Peter T.

Did you run other processing/graphic intensive programs? you should close them before running X-Plane. clean your ram by following these steps-> Clean your RAM You may recognize that your system gets slower and slower when playing and working a lot with your Desktop or a laptop. That’s because your RAM is full of remaining progress pieces you do not need any more. 1. Open the Notepad and type: FreeMem=Space(64000000) 2. Save it as RAMcleaner.vbs (You should choose the “All Files” option when you save it.) 3. Run the file and your RAM may be cleaned. Of course you can edit the code in the file for a greater “cleaning-progress”. For Example: FreeMem=Space(128000000) -Its not harmful, it helps clean your RAM.

Perhaps remove your preferences, and then slowly increase your render settings.

Maybe you can just quote, no need for C195s

Can you make it more wispy? right now it looks almost like the default clouds...

yes, you uncheck "use texture map" on top when tracing purced pavements. you sadly have to do the road again.....

actually, its not that complicated....why not copy paste the hues from the other files into one file? I would like to know more about this sky environment add on

THAT, people is a real environment add on. Complete rewrites of the cloud system also improving FPS!

Your laptop isnt falling to pieces, as what ives seen....the laptop can run x-plane, but on mid-low settings, but thats xp9, xp-10 will become just another version of powerpoint. Im getting a new 27' mac with high end settings, just for the sake of developing, because right now my HP Probook wont suffice and frequently crashes requiring frequent fixes....almost 20,000 HKD, but hope its worth it. Lets get back on topic now.

Folks, There will be no news about development until Michael gets his new laptop, so please refrain from asking about any progress, because there is none besides the paints. The WHOLE aircraft will be remapped, inside and out, existing paints require only a little adjustment but thats it. the new remapping will allow higher-res textures. the systems will be completed, the animations will be completed. estimated release date is POSSIBLY (read it) at the end of 2013. its a possibility, and its estimated, if we didnt reach that date dont go bashing at us.

I have seen your pavement textures, thinking how is it related to a sky enhancement addon.

I believe its a little rude to specifically mention someones product's user if they want to change to your sky environment addon. It creates tension and rivalry which we do not want here. And potential damage someone's sales. Apparently, its you only Aaron in the team, im not so sure about the other devs since you stated that they dev for MSFS. I have seen much better work from others, what i see here is simply random tones of skies with a pricetag because a installer for windows only is available. As you said that this is a work in progress, i dont see anything else to "improve" on a set of sky colours rather than adjusting the colours in Ps. SKYMAXX Extreme has some innovative and distinct features, its not simply a bunch of sky textures and cloud textures, a plugin was programmed to implement skyboxes, a first in X-Plane, which allows great cloud illusions, the programming probably costs so therefore to cover up the expenses it is payware. As for your remark on the glacier textures, i have to ask you on the comments page in your facebook to make you reply that John has made the textures, your first reply simply stated that the textures were made from AWG. So you are trying to hide the fact that John made the textures, and stating that YOUR TEAM made them. You tried to be a developer, running a proper team and brand, but you rocked the boat many times, causing most customers to walk away unsatisfied with their purchase. The fs market is pretty big, and many developers made quite a good living out of developing add ons. You are a fraud. Using John's texture without mentioning him in the first place, until users at the org notice a similar texture style from John then you go ahead and stated that John made them. Simply put: You used him. He has the right to comment on this thread because he is trying to protect his product. Next time, you shouldnt ask such a question. Nobody ask "Would folks be willing to switch from ______ to our ______product?

I love AWG's cheesy marketing techniques as you can see here- He reviewed his own product and praise it etc even by going as far as saying it is recreated with great detail from the review= "One thing that struck me was the amount of detail that has been added to the airport. It looked superb. All the buildings look good and are custom modelled as far as I can see. The models are of a high polygon count and have sharp textures which something most free ware sceneries do lack." http://asn.aerosoft.com/?page_id=9110 And from his site (AWG intro/description) "At AWG Simulations we make standards and then we redefine those standards with our next project. We have unrivaled experience in this area of simulation, but don't take our word for it - look at the reviews." http://www.awgsim.com/

in a parallel universe, I just known that my laptop harddrive has damaged so i cant really contribute towards the 787 project until its fixed... *do not buy HP*

Hmm it looks great, but a similar set of skycolours are offered from EPORT Aviation, and SkyMaxx has more features including new cloud textures and a skybox add-on feature that makes the sky look more real..

Airfighter=3d panel and systems Vezirgiannis=exterior 3d, and systems Thats what i think

The FSXP 767 is not based on any previous aircraft, the panel and other features is all done by FSXP, the 757 is X-Plane freeware's

yes the fs9 converts better, most of the time the orthos converts better.

you dont need to use FSX in order to understand it's system, you can simply look at the pictures

not exactly, FSX uses default rendering system too xD. Its the add-on scenery that doesn't convert its own orthophotos. i converted the fs9 version and it converted much better, however the ground detail is missing leaving the plain underlying ortho.

Lots of detail esp the ground is missing, so i wouldnt call this looks almost the same

the flightmodel is possibly finished, I am not sure about that yet.

the 787 has a 2d cockpit, when you're not in 3d cockpit view. Just for some clarification and plans for the 787's development- There is still a lot of "stuff" to finish- -3d cockpit (50-60% finished) -Exterior model (70-80% finished) -Cabin (50% finished) -Systems (40-50% finished) -Sounds (70=80% finished) -Animations (80-90% finished)

there is already an updated version (ver 3) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eXCwI6a1DqI

The md80 isnt started yet, this thread is just to ask you guys whether an md-80 project is favourable. The F100 is very likely to be cancelled as most of the project was lost, the 788 however is mostly saved by previously sending betas to betatesters.

its FSXP's then, please dont post pictures of it.