AES and KLAX (tiny problem)

[tetiaroa]

Hi everyone,

First of all great scenery and thanks for still supporting FS9!!!

Still, I´m having a small issue with AES and KLAX; therefore I posted this message to Oliver at Aerosoft:

Hi Oliver,

didn´t hear of me in a long time, huh? Well, you know how most of us are: only typing when in need of something ;-)

But first, let me thank you for another great version of AES and your never ending effort in improving and promoting this tiny but excellent tool!

Now, my problem is actually just a small one, yet bothering me quite a bit. I´m referring to the fact that at most stands with double jetways in KLAX (same as in KJFK), there´s movement only simulated for one of each jetbridge. In KJFK that is also quite annoying, but as there are less gates with double jetways, it´s not of that much significance as in KLAX (still wouldn´t mind if it were solved there, as well :-) )
I know that the core of this problem might be that the guys at FSDreamteam only removed one of each jetbridge in the scenery; but since we had to wait 4 long years for an AES supported KLAX scenery, I was hoping that you could - together with the guys of FSDreamteam - figure out a way of making all of them movable and thereby perfectioning this wonderful scenery!

Thanks in advance!

Your´s,
Tetiaroa!

Do you see a chance of solving this? You would really make my day!

Thanks,
Tetiaroa!

[henry]

I also installed AES today for KLAX FS9 & FSX, I have the same problem.

I also noticed that at Gate 101 in FS9 there are two jetways and in FSX three, why is this because I think this gate is for the A380.

Attached images from FS9 FSX.

I have up to now not noticed any problems with other FSDT Airports. If I park at KJFK both jetways connect to the aircraft doors.

I also noticed with  all the double jetways at this airports  one is pointing away from the aircraft.

[virtuali]

Sorry, it's not a bug or a problem, the scenery is made like this, with the 2nd jetway as part of the terminal, and won't be changed. Since FSX by default doesn't support the 2nd animated jetway and the FSX default method is what we use, we design the scenery taking into account this. Of course, since the FS9 version is a conversion from FSX, it's modeled exactly the same.

I believe there's also a note in the AES documentation about this.

We'll look into double jetways animations when we'll finally replace the FSX default jetway animation system with a more flexible one that will probably add to GSX, but of course it will for FSX only.

[henry]

That doesn't mean there is no  difference between FX 9 and FS X , because in the FS 9 there are two jet ways for the
380, and in the FS X there are three jet ways for the Airbus 380.
See two photo's above, also I have tested this afternoon most of my airports, and most of the airports I have bought have
double working jet ways, (Aerosoft and many others) and also FSDT New York the double jet ways are working very well.
Also the 380 parking at KJFK is working great.!!
It has cost my again AES credits for something which is not completed, and it seems to me that everything gets more expensive
and still not really up to date, and still have to be changed in the future again.
I have been waiting a while with AES  because I was expecting something like this.

 

[virtuali]

It has cost my again AES credits for something which is not completed

That is "not completed", is your opinion, we believe the scenery was completed already as we sell it, you can't complain here that you spent AES credits on an AES implementation you are not happy with.

We don't sell AES credits, and we don't even *advertise* KLAX as being compatible with AES, see here, no mention of AES:

http://www.fsdreamteam.com/products_klax.html

If Aerosoft sells AES credits for KLAX, it means they believe it IS completed and ready for sale, even without double jetways, and it's worth the credit price they are aksing for it.

if you don't agree, simply don't buy the AES credits for KLAX, and as I've said already, I believe there's a note in the AES documentation about the scenery not having double jetways, which you could check before deciding to spend credits, since the documentation comes with the program updates.

[tetiaroa]

Well, with all due respect, but we had to wait FOUR long years to get an "AES-ed KLAX", 2 of which you´ve made us believe that you´d eventually update C9-KLAX making it compatible with AES (which you obviously never did). And now....now you´re coming up with that crappy solution trying to convince us that it´d be too complex to do any different???

I mean, I know that your focus is on FSX and that your support for FS9 is...well let´s call it "limited", and there´s absolutely no need for you to come up with any statistics or anything now why that is....all understood and accepted. But my point is, choosing only the most profitable way, still might not always be the best way, because you start loosing something that is a high value in these days: customer orientation! And you can´t deny, there is a demand for a nicely AESed-KLAX, otherwise people wouldn´t post here (even if that demand admittedly may be small). Ignoring these demands may not let you feel any negative consequences immediately, but on the long run it might. Just speaking for myself and Zurich for instance: meanwhile I switched to Aerosoft´s version as their customer service seems way better than it is here...and I´m quite sure to not be the only one having done so.  

What I´m saying is, stop - for all our sakes - sticking fanatically with one idea that in general might be right, and let exceptions be part of the game. I mean how much time could it actually take you to undo these second jetbridges and pack ´em in a second .mdl-file? Two work-hours...maybe 5!? Moreover, I´m sure most people would even pay for such an update and if you priced it with only $5 or sth., you´d only need about 10-20 customers to buy it and all your expenses would be evened. And additionally, your clientele and therefore in a final step you...would be a great deal happier!

Think about it!

[virtuali]

Well, with all due respect, but we had to wait FOUR long years to get an "AES-ed KLAX", 2 of which you´ve made us believe that you´d eventually update C9-KLAX making it compatible with AES (which you obviously never did). And now....now you´re coming up with that crappy solution trying to convince us that it´d be too complex to do any different???

There's a very long thread in this very section about KLAX not having good enough performances, *especially* with FS9.

Splitting it further, for the *sole* purpose that AES could animate also the double jetways will decrease performances even more, and we don't have the slightest intention to slow it down further, because it's already on what we consider the lowest acceptable minimum for FS9, and the performance slowdown that will be imposed to ALL users (even those not using AES), will affects sales far more than not having AES on double jetways.

But, again, you are still missing the main point, which is: Aerosoft/Oliver Pabst has decided to add KLAX to AES and priced it at 5 credits, which means they believe it's worth it. If you don't agree, either complain with them about the price, and/or don't buy the credits.

If you don't like FSDT KLAX as it was made, there are two alternatives: a very fast and good looking Cloud9 version, which is a bit outdated and doesn't have *any* AES support and will never have, or the Blueprint version, which doesn't look nearly as good, and doesn't have AES support either and will never have too.

[tetiaroa]

I´m not complaining about the 5 credits and I´m not unhappy with Oliver´s work at all, so why complain there? Neither did I mean to complain nor to offend you, so no need to feel attacked! All I´m saying is that pretty many of us are disappointed about your marginal efforts in generating a scenery fully compatible with AES.  

If you are concerned about users having trouble with too low FPS after converting the scenery to be fully compatible with AES, why don´t you provide the converted version as an optional update and leave it up to the users which they prefer?

[virtuali]

If you are concerned about users having trouble with too low FPS after converting the scenery to be fully compatible with AES, why don´t you provide the converted version as an optional update and leave it up to the users which they prefer?

Because we don't have any intention to manage two different versions, which also means keeping two different source code of the models, so that every time we'll ever need to touch the models for any modification, we'll have to do it twice, and this just to accomodate a very minor AES feature.

I'm sorry, but I'm agree entirely to what Oliver Pabst said about the AES implementation at KLAX: you already have 125 animated jetways, and 220 pushback positions, I'd say it's good enough and you won't find any better representation of this airport and any more complete AES implementation than what it's already done.

The topic is closed, since there's no more left to add.