Mario Donick

I think the original posting (2nd image!) refers to an apparently WRONG position of the landing light switch. On the screenshot it is halfway hidden behind the vapor supress and go around buttons -- it should not be there. Now the question is: What's the reason? @albvt: Which X-Plane version, which operating system and which aircraft version do you use?

Regarding priority, this is right. The problem is that even higher-priority scenery still allows to display objects and facades of lower-priority scenery at the same time, when the higher priority scenery does not explicitly exclude objects and facades. This has always been the case, and now can get confusing. So it is really important that all scenery developers add those exclusions.

Sorry, but this is not the case with the new Global Airports folder. It also has nothing to do with autogen textures. The Global Airports folder is not like the usual default scenery. The global airports folder is sitting inside "Custom Scenery" and thus treated exactly like custom scenery, and if you have, for example, installed a custom airport for Sparta, Michigan, X-Plane will show both its own Sparta (included in Global airports) and the one you installed. As Sparta has no exclusion zones for facades and objects, you will have doubled buildings, unless you add the exclusions on your own. Unfortunately this is not an exception, because in contrast to what you say, most custom airports DO NOT have the required exclusion zones. This is even true for payware scenery, for example for some Aerosoft scenery. At the .org, there is thread where quite a few people are complaining about messed up airports in 10.25, and freeware scenery developers answer that they did not include exclusion zones because its too much work. (Because exclusions are only rectangles, and thus you may need lots of single exclusions if you do not simple draw an exclusion around the whole airport.)

Really, the best way is to add an exclusion zone. It's done very easily. Or you write the developer of your addon and ask him to add an exclusion zone. (This would be even better, because developers are requested to do this. Ben Supnik already pointed out this in April 2013). HOWEVER, you can disable the whole "Global Airports" folder by adding SCENERY_PACK_DISABLED Custom Scenery/Global Airports/ to your scenery_packs.ini OR you can simply remove the "Global Airports" folder from "Custom Scenery". (But in the 2nd case, you would need to this again after an X-Plane update).

If you have already an airport that is now also included in X-Plane, you maybe will have doubled buildings. This is the case if your airport lacks correct exclusion zones for "objects" and "facades". You can open your airport in Overlay Editor or WED and add these exclusion by yourself. Save and everything is fine.

Not sure about this. I had the same problem when trying to convert Aerosoft's Manhattan, which makes use of FSX default textures. I then simply pointed FSX2XP to the FSX main directory (instead of one of the sub directories), so it used everything it could find there. The grey buildings were gone.

Thanks for this video recommendation. Very interesting! I really like that the style of the documentation is not as hectic as in some other shows (e.g. in Flying Wild Alaska), so it's easier to follow even for a non-native speaker.

Steam has an offline mode.

You should not change JRollon's plugin. This stays as it is. You just change the KLN update's "xap" plugin for a recent SASL.

In KGEG Spokane.

I think it's not really a fault, but a question of different versions of the original .acf file. The airfoils referenced by the file you provide are different that those referenced by the original .acf file of the Jetstream v1.3 available at X-Aviation. Which Jetstream was the basis for your modifications, i.e. where did you buy the aircraft? Maybe the .org version is different than the X-Aviation version, or maybe you made your changes with v1.0, 1.1 or 1.2, or maybe your X-Plane version is different? OR maybe your .acf file got corrupted somehow, and these airfoil references are wrong by accident. I ask all these questions because it would be great if your download included a correct .acf file But maybe it _is_ correct, but just for a different version of the aircraft. Edit: I see now you said it was 1.1 you used. Maybe Javier can confirm if the airfoil file names had changed inbetween. So users of later versions would need an adjusted .acf file.

Okay, after installing and trying to load the airplane with my Jetstream copy (v1.3, bought at X-Aviation), the plane does not load. It tells me an airfoil file (NACA 63_3_-418.afl) could not be found. I checked the airfoil files in the Jetstream folder, and it indeed is not there. But this is the case also for the unmodified Jetstream, which loads perfectly fine. The airfoils I have in the airfoil folder are NACA 16 (good propeller).afl NACA63A412.afl NACA63A418.afl Is your modified .acf file compatible with all versions of the Jetstream 32 by all vendors, or just with a specific one? Edit: I have opened both the unmodified and the modified .acf in a texteditor and found the place where the missing airfoil names are included: Now trying to simply correct the names so they match the original .acf. Because I guess your KLN modification should not change anything regarding the flightmodel. I'll report if it works. Edit 2: Okay, works after correcting the airfoil names! I had to correct it at 2 places in the .acf file (at P _wing/8 and P _wing/9).

Thank you! Just one important remark: The KLN90B includes the "xap" plugin which is an extremly old version of SASL. Anybody who wants to use the KLN90B should delete the "xap" folder and instead put a recent SASL 2.0 there (for example by copying the "sasl" folder from the "plugins" folder of one of the recent Carenado planes; DRM-protected SASL versions won't work). Otherwise, you will experience SASL crashes in 64 bit mode. As SASL (in the non-DRM version) is Open Source, a SASL 2.0 could even be included in your integration package.

I'll check MMMI out, and your's to when it's available. I guess the Taxi2Gate thing will take a while.

2 more: UHMA Anadyr -- Rating: still "good", because the nice buildings and still well done night lighting. This is a great 1st stop if you want to travel from Unalakleet, Alaska to Russia.UHMM Magadan -- Rating: Okay. Nearly received a "good", but night lighting is not so good anymore. A nice 2nd stop after UHMA.

I don't know any good, but you can suggest one!

And we continue, this time with 4 Russian airports: UNCC Novosibirsk (incl. city), Rating: Good. At daylight, it's very well done, near payware quality, but at night, the lights are just okay. URML Uytash: Rating: Was not sure. Some 3D objects look a bit basic, but the overall impression is -- good. UERR Mirny: Rating: Good. Has a good terminal, good lightning and good ground photos UIAA Kadala: Rating: Okay. At daytime, it's nice, but at night it looks really bad.

Departing from Berlin-Schönefeld:

In general, this map is for showing places where flying from or to is enjoyable. ALL scenery files on the map are, in my opinion, recommendable. For the ratings, many small things come together. For example, if an airport consists only of Lego Bricks, it will usually get "okay" or sometimes "good", but in rare cases can still get a "very good" rating if the overall appearence is very convincing. Or, an airport with custom buildings maybe just gets an "okay", if the quality of the objects or the textures is not so good. But maybe, this airport with not the so good 3d objects has other qualities -- such as a high quality ground photo, perfect night lighting, well-done OSM street integration or even ground traffic! Then, despite the 3d objects, it may get a "good" or "very good". Being situated in an overall nice landscape helps, too. To not overcrowd the map, an "okay" airport may fall out of the map if in the exact same region a new, better airport gets available. On the other hand, if absolutely no airports are available in an area, it is likely that at least some "okay" airports get included.

In anticipation of alpilotx' HD mesh freeware, I have checked some more of Tom Curtis' payware airports for Western Canada, which are part of his packages "Inside Passage" and "Canadian Rockies". Both packages are rather old, but include hundreds of airports, airstrips and seaplane bases. Some of them are still good (even today), and I already had some of them on my map. Today I have some more, two of them in the very north of the region: CYZF Yellowknife (rating: good)CYDW Dawson Creek (rating: okay; if X-Plane showed buildings in the city, it'd get "good" rating)CYOJ High Level (rating: okay)CYBD Bella Coola (rating: okay)Esp. Yellowknife can look really cool, with the moon shining over the airport near the lake ...

Latest changes to the map: Checked more than 20 freeware sceneries in the USA and Canada, added the following: KNPA Pensacola NAS (Rating: Very good. This is _extremely_ well done freeware).KIAH Houston (Rating: Good).KJAC Jackson Hole (Rating: Good).KJMS Jamestown (Rating: Okay).CYQT Thunderbay (Rating: Okay).CYXE Saskatoon (Rating: Okay. If this was updated with some XP10 lighting, it would be rated Good).

Yeah, but I was not able to test it by myself Have to wait until next month.