mauricecohen Posted December 5, 2019 Share Posted December 5, 2019 I just bought KBVS Skagit (and 9 other airports) and I am mighty disappointed by you lack of attention. Runway 10-28 at KBVS has been renumbered 11-29 a while back. All you seem to have done is make the change in the apt.dat for the runway (useless as this is a conversion) and left all the taxi signs and the numbering of the runway as is, showing 10-28. I do not think you should sell an airport under these conditions and expect a speedy correction I will be also checking the other 9. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Janči Valko Posted December 6, 2019 Share Posted December 6, 2019 A lot of ORBX airports for Xplane have some bugs. Either some elevation issue, water masking issue, misplaced runway lights, all things that have no place in payware scenery. And months without fixes, they are "noted".... That's why I refunded them. The quality has gone downhill this year and I can see that I was right when I did not buy KBVS, I was expecting exactly something like this.. I'm very disappointed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nick Cooper Posted December 6, 2019 Share Posted December 6, 2019 Hello, KBVS was released on 15th June 2014. The X Plane 11 version is not and does not pretend to be an update, it is the same airport, as are all the others converted from FSX. All the products are snapshots in time, as they must be and there is not and has never been an undertaking to update them to match real world changes. It is unfortunate that you both feel as you do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mauricecohen Posted December 6, 2019 Author Share Posted December 6, 2019 1 hour ago, Nick Cooper said: It is unfortunate that you both feel as you do. Nick, I am actually upset at myself for falling for all the Madison Ave hype and hard sell; I believe that a note on the description of the airports about their date of creation and the fact that they are conversions would be appropriate. I would be less upset if the apt.dat runway numbers reflected what is actually in the scenery, rather than deceptively (but uselessly) included the new numbers. Live and learn, and as always, caveat emptor. Leaving airports aside, having the developers spend some time fixing bugs in various TE packages before pushing out even more new stuff would be welcome. Maurice Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ardix Posted December 12, 2019 Share Posted December 12, 2019 Noticed the same thing: Runway numbers 11-29 but vertical markings still 10-28. Actually I didn't expect something like that for a PAYWARE airport. Waiting for the fix Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nick Cooper Posted December 12, 2019 Share Posted December 12, 2019 Hello, I apologise for missing the obvious mistake. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ardix Posted December 12, 2019 Share Posted December 12, 2019 1 hour ago, Nick Cooper said: Hello, I apologise for missing the obvious mistake. No problem sir. It would be perfectly acceptable to have the "old runway". 10-28 markings both on the runway and in vertical markings. But having a discordance between the two is just a bit weird. Regards Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mauricecohen Posted December 12, 2019 Author Share Posted December 12, 2019 5 minutes ago, ardix said: 10-28 markings both on the runway and in vertical markings. You can edit the apt.dat to have the runway appear as 10-28: along line labeled 100, replacing 11 by 10 and 29 by 28 should work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ardix Posted December 12, 2019 Share Posted December 12, 2019 2 hours ago, mauricecohen said: You can edit the apt.dat to have the runway appear as 10-28: along line labeled 100, replacing 11 by 10 and 29 by 28 should work. Thanks for the hint, but unfortunately it doesn't solve the problem, since the runway numbers markings are a texture, apparently. So the apt.dat tweak only changed the numbers in the map interface. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mauricecohen Posted December 12, 2019 Author Share Posted December 12, 2019 1 hour ago, ardix said: Thanks for the hint, but unfortunately it doesn't solve the problem, since the runway numbers markings are a texture, apparently. So the apt.dat tweak only changed the numbers in the map interface. I had not tried it and unfortunately you are correct. I knew the taxi signs would not change because they are not created by the apt.dat (they do not appear there), but I had hope for the runway numbers (which are in their normal place in the apt.dat). I use this method of editing the apt.dat to change runway numbers AND taxi signs in "normally" created XP airport scenery (meaning not converted) whenever there is a real life re-numbering because of magnetic variation change. Now that I know that they actually modified the runway numbers from the original, I am really disappointed that they did not correct the taxi signs On 12/5/2019 at 2:34 PM, mauricecohen said: and expect a speedy correction 5 hours ago, Nick Cooper said: I apologise for missing the obvious mistake Nick, I think Orbx ought to do more than apologise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nick Cooper Posted December 12, 2019 Share Posted December 12, 2019 Hello, you are welcome to think whatever you wish. I am making a personal apology for overlooking the obvious error. "Orbx" has made no comment as yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mauricecohen Posted December 12, 2019 Author Share Posted December 12, 2019 4 minutes ago, Nick Cooper said: "Orbx" has made no comment as yet. Nick, you are identified as an “Administrator,” so please pardon my not understanding what it means. When might I see a response from Orbx about my request for a “speedy correction” from a week ago? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nick Cooper Posted December 12, 2019 Share Posted December 12, 2019 I am a forum administrator. Developers are supposed to provide support for their products. Sometimes I can offer that support on their behalf, sometimes I cannot, but it is not my duty to do so. I try very hard to be as helpful as possible. You need the airport developer to come to this topic and answer the perfectly valid question that has been raised here. I have asked him to do so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mauricecohen Posted December 12, 2019 Author Share Posted December 12, 2019 23 minutes ago, Nick Cooper said: I try very hard to be as helpful as possible. You do indeed and I thank you, as we all do I believe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nick Cooper Posted December 13, 2019 Share Posted December 13, 2019 Hello, I am informed that this oversight will be addressed on Monday. I would hope that a release will follow shortly afterwards but I have no control over that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed Correia Posted December 17, 2019 Share Posted December 17, 2019 Fix has been made and available on Oorbx Central Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.