That could help a lot I suppose and would eliminate even those fake airports that Aces invented due to different sources containing faulty data. BTW, I'v just changed VC11 to VCCK including renewing the whole environment (coast lines, the missing Koggala Lake, objects and LCs), learned to build generic buildings, re-arranged my ADE Object data base etc.... :afro:  Sorry for answering late...

Hi Tim,

ICAO codes are not necessarily valid forever and people like me are trying to update those in cases I'm flying in those areas via Airport Design Editor (the Pro-version is needed). Furthermore Microsoft used quite often kinda pseudo codes (e.g. Sri Lanka is full of those VC11, VC12 etc...).

However, as FS doesn't support such changes and you'll have two airports at the same place finally. Unfortunately the default one will show up in Plan-G when hovering with your mouse over the spot and you can't select the correct ICAO even not via the context menu. It seems to me, that it might to have something to with the way you are layering the database content when building up the map. I suppose that you are first searching for all defaults before overwriting such data with add-ons dealing with already known objects. Sometimes even contradicting data are shown (see enclosed picture), the mouse-info shows the correct ICAO while the information window sticks on the default one. Unfortunately the context menu only offers the faulty ICAO and you have to use the search function.

Is there anything you can do (probably in a far future) to bring the add-ons on top?

Hi Tim,

Unfortunately it seems that there are still some bugs in this version.

• When playing with this version I saw all HDG indicated as "000°", the tracks had been shown correctly.
• It happened more than once that  the map was frozen (no difference between connection based on FSUIPC or SimConnect
• A couple of times I wasn't able to mark a WP in my flightplan (it first looked normal colour marked but then disappeared when the mouse pointer left the FP-window) and consequently got no selection where to put a new WP.
• When facing the insertion problem as above I tried to use the edit mode, but the moved handle remained loosely linked to the map and I wasn't able to move it to the new location (NOT reproducible so far).

Well, best of all: the log file looks rather normal. However, as I realised that Plan-G had a lot to do with upgrading the weather, I'll see what is going to happen during a normal flight as everything mentioned before was done while  setting the a/c from place to place - via 'Move FS Aircraft to Here' or by using the respective FSX function.

I'm still sticking on FSXA running on a W7 Pro machine.

BTW, the OpenTopoMap looks good - it only lets you think about high risings mountains even if you are over a waving landscape. It's quite emphasised.   ???

I've just installed the new version (3.2.0.144) without having problems building the DB at all (I'm still using FSXA with 300+ enhanced airports and some missing - most of them I did myself).

Quote from: Haddock on July 15, 2016, 07:01:47 PM
Hello,

it belongs to SEQM - Quito Mariscal Sucre Intl Airport, Bolivia:

- Plan-G3 is showing datas and symbols of ILS for both runways 18/36
- X-Plane 10.45 didn't show any ILS runway, gives no datas and also an ILS approach didn't work.

In SEQU it is vice versa (less than 10 nm west of SEQM):

- Plan-G did not showing an ILS runway
- X-Plane is showing datas and symbols for an ILS runway.

The cruel thing is that Plan-G's database is based on X-Plane's database. In detail: X-Plane is up to date, and Plan-G's database is new generated from this X-Plane installation.

Any idea?

I don't know too much about X-Plane. However, correct is a full size airport at SEQM with ILS at both runways and a disabled and dismantled airport with the former ICAO identifier SEQU. Actually, it's a city park now. I don't know what add-ons or updates you are using, but for FSX I can tell you that SEQM wasn't there when it was was published. To bring it alive you needed at least to install a functioning AFCAD.

For X-Plane I don't know how it's done there, but I suppose that you would need any add-on here as well in order to show the new Quito airport. Obviously it's not present or something else is not working correctly. Your statement that X-Plane is showing the today's state is definitely wrong. SEQM is not existing anymore. Plan-G seems to know it better - for unknown reasons.

Hi Tim,

At least I found the trigger. One of the last airports at the end was entered twice in the plan. When deleting one of those entries the plan appeared.

Quote from: tim arnot on September 23, 2015, 07:09:00 PM

Quote from: pmb on September 21, 2015, 09:20:45 PM
I set the IPs for my machines under Windows network/adater settings on the respective machines, which did work as well. I feel a bit uneasy messing with the router.

Kind regards, Michael

That's fine so long you use addresses that your router is not going to allocate to something else, otherwise you could potentially have a conflict if another device gets the same address that you manually allocated.

Most routers nowadays are too smart for doing that. However, usually they are allocating addresses above a certain threshold, e.g 200

Understandable, Tim! As fas as I can remember, a connection via FSUIPC has some drawbacks, too (it's slow?).

Quote from: cmitch81 on October 07, 2015, 10:06:13 PM
My "map drop down menus", which show when you right click on a spot on the map or object on a map, work at first but then become transparent, for no apparent reason, as the flight continues.

Like they have been removed to the "background".

Any advice.

cmitch
==========

Transparent drop down menus might happen, if your flightsim is running in the background, at least for me. It's not limited to Plan-G in this case. You didn't write whether you're using a second screen or a single one.

SimConnect

Hi Tim,

Quite a while ago I posted a suspicion that the amount of objects (including AI) might cause crashes of Plan-G. It seems, that the AI dependency is verified after some weeks of trial. I'm flying regularly with a couple of friends connected via FsHost and all of us are using Plan-G in order to track ourselves which does not prevent other AI-traffic to appear, of course. As I experienced myself that I never had any crashes in remote areas with almost no AI but more often with a lot of other spotted planes (only moving ones), we decided to switch off completely the AI in Plan-G and *BINGO* no crashes anymore, even for those guys that cursed each session a couple of times.

I don't know whether you addressed the stability in your latest Beta but it seems for me to be something being worth to be observed. Probably others here experiencing crashes can observe it. Probably it would help, showing only the traffic +- 2,500 ft (or maybe a configurable value) relative to the own altitude in order to avoid overflows (of what?).

Hello Tim,

At the moment I surprisingly have a strange behaviour with Plan-G, build 3.1.3.104 (I'm still using this version even if a new Beta is in the field).

I developed a flight plan around Big Apple, planned as a scenic tour through rolling landscape and touching several airports in short distance to each other. When opening this tour again I got the plan, the right map area, and the red triangles showing the waypoints (airports), but no connection between them. This happened in each zoom stage where usually those connections are drawn. It's not the amount of waypoints as a trail of relatively short hops around half the world (about) did never show such effect.

I added the flightplan a picture showing the effect and the log as well.

Could you please explain a bit more about the last two functions?

Quote from: tim arnot on March 16, 2015, 01:16:14 PM
I'm pretty sure it's an FSHost thing. I think there's a fix, but I don't remember what it is (so rare i use FSHost!)

I'll do a search when I get a chance.

Hi Tim,

Unfortunately the problem persists. When flying jets altogether I can see my buddies riding even with 830+ knots. I checked with FS Commander 9 in parallel and everything looks correct. That's for me proof enough not thinking about FSHost as FSC gets the same data. BTW, I searched for the mentioned fix myself and failed.

Mike, I don't know the answer, but are you able to select Rw11 from FSX directly for this airport? If the developers of this specific airport did not add a start position for this RW you may have to taxi to the right end.