I installed the JYAI_Typhoons_Austria _FSX_P3D_1
package to P3D
Unfortunately the Zeltweg base suffers from elevation anomalies



same problem at RAF Mount Pleasant

It's fine in my P3Dv5.3, though the airfield boundaries suffer from some cliff action.

Yes P3Dv5
I use the ORBX Global and Open LC packages
Could this be interfering?

I don't have a problem either, but I don't have the ORBX and Open LC packages, so I suspect they might be causing the problem.

John

I have pretty much a full house of Orbx scenery, and that isn't an issue. The MAIW LOXZ is at a slightly lower elevation (676m) than reality (682m), but that shouldn't do this. However, it might be worth trying to make a new CVX file in ADE to see if that sorts it out. Only do this if you have ADE using a P3D SDK predating v5.3, as CVXs made with that SDK will not work.

I'll have a look at MPA. Just confirm which scenery you're using?

TimC340 wrote: ↑20 Aug 2022, 18:05 I have pretty much a full house of Orbx scenery, and that isn't an issue. The MAIW LOXZ is at a slightly lower elevation (676m) than reality (682m), but that shouldn't do this. However, it might be worth trying to make a new CVX file in ADE to see if that sorts it out. Only do this if you have ADE using a P3D SDK predating v5.3, as CVXs made with that SDK will not work.

I'll have a look at MPA. Just confirm which scenery you're using?

Hi,

I use P3Dv5 Academic
I installed Typhoon packs:

Problems with these In many places the buildings are in each other
JYAI_Typhoons_Austria _FSX_P3D_1
JYAI_Typhoons_Germany _FSX_P3D_1
JYAI_Typhoons_United Kingdom _FSX_P3D_1 (RAF Mount Pleasant)

Example:
Manching ETSI :

Neuburg ETSN:


I am grateful for your help!
Zsolt

The first thing you should do is check for other instances of third-party scenery for this airfield. Make sure none are active except the MAIW scenery.

With P3Dv5, very often the MAIW (and other) scenery will not exclude the default buildings or taxi signs. Also, Orbx scenery may sometimes display on top of the MAIW scenery even if you have made sure that the MAIW scenery loads above the Orbx scenery.

If you suspect Orbx (you can often recognise their airfields), search your Orbx installation for the airfield(s) you're having trouble with. Then create a 'removed' folder in appropriate Orbx directory and remove all of the relevant Orbx airfield files to that folder. Reload the sim and see if it has solved your problem. If not, go to the next step.

If it's the default scenery showing through your MAIW scenery, the best way to get around this is to open the MAIW ADEX/ADEP4 file in ADE then 'load stock data' (in the Tools menu) - buildings and taxi signs. You don't need to import the MAIW buildings or other items. Carefully go through and delete all of the stock items that are not required by the MAIW scenery. Save and compile the airport, and replace the MAIW ADEX/ADEP4 airfield bgl with your new one, plus the associated OBJ file (which includes the excludes you've just created for the removed stock scenery items) if you have set ADE up to save the OBJ file separately.

If the airfield is still at the wrong elevation and you're getting cuttings or embankments, you can reset the MAIW airfield elevation in ADE to try and match the default elevation for the field. You can also attempt to create a new CVX at the correct elevation for the MAIW airfield to override the default flatten, but as I said in my previous post, this will not work if ADE is using the P3Dv5.3 SDK. There are other discussion here in the 'Scenery Design' forum that expand on the problems others have had with this and the way we tackled it.

Good luck!

"The first thing you should do is check for other instances of third-party scenery for this airfield. Make sure none are active except the MAIW scenery.

With P3Dv5, very often the MAIW (and other) scenery will not exclude the default buildings or taxi signs. Also, Orbx scenery may sometimes display on top of the MAIW scenery even if you have made sure that the MAIW scenery loads above the Orbx scenery.

If you suspect Orbx (you can often recognise their airfields), search your Orbx installation for the airfield(s) you're having trouble with. Then create a 'removed' folder in appropriate Orbx directory and remove all of the relevant Orbx airfield files to that folder. Reload the sim and see if it has solved your problem. If not, go to the next step."

I have completed these operations
No other identical scenery files within ORBX conflicts with MAIW.
Where can I download the MAIW ADEX/ADEP4 tool?
I'm afraid that it is not the MAIW objects that need to be removed as the default buildings are interfering with MAIW objects.

ADE (you want the latest development version (1.79)) comes from here. It is not an MAIW tool.

The process I described removes the default buildings, not the MAIW buildings.

So we are back to this again... Which LM still has yet to address...

https://www.prepar3d.com/forum/viewtopi ... 2&t=144718

I'm not actually sure what the root cause of the problem is in this case, as it isn't affecting me or John and we have very different installations of P3Dv5. It doesn't appear to be related to the issues raised in that thread (which I cured by getting rid of the P3Dv5.3 SDK files that ADE, MCX and other scenery programs use and replacing it with the v5.2 SDK).

It is probably true that we are beginning to push our luck trying to keep FS9-generation (or earlier in some cases) scenery working in P3Dv5. So far, I've managed to get around most problems (though not the issue of the default flatten being higher than the third-party airfield). Most payware developers are using far more fundamental ways of developing scenery than ADE allows, and Jon Masterson has taken his eye off the P3D ball while he develops ADE for MSFS, so I don't see any chance of ADE for P3D being updated any time soon.

P3Dv5 is potentially very good indeed, and it can look as good as MSFS if you're prepared to do a lot of work or pay a lot of money! Its AI, even though it goes back to FS9, is light years ahead of MSFS and that's principally why I stick with it. Its study-level flyable aircraft are also well ahead of MSFS in most cases, and the user's interaction with the program is a great deal more intuitive than in MSFS. So I think it's worth persevering, but we might have to leave behind some of the the FS9 stuff. I keep a full installation of P3Dv4.5 for that!

I installed also the JYAI_Typhoons_Austria _FSX_P3D_1 for P3Dv4
No ORBX there
But no buildings

https://kepkuldes.com/images/a25d8ed44a ... 9e60b1.jpg
https://kepkuldes.com/images/bb7ae6145f ... 47714e.jpg
https://kepkuldes.com/images/5726d9b4c2 ... 4bb2a5.jpg

zsoltfireman, still working through checking mostly USAFE bases, but I did pull up LOXZ in my v5.3 and have the same issues. I'll follow up after looking in ADE 1.79 as TimC340 suggested, but I have the latest SDK. Forgot how nice this Austrian base is.

I like this Zeltweg base, I was there last weekend at Airpower 22

One more comment on the German Typhoon traffic
I do not see the traffic at ETSN and ETNL bases
Everything is in place,although I don't know after all the updates what the last German packet was

For those following this thread and are interested, there is a very nice version of LOXZ for MSFS at flightsim.to site.

The MAIW LOXZ for P3Dv4 may well not work properly in 5.3 as it stands - and this is true of several FS9 airfields converted to FSX/P3D format. You have to update any scenery object files to the P3Dv4.4 format in MCX to get them to display as well as possible. I'm quite sure that many of the updates for Matrix were converted to v4.0 - which is fine for early versions of P3Dv5, but 5.3 broke quite a lot of backwards compatibility.

This is the MAIW LOXZ in my 5.3. It's not perfect - I could spend some time getting rid of the cliffs, but this isn't really a part of the world that interests me particularly.

zsoltfireman wrote: ↑08 Sep 2022, 20:18 I like this Zeltweg base, I was there last weekend at Airpower 22

One more comment on the German Typhoon traffic
I do not see the traffic at ETSN and ETNL bases
Everything is in place,although I don't know after all the updates what the last German packet was

Not really appropriate for this thread, but it's all fine in my 5.3. That's the JYAI traffic packages that were released a couple of years ago.

TimC340 wrote: ↑09 Sep 2022, 11:08

zsoltfireman wrote: ↑08 Sep 2022, 20:18 I like this Zeltweg base, I was there last weekend at Airpower 22

One more comment on the German Typhoon traffic
I do not see the traffic at ETSN and ETNL bases
Everything is in place,although I don't know after all the updates what the last German packet was

Not really appropriate for this thread, but it's all fine in my 5.3. That's the JYAI traffic packages that were released a couple of years ago.

Will you share this version with me?
For me, editing the landscape is complicated

I use P3Dv4 Academic 4.5 and P3Dv5 Academic 5.1

Thank you,
Zsolt

It should work as it is perfectly well in 4.5. But in v5 you have to do some work to the AFD as v5 seems not to recognise the stock scenery object exclusions that worked in previous versions - not least because almost every stock airfield was revised for v5. But I explained all that earlier in the thread. It’s not difficult to do, but it does constitute modifying someone else’s work which means it can’t be shared.

I don’t understand why you’re having these problems in v5.1. Generally speaking, that version accepted v4 scenery without too many issues. From the screenshots at the beginning of the thread, I’d say you have another version of LOXZ on your system somewhere.

TimC340 wrote: ↑10 Sep 2022, 07:55 It should work as it is perfectly well in 4.5. But in v5 you have to do some work to the AFD as v5 seems not to recognise the stock scenery object exclusions that worked in previous versions - not least because almost every stock airfield was revised for v5. It’s not difficult to do, but it does constitute modifying someone else’s work which means it can’t be shared.

I believe you, but unfortunately, as I showed in the P3Dv4 pictures, the LOXZ buildings and hangars are not shown