Cloud9 Support goes to FSDT...

[Mike Phyrio]

So, after all this time, still no AES for LAX, eh?
Well, it's no use writing a bunch of criticism; it just angers the people you are hoping will make you happier.
But I gotta tell you, I am VERY unhappy.

[bradl]

So, after all this time, still no AES for LAX, eh?
Well, it's no use writing a bunch of criticism; it just angers the people you are hoping will make you happier.
But I gotta tell you, I am VERY unhappy.

With all of the things that have to be done for LAX, AES is the least of your worries. I think the bulk of the people would much rather have an updated version of LAX than a 2 - 3 year old version with AES.

BL.

[newmanix]

Ok here is my position.

Virtuali said several times that the reason we won't have AES for KLAX was because it was property of Cloud9. Now that KLAX is under the full support of FSDT I really think C9 KLAX should be enhanced with AES for a few reasons.

1. I think it will boost sales.
2. It will fill a gap and keep all C9 customers happy untill FSDT decides to make a KLAX which could be at least a year from now.
3. What if FSDT never makes a KLAX?

I would really like Virtuali to reconsider.... At the very least, KLAX can have new life for us untill FSDT decides to make KLAX.

[Bruce Hamilton]

At the very least, KLAX can have new life for us untill FSDT decides to make KLAX.

Their agreement allowed them to use parts to create new sceneries, not update old ones.

[newmanix]

At the very least, KLAX can have new life for us untill FSDT decides to make KLAX.

Their agreement allowed them to use parts to create new sceneries, not update old ones.

We are talking about small scenery modifications, not updates.

[Mike Phyrio]

With all of the things that have to be done for LAX, AES is the least of your worries.

Well it is, so there.....nyahh!

Actually, I'm fine with the quality of the Cloud 9 Scenery at LAX. I just got used to (read: hooked on), AES and the heightened "realism" it afforded and, since LAX is my "home airport" and I do most of my flying into and outta there, I thought it'd be nice to have AES there so I could go to an actual Southwest Terminal and have a jetway come slithering out to say "Allo dere." 

[newmanix]

With all of the things that have to be done for LAX, AES is the least of your worries.

Well it is, so there.....nyahh!

Actually, I'm fine with the quality of the Cloud 9 Scenery at LAX. I just got used to (read: hooked on), AES and the heightened "realism" it afforded and, since LAX is my "home airport" and I do most of my flying into and outta there, I thought it'd be nice to have AES there so I could go to an actual Southwest Terminal and have a jetway come slithering out to say "Allo dere." 

KLAX is my home airport too. I haven't used KLAX in like 2 years, but I believe the jetbridges do move. It's just a pain in the @$$ trying to slew the aircraft into the correct position to get it to work....


And it would be great for my SWA LAX-LAS sorties!! You have no idea how many times I have done that flight in real life....

[virtuali]

Virtuali said several times that the reason we won't have AES for KLAX was because it was property of Cloud9. Now that KLAX is under the full support of FSDT I really think C9 KLAX should be enhanced with AES for a few reasons.

Sorry, but being under "full support", doesn't mean Cloud9 KLAX is now our property. We have TWO agreements with Cloud9 right now, one for the support of old products, and one to use parts of the old scenery to create A NEW FSDT PRODUCT.

New FSDT products derived from Cloud9 products, might be created with an eye with AES compatibility. But no, we don't have any intention to work on Cloud9 products, just to allow AES compatibility.

Also, I don't think it does ANY sense to put work on KLAX just to have AES, and leaving out the update of the airport. All those modification put together are a major rework that, while we are at it, might be done using 2010 design methods instead of 2006 ones.

It's a simple matter of economics here: the "support" agreement for Cloud9 products we have now, can only support the cost of supporting users, and nothing more. It's only the chance to create a new FSDT product, that can justify the budget to put people working on modifying the actual scenery.

[newmanix]

Ok, but why would you really need parts of old Cloud 9 scenery to create a new one? I would like to think that you would simply create a new scenery from scratch insted of using outdated objects...

[virtuali]

Ok, but why would you really need parts of old Cloud 9 scenery to create a new one? I would like to think that you would simply create a new scenery from scratch insted of using outdated objects...

First, most of the objects are not "outdated", the biggest change the airport had was the runway that moved. And, of course, while people sometimes think 3d objects are the most important part of the scenery, in reality, a lot of time is spent on less sexy things like taxiways, ground markings, parking markings, vertical signs, etc. Those are certainly not "outdated", except in the parts relevant to the moved runways.

However, I would really like to point out the fact that we HAVEN'T decided to redo KLAX yet.  And, even if we decided to do it, it's not sure will decide to reuse part of the Cloud9 scenery or not. With this new agreement, we simply have the CHANCE to decide what to do, but that doesn't mean we are doing anything, or have decided anything.

The only thing that's for sure, is that we'll not do any modification to the Cloud9 scenery. Supporting Cloud9 scenery means ONLY supporting users with reactivation and keeping the installers always compatible with our new stuff and newer OS. Nothing more.

[Silverbird]

Hi guys, Umberto, to be honest I think the fastest way to get klax out, if fsdt decided to redo klax, it to use the current models like Umberto said its not outdated and the models that are in 3d studio max/gmax can be modified, re textured if they feel that it needs it I don't see any point in rebuilding everything from scratch when you have good sources already made now.

I can understand if the 3d models and source for the scenery was extremely old and low quality but that's not the case here with klax or even kmco, kdca,eham, they are very well made sceneries they still look wonderful after all this time. I'm sure when they get the chance and time they will redo klax, well at least hoping as that would be perfect with other fsdt sceneries like phnl klas.

[bradl]

Thank you, Umberto, for bringing home my point.

Something as cosmetic as AES is nothing compared to having 7R/25L moved to its now proper place and widened, having Taxiway H installed, and all of the highspeeds installed to match. All of the other objects (as listed on the AF/D remain the same). Compare how LAX looked in 2006:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/58/LAX_airport_map.PNG

to how LAX looks now:

http://204.108.4.16/d-tpp/0911/00237AD.PDF

I'd think having the right runways and taxiways would be a bit more important than keeping the old setup and adding AES and other gate automation.

BL.

[phenocom]

I would like to know what happened to the excellent product Cloud 9 was working on? Namely VHHH which from the early screenshots looked a lot better than the one Imagine Sim is currently releasing

[Ethan744N763]

Dead probally. Imaginesim's one is a great scenery I dont know what your talking about

[phenocom]

I am not a person who dislikes Imagine Sim. On the contrary,  I have almost every airport they have ever made and I think they're fantastic  But Imagine Sims version pales in comparison to the screenshots cloud 9 showed on their version of VHHH and I just wanted to know if FSDT might have plans to complete Cloud 9's excellent version.