago, Russell Linn said: I'm aware that it's not a must have for every airport. We set out to make KSUN as accurate to the real thing as possible, so we opted to create a custom mesh to reflect the depth of the airport in reality. I appreciate that you might like it anyway, but we're reluctant to spend that amount of time in redesign and compromises when the result would be a heavy visual downgrade in comparison to the real world airport. Thanks, Russ Visual downgrade? This will not happen, because there are a lot sloped rwy airports modeled in flightsim, modeled with an flat rwy. They looking also nice. Of course, it will cost money to develop two versions. Is an sloped rwy an must have for this airport? No. There are some around the world where the sloped rwy is the main feature and customers are buying it because of it. I see it like this: Only sloped rwy: around 20% won't buy it, you loose money. More money to spend for you, less to earn. Both versions: more time to work, everybody who is interested on this kind of airport will buy it. But you need more time and money for developing two versions. Flat rwy: more easy to develop, less money to develop. But everybody who is interested in this airport are buying it. You will sell more, because it's compatible with everybody's flightsim. No copy will be sold because of an sloped rwy, until it's working perfekt with everything. With your decision you have a nice, cost intensive feature, but you'll lose a lot of customers. You can tell that this is an must have feature for this airport, but a lot of people don't believe it. Both options or a flat one is the choice to make an airport like this. In my eyes. Thanks, maybe you will understand us customers for our view of this. Urmel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Urmel81 Posted February 13, 2019 Share Posted February 13, 2019 Ketchikan is on two different levels, an not ai compatible. That's an must have, because the difference between rwy and apron is really heavy. I don't see this at KSUN on you Screenshots. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alecroberts Posted February 14, 2019 Share Posted February 14, 2019 As well as the parking elevation problems (which l can work around for now) l also get problems taxiing to RWY31, my aircraft lifts about 2 metres of the ground at the third of the runway/taxiway towards 31 and stays levitated until the TO roll reaches that point again and tbe aircraft returns to the surface. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.