Leaderboard

Similar to weather most North Americans are experiencing so far this December!

This sheds a bit more light on it. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2522000/Asiana-pilot-landing-San-Francisco-stressful-worried-crash.html * Meanwhilst, the captain of the plane has confessed to investigators he felt stressed out and was 'very concerned' about attempting a manual visual approach * A former Boeing 777 foreign captain at Asiana told investigators he found it 'extremely difficult' to get pilots to fly visual approaches, and that they usually wanted to take off rather than land.* it's not unusual for pilots to make a visual approach, using the view through their windshield. [as opposed to using instruments] Looks like they should've employed any of us xplane users. I know I can land an airliner on that runway perfectly well, and I'm a helicopter fan.

Thanks John

Ah. I will keep an eye out for it. Has the Archer been released? I may have missed it! :eek: Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

Hi Folks I too have uploaded a number of US and European airports and admit I am guilty for not putting the exclusion zones in. When I started doing the sceneries I read the WED manual in its entirety and didn't come across any section which said these exclusions had to be put in. There is obviously the explanation of the exclusion tool, but no mention that these should be put in as a matter of course to prevent the issue we are now seeing. I will try and add these and re-upload the files, but at the moment I just haven't got the time to do so. I think some of these people complaining really need to understand how long these airport scenery's take to produce, and that is before the actual creating of screenshots and uploading to the various libraries. Considering these are uploaded for people to enhance their simming experience to download for free, I think it's a bit fresh to start having a go at all the designers who haven't put the exclusion zones in. A more prominent description of the need for this would be sensible in the WED instructions.

Guys, the problem is not really the INI, nor does it solves the "core" problem, neither is that the central meaning of the link: http://developer.x-plane.com/2013/11/an-exclusive-club/ The INI only specifies the priority of sceneries (layering). Which scenery should come first, second, etc. But, the main problem still remains: that each scenery should (but many don't do this until now) specify what kind of other scenery elements should be EXCLUDED within its premises (defined via. EXCLUSION zones), and which not. And the developer has quite a list of choices, what he wants to be excluded from lower layer scenery: http://scenery.x-plane.com/library.php?doc=dsf_xplane.php And that is what the link above is about. That scenery authors MUST to take care of this exclusion explicitly, because X-Plane can't tell on his own, what scenery elements should disappear and what not from lower layer scenery (and neither should X-Plane do that, because sometimes it is desirable to mix elements from different scenery layers)! As long as such exclusions are missing, you will always see mixing of scenery elements with elements from lower layer scenery.

This may be the cause. We have some updated OGL code in the upcoming 1.2 update, so this may already be fixed for the next update.

I'd say the majority of simulator pilots could have easily done as piss poor a job, if not better than this acting captain did. But then again, I would not want any of you guys in the cockpit if I was sitting in back. I laughed when I read that the captain was a highly experienced 747 pilot, but was just in the training phase on the 777. First of all, I would bet he was just as awful at hand flying the 747, but probably never had the opportunity/excuse to crash one. Second, an aeroplane is an airplane, is an aeroplane. Your 747 is just as conventional an aircraft as the 777, fundamentally it is like a big 172, but I guarantee this pilot could not land one without full three axis autopilot and an ILS. Recently, I was talking to a Class 1 instructor, about an idea I had, which involves training ab-initio student pilots on taildraggers. It worked through the early days of flying, and the Second World War proved that training on behemoth single and multi-engined taildraggers can make exceptional pilots. But, around 1950 the first mass produced tricycle geared aircraft began being produced, and some time around 1970 they started becoming the norm, as regulators got lazier and decided it was just easier, and thus safer, to train with the training wheels on. But I digress...

This makes zero sense at all. It's always been there, 1.0 included.