Jump to content

Amsterdam Wish List.


Shaun Fletcher

Recommended Posts

Shaun,

Thanks for making this possible. On behalf of the Dutch VACC I have gathered the following until now:

- B-pier misses stands on the southern side, and the fencing must be removed. There are no aviobridges, but stairs.

- B-pier misses one aviobridge on the northern side.

- B-pier odd-side numbering shall be changed to B13, B15, B17, B23, B27, B31 and B35.

- 'Lantern masts' near the J-platform (e.g. near P10) are not placed correctly, because these stands are taxi-in/taxi-out stands.

This is the only picture I could find that shows the new situation at the southern side of the B-pier:

1517487.jpg

Maybe more to comehappy.gif.

Stefan

Link to comment
Share on other sites

First, let me say I strongly agree with the earlier poster, saying the B-pier MUST be adapted. This has been this way for 9 months now, if I buy a BRAND_NEW scenery, I expect it to be up to date. This might involve some changes in the coming AES release then too.

The AFCADs don't do justice to AMS at all. The airline assignments are completely non-realistic, but that is not my main problem. The runway use is completely rubbish. The by far most used combination (18R for landing, 24 for take-off), isn't even possible. I expected, this being one of Mathijs favorites, that he would have made sure this was going to be correct. Why is it so that allmost all payware sceneries are delivered with crap AFCADs? Why do scenerydesigners not make some extra some efforts to make sure those are correct? CDG, BUD, FRA, MAD, BRU, they were all full of issues. After all sceneries I buy, I am first bizzy for half an hour at least to make the AFCAD correct.

I hope you guys bring a good update.

To finish with some compliments: the textures are amazing, and the blending with UltimateTerrain is simply fantastic. Well done!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Great to see a wish list!

I would like to see:

- More compatibility with the default FS9 terrain. No the A4 just stops and cars are riding over the terrain (other airports have multiple options in the installer to choose from)

- Better shaping of the bridges and tunnels (only use elevation for AI cars)

- More customized AI cars and busses, like the typical Schiphol Sternet bus

- Better rendition of Schiphol Plaza (no traffic there at all, although it is a busy bus terminal (!))

- Seasonal textures

- I feel there are some taxiway signs missing

- Some more objects, like all the boxes loaded with cargo and suitcases

- Some more charasteristic buildings in the surrounding area, like the Spotters place near the Polderbaan (36 L), the MC Donald's near runway 27, the small windmill on the A4 and maybe even the gasstations with restaurants and bridge at the A4 which you always see when departing and arriving from the Kaagbaan.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would like to see the Icetower and adjustments of the de-icing pads and numbers. Check the photo's on this link: http://www.flickr.com/photos/43737556@N02/4328778648/in/set-72157623344744106/.

I mentioned this also in the other post, but I think it should be in this topic. Sorry for double up. I am working in that area right now, so when necessary do not hesitate to contact me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well also all the taxiways + Runways are poor. It looks like an old asfalt road in the wildwest. Maybe some more sharper at the sides

53c4i.jpg

Also the lights are not so very sharp. Maybe some birghter lights

Link to comment
Share on other sites

- Brighter taxi lights during night

- More taxiway signs

- If possible, brighter and maybe larger gate number signs on ground.

- Taxiway bumping on A and B between A4-A8 incl the S-exits

Yes it is lacking in taxiway signs Its much harder to navigate on the ground that the C9 version..... Please take note this is so important :blush:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

First of all, great scenery etc!!!

Is it possible to change the brake marks at the gates in oil marks and to make the bridges elevated (like Leipzig)? As some posts before, cars just dissapear. Also the high way at 18r just stops and with wing view you see the default scenery and the high way starts all of a sudden. Some more cars would be nice (always traffic jams all around the airport), but no priority ofcourse! Others already said the other things (some a bit blunt... :wacko: ).

Regards,

John

@Robin. At SPL they don't cut the grass everyday ^_^ so that's probably why the edges aren't sharp as you mentioned.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

+1 for the elevated avioducts and viaduct (A5 connection to A4 is only a part of the photo texture.

Not only the crossing of the A4 should be elevated like Leipzig, but also the crossing of the Hoofdvaart, towards 36L/18R.

Also, I would like an increased area to be covered with the ground texture. Right now it's very tight fitted around the airport. While on approach to 18R, you clearly see the north and west boundary, right at where you cross the A9. Cars also disappear there (because the scenery stops there).

Also, there is a lot of airport ground traffic driving over the south avioduct. In real life, there is no airport ground traffic allowed there. There is no road on the avioduct.

When I think of more, I'll let you know.

I'll state again; I work at SPL and have access to most parts of it. If you need data or photo's just let me know and I'll see what I can do.

Best regards,

Frank van der Werff

Link to comment
Share on other sites

+1 for the elevated avioducts and viaduct (A5 connection to A4 is only a part of the photo texture.

Not only the crossing of the A4 should be elevated like Leipzig, but also the crossing of the Hoofdvaart, towards 36L/18R.

I do not agree wit this one, since elevated crossings cause the AI Traffic to go right through it. Also the purple taxiway aid will disappear when using elevated crossings. As an alternative a better modeling of the current situation should be a better option.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just made an ILS approach on the 18R with my little Fokker (DA). I noticed that the localizer seems to be slightly off to the right (indications on my PFD and ND are bang on).

And, as mentioned here before as well, I am missing a lot of taxi signs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

-Some of the roof texture look really blurry.

That's because most (if not all) of the textures' are DTX3 without Alpha-Channel. This is MUST fix for SP1, otherwise stuttering and blurrying 100% guaranteed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The only thing which is bothering me is the runway usage. If I use the south direction AFCAD, take offs are from 24, but landings are also on 24! This problem also occurs at the north Afcad, but then with 36C. 36L/18R is never being used by the AI.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The AFCADs are quite useless, therefore a friend of mine working at AMS, and I, both having extended experience with the airport as spotters and travellers, have created our own AFCAD with working STAR-technique applied. Every combination you like is available, and within FS2004 limits it works like a charm. The gate assignments are 99,99% realistic.

Making the AFCAD work was quite difficult actually, because the original maker at Aerosoft/DFS forgot to make the taxiwaylines over the runways dedicated runway lines, therefore completely screwing all AI-traffic movement. Forgive me the rudeness, but that is really a newbie's mistake.

Anyone interested in our AFCAD?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The only thing which is bothering me is the runway usage. If I use the south direction AFCAD, take offs are from 24, but landings are also on 24! This problem also occurs at the north Afcad, but then with 36C. 36L/18R is never being used by the AI.

I'm pretty sure I am right in thinking that while there may be many different afcads......the Approach codes have not been written for the newish runway designations.

Without which your AI will not stand much of a chance.

Get Jim Vile's EHAM Approach code file here: http://library.avsim.net/esearch.php?DLID=&Name=&FileName=eham__app__3rd.zip&Author=&CatID=root

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's because most (if not all) of the textures' are DTX3 without Alpha-Channel. This is MUST fix for SP1, otherwise stuttering and blurrying 100% guaranteed.

I think it is not, with all due respect. Many, if not all of the Aerosoft airport sceneries I see released for FS (9 and X) have rather blurry roofs, and I can't blame them: you don't see the roofs at all when driving your plane around. Maybe you see it when you take off or land, but I don't think you'll notice it that much at these moments. And when you overfly Schiphol, you'll be so high it will look very sharp. So no, I do not think this is a mkust fix. Sharper textures would be nice, but there are more pressing things right now, like the taxi signs, AFCAD stuff, B-pier problems...

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hello Schipol people :)

Since Shaun has started that thread and since it sounds like there's going to be some rework of that nice scenery, I feel the urge to point at what I think is a major issue with Mega Amsterdam.

There are lots of small details that could be improved when you are right on the airport, but there in my opinion a serious problem when you're actually flying toward the airport.

It must have to do with the LOD architecture of the scenery, and perhaps, with the 'under the sea level status of Schipol.

Better than a long post full of typos, those screenies will show the problem:

eham_1.jpg

eham_2.jpg

eham_3.jpg

eham_4.jpg

eham_5.jpg

eham_6.jpg

eham_7.jpg

3 nautical miles from the airport and no 3d objects is abnormal, and that is a problem. I know some bits of the makings of a scenery, LODs etc, but here that's really exagerated, and that must be sorted.

Always difficult to compare with other sceneries, however if we look at other mega airports from AS the story is a whole different: Madrid, Heathrow, De gaulle, Frankfurt, Brussel (same deisgner) etc,

as far as 10NM away you can already see the main buildings first LODs.

There is also something wrong with how AI aircrafts remain untextured in Mega Amsterdam: I know some AI models loose their texture from the distance and their lowest LODs, but here, even at 1 mile

they're still naked. That should really be worked out, I hope Cornel reads this.

Seeing a vast empty area filled with naked AI aircrafts instead of an airport, when you're on final at less than a few nuatical miles and few hundreds feets is defintiely not pleasant and not the way it should be. Again, no other Mega Airports from Aerosoft looks like this.

In fact, I am thinking that the buildings popping up in view like they do, making the whole think look quite weird, is because they are not built with LODs.

Which nowadays, cant be.

Hope this help us all.

Regards

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have one big thing to ask you guys: could you make EHAM fully compatible with NL2000? I believe I asked this during development and I was assured that it would be made compatible. Now it appears it isn't...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Go to your NL-2000 folder and delete all files starting with EHAM. That's all.

Make sure MAP Amsterdam layer is above the NL2000 layers.

Great idea for a wishlist. It's nice to see developers want to improve a product even after it has been released.

What I would like to see is some changes in the centerlines between the C and D pier.

The southern side of the 'roundabout' should be placed more to the north, on a straight line as the ramp line from D2.

Will make you a screenshot later to compare with.

The second thing, which i've already mentioned a few weeks ago; the safety bars on the apron drive jetways; They are not round.

I'll make you guys some scetches for the jetways as well.

And of course there are some other things but most are already mentioned, so I won't post them again.

Thanks again for taking our notes into account!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Arnaud described it perfectly, having the same problem here as he has. I think that's a major problem which should be fixed first before we think about taxi signs etc, which are of course important, too. :blink:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Privacy Policy & Terms of Use