FSDreamTeam forum

Products Support => Vancouver CYVR support MSFS => Topic started by: drose12ca on October 17, 2020, 06:55:39 AM



Title: CYVR MSFS 2020 Feedback
Post by: drose12ca on October 17, 2020, 06:55:39 AM
Firstly, nice work!

Couple issues that I noticed. But I do see that Google Earth is showing what you've implemented, where as Bing Maps shows correctly to real life.

The crosswind runway numbers are 12 / 30 (Google)  when it should be 13 / 31 (Bing).

Google 30
(https://i.imgur.com/kM6Yqya.jpg)

Bing 31
(https://i.imgur.com/5kFGfnw.jpg)

There is an extension on the runway at 26L.

Google
(https://i.imgur.com/RfBpQxN.jpg)

Bing
(https://i.imgur.com/cDNGuNC.jpg)


Title: Re: CYVR MSFS 2020 Feedback
Post by: Dave_YVR on October 17, 2020, 09:16:44 AM
 The airport as it was released is based on data/imagery that's at least 3 years old.


Title: Re: CYVR MSFS 2020 Feedback
Post by: Mooze on October 17, 2020, 02:58:26 PM
I was fooled by the statement “ However, is not a “straight” conversion, and there has been many changes, both due to the changing airport layout” I wish I can get my money back.


Title: Re: CYVR MSFS 2020 Feedback
Post by: scotth6 on October 18, 2020, 06:45:37 AM
This is strange, because I remember this same issue being addressed with the FSX/P3D version back in 2015.  Maybe it has something to do with the MSFS SDK.

http://www.fsdreamteam.com/forum/index.php/topic,10856.0.html


Title: Re: CYVR MSFS 2020 Feedback
Post by: lonewulf47 on October 18, 2020, 01:31:43 PM
No idea, what Google picture you are using. Mine (dated 6/13/19) correctly depict the RWY numbers 31/31 and the extension on 26L. Furtermore it would be poor designing by FSDT if RWY number were taken from satellite imaginery... :D Maybe the design of the ciphers, but certainly not the numbers themselves. There are official sources like CAP which are holding accurate numbers and such...

Oskar


Title: Re: CYVR MSFS 2020 Feedback
Post by: drose12ca on October 18, 2020, 05:53:11 PM
The airport as it was released is based on data/imagery that's at least 3 years old.

Is there a roadmap to this being updated using more current (Bing) sattelite data?
The runway was changed in 2014, so that's 6yrs + old data already.
Certainly someone can do a little bit of update work here.


Title: Re: CYVR MSFS 2020 Feedback
Post by: virtuali on October 19, 2020, 03:08:16 PM
This is strange, because I remember this same issue being addressed with the FSX/P3D version back in 2015.  Maybe it has something to do with the MSFS SDK.

Exactly, this is just a stupid mistake we did:

- We knew the runway "12" changed

- We *forgot* we already fixed this in the PD3 version, back in 2014. Yes, sometimes it happens you forget something you did 6 years before.

- Since we know the runway changed, we actually spent time to change back from 13/31 to 12/30 and instead of checking the charts, we did a casual glance on Google maps, which by default shows a picture from 2001, because that's the one with Lidar data, so they show that by default because it's supposed to be "better", so you must change the date to see the newer version.

So, the scenery was already fine, and it was like that since 2014, we did something when there was no need to. OBVIOUSLY, this is being fixed right now.

We are also adding the changes happened around to RWY 26L, and we'll add the new Airside maintenance building too, which has been modeled entirely from scratch, in addition to all changes to the ground textures in that area.