FSDreamTeam forum
FS9 support => Chicago O'Hare for FS9 => Topic started by: virtuali on May 08, 2008, 04:14:30 pm
-
We just released today an update for the O'Hare scenery
These are the fixes:
- De-Icing added in the Pad 28 Aerea, there are 4 vehicles, operating only in Winter with Snow
- Corrected some textures problems in the airport signs
- Corrected names for stands M1 to M6
- Night textures resolution doubled to fix the grid effect at night in FS9
- AFCAD - Fixed taxiways width
- AFCAD - Diamond technique used at runway intersections
- AFCAD - Added instrumental approaches in FS9
The default AFCAD file for FS9 use the latest parking definitions from Harpsi, but doesn't use any kind of star method or other tweaks. We prefer to leave those for addons AFCAD.
We added instrumental Approaches in FS9 (we already had it in FSX), so you should see correct Approaches on the GPS and the ATC will know about those procedures as well. Previously, we didn't have approaches for runways that changed names from default (for example, 10/28).
In FS9, since Approaches are in the AFCAD file, but are not recognized by AFCAD program, we made a separate file named APPR_KORD.BGL, that ONLY includes approaches so, it will be possible to tweak or replace the main AFCAD without losing the approach procedures, since they reside in a separate file.
To apply the update, simply download again the installer. You can either Uninstall 1.0 or not, it shouldn't make any difference, but it will not hurt either if you choose to Uninstall 1.0 first. In any case, no registration info is ever lost, as long as you don't reinstall Windows.
-
Thx for the info, pitty you couldn't add the airline brands to the gates...
-
@ Virtuali,
Will there be a problem if I install 1.1 and then put back the afcad I currently have in version 1.0? Essentially meaning I would get all the upgrades (textures, approach codes, etc.) except the afcad-specific fixes.
The reason I ask is because I have modified my afcad to the point where the airport ops and parking is exactly how I want it and I don't want to go through all those tweaks again.
-
That's precisely the reason why we made a separate file just for the approaches, so people can continue to use their preferred AFCAD. Of course, you should backup your AFCAD before installing, otherwise the 1.1 installer will overwrite it.
-
Thanks for the answer.
-
Could you please tell where exactly are approached file are located. I'd prefer to use old marking and rnwy numbering, so my goal is to get rid it.
Thanks
-
Could you please tell where exactly are approached file are located. I'd prefer to use old marking and rnwy numbering, so my goal is to get rid it.
Thanks
The file is APPR_KORD.bgl.
alessandro.
-
where can i find this update?
-
You need to re-download the installer... 75mb in size
-
oh thanks for the info! :o
-
Awesome frame rates, cool... thank you!! ;D
-
You need to re-download the installer... 75mb in size
So there's no separate update? Seems like a waste of bandwidth to me.
By the way, use APPR_KORD.bgl or my approach file, but don't use both at the same time. Just disable one or the other by renaming the extension from bgl to bak for example. Also, the file should be put in Scenery/Generic/scenery and only there. Not sure if they put it there, haven't downloaded the update yet.
-
So there's no separate update? Seems like a waste of bandwidth to me.
Then don't download. Simple.
-
So there's no separate update? Seems like a waste of bandwidth to me.
Then don't download. Simple.
You're a funny guy... not.
-
Also, the file should be put in Scenery/Generic/scenery and only there. Not sure if they put it there, haven't downloaded the update yet.
Mike and or FSDT can we get a clarification please - as it stands now the new approach bgl is installed the scenery subfolder for O'hare. Is this in fact an issue and should it be moved to Scenery/Generic/scenery?
-
If it works, leave it. But it has been established, by individuals such as Jim Vile, that the preferred location for approach files is Scenery/Generic/Scenery.
So there's no separate update? Seems like a waste of bandwidth to me.
Then don't download. Simple.
Ignorance is bliss. I have cable internet, I can download it quicker than I can type this post. It wasn't my bandwith I was talking about. Any way you look at it, bandwidth costs money. Part of the price of the scenery no doubt covers costs such as bandwidth usage, server maintenance, advertising, whatever... In that respect it is a waste to have users download the entire product for only a couple of changed files. Sure, this isn't the Avsim Library, so it probably won't make as big a difference, but still. And yes, there are a lot of people with less than ideal connections. Try downloading the file over a modem. Simple? Not really. ;D
-
I hope they do not bring up a new installer everytime when the promised runway updates appear...
-
Mike and or FSDT can we get a clarification please - as it stands now the new approach bgl is installed the scenery subfolder for O'hare. Is this in fact an issue and should it be moved to Scenery/Generic/scenery?
The AFCAD we supply works with the Approach AFCAD we added in 1.1, in the location they are installed right now. You can check this, by using the GPS or the Map View, and see that runway names are updated (10/28 in place of 9R/27L, for example) as related approaches are, this means the KORD_APPR.BGL is active.
You can also verify this, by putting the visibility down to less then 3 miles, forcing the airport go into IFR mode, and check that ILS approaches are being assigned to you.
-
It wasn't my bandwith I was talking about. Any way you look at it, bandwidth costs money. Part of the price of the scenery no doubt covers costs such as bandwidth usage, server maintenance, advertising, whatever...
You don't know how we pay bandwidth or even if we *do* pay our servers depending on bandwidth usage.
You should be more worried about people downloading the Trial and not buying the product, than the increase in size of the installer comparing to what it might have been if there was a patch. But, as I've said, the added bandwidth consumption of a product with a Trial, is far more offset by the fact we spend zero on advertising (because the Trial advertise the scenery better than any ad) so there's no negative effect on the product price caused by the installer size.
-
I hope they do not bring up a new installer everytime when the promised runway updates appear...
You can bet on this.
New runways it's not just AFCAD work, but also the ground textures to be modified, taxiways as well, and the photo-real background will need to be compiled (that's the biggest file of the scenery), not to mention any additional buildings that will surely appear during the construction works.
-
The AFCAD we supply works with the Approach AFCAD we added in 1.1, in the location they are installed right now. You can check this, by using the GPS or the Map View, and see that runway names are updated (10/28 in place of 9R/27L, for example) as related approaches are, this means the KORD_APPR.BGL is active.
You can also verify this, by putting the visibility down to less then 3 miles, forcing the airport go into IFR mode, and check that ILS approaches are being assigned to you.
If it works, leave it.
Thanks guys - as I generally prefer to allow the dev to dictate how the product is installed, I'll use it as is.
-
Very well, so basically you're just making it difficult only for us, not for you. Some things never change.
You started saying that it's not your bandwidth you are worried with, because you were worried about our bandwidth costs might be reflected on the product price, I simply said that's not the case.
If there are enough people with a 56k modem that find it too difficult to download the installer, they'll make us hear their opinion. Don't you think we already have an idea, by looking at domains/IP numbers people downloading from and the time it takes to download a file, how is the percentage of users with a fast enough internet connection ?
-
I hope they do not bring up a new installer everytime when the promised runway updates appear...
You can bet on this.
New runways it's not just AFCAD work, but also the ground textures to be modified, taxiways as well, and the photo-real background will need to be compiled (that's the biggest file of the scenery), not to mention any additional buildings that will surely appear during the construction works.
Sure. But I suppose not every file needs to be re-done, so why not build an installer that just replaces/adds the necessary bmaps/bgls?
-
Sure. But I suppose not every file needs to be re-done, so why not build an installer that just replaces/adds the necessary bmaps/bgls?
In FSX, the photoreal background bgl takes about 80% of the whole installer space because it contains textures inside the BGL. That one will surely change when additional runways and their related taxiways will be added so, there wouldn't be much saving comparing to the full installer. And, since the photoreal scenery use lossy compression for terrain, an incremental patcher wouldn't work very well either, because incremental changes in compressed binary files are not very efficient. In FS9 textures are all separate files, but still many will be affected by such change.
And, if we start distributing full installers and updates, it would become more complex and time consuming (and it will be worse with each subsequent release) for users to reinstall. Take Zurich as an example, if a user wanted to reinstall 1.3, he would have to install 1.0, then update to 1.1, then to 1.2, then to 1.3, instead of having just a file to keep track of, like we are doing now.
The very concept of a base product + updates, is the only method for developers without a Trial version: they don't have any other choice than using updaters, because they don't let you download the full product freely. Since this is not our case, offering a single installer it's the easiest solution (especially long term, when there will be more updates) for everyone.
-
Did the issue with the missing jetway with the FS9 version get fixed in V1.1. I know that awhile back someone posted a note about this missing jetway on the C gates (C12 or something like that) along with a google maps to show as example. Just curious if this got addressed in this update.
Thanks again for everything.
Troy
-
Thanks for the update FSDT...appreciate it. Nevermind the trolls in here, 99.9% of us love what you guys do.
-
hello everyone,
I have downloaded the new installer but it fails with some corruption
errors. i have tried download it multiple times, same results.
The error message says "source file is corrupted" which I interpret
as meaning that the file is corrupted in the archive.
It affects: Kord_T41_HW.bmp and subsequent files.
Do I have something wrong with my installed version or the ohare_setup.exe
file?
Thanks
-
Is the Addon Manager X installed?
If not, get it here (http://www.virtualisoftware.com/binaries/setup_addonmanagerX.exe).
-
Is the Addon Manager X installed?
If not, get it here (http://www.virtualisoftware.com/binaries/setup_addonmanagerX.exe).
It is installed but I don't see how this could help. You do not upgrade from within the Addonmanager.
Is there a problem with my current install. This error looks like a protection scheme to me. So it may
be the Ohare installer is missing a file somewhere and it get stuck. Yet my Ohare scenery works normally.
-
This error looks like a protection scheme to me.
No, it doesn't have anything to do with protection, it might simply be you got a corrupted file somehow. Please, stand by, I'll check the file and, if it's really corrupted, I'll re-upload it.
EDIT:
I've just checked the file, downloading it again, and it's fine, installers runs, and is not corrupted. You must have had a transmission problem when you downloaded it. Try deleting the installer, clear your browser cache, then download it again.
-
This error looks like a protection scheme to me.
No, it doesn't have anything to do with protection, it might simply be you got a corrupted file somehow. Please, stand by, I'll check the file and, if it's really corrupted, I'll re-upload it.
EDIT:
I've just checked the file, downloading it again, and it's fine, installers runs, and is not corrupted. You must have had a transmission problem when you downloaded it. Try deleting the installer, clear your browser cache, then download it again.
Ok, I have downloaded it again just now and this copy works. For some reasons, all my downloads from yesterday on two different
home machines yielded corrupted .exe files.
Thanks.