My submission (# 87394) had no elements that were outside the "acceptable boundaries". The tree elements are crucial to a realistic approach/departure.
Additionally, are static aircraft no longer "acceptable"? Nothing in this package is any different than many other airports I have submitted. Might as well just save myself a lot of hard work and not submit any more packages.
I need to know the answers to these questions as there is no clear guidance as to what is acceptable any more.
Any scenery outside the “airport fence” was always (last few years) not desired. It was “acceptable” for crucial buildings or characteristic features, modeling extensive forestry never was one of them…but the moderator gave some leeway. Not anymore, because those will clash with new XP12 autogen. So in a nutshell: NO objectes/trees outside the airport fence anymore, please. And 99% of your trees were not “crucial” to realistic arrival/departure procedures, usually only the first few trees in the climb/approach part are. “Fitting the ortho” is not crucial 😉
Static aircraft were never desired, either - except in very limited circumstances (like the firefighting practice hull on bigger airports). All spots where an aircraft COULD be parked should get a ramp start with the correct parameters to allow dynamic aircraft placement (and to have the ability to remove aircraft for online flyers or users of 3rd party traffic programs). Up to now the moderator allowed some leeway, not anymore.
I have been busy cleaning up your airports for the last few weeks, please don´t create any more work for me, thank you 😉
You make really good airports, and if you like to add those things for your own enjoyment (I bet you use ortho4XP), please upload a version devoid of those things for the Gateway and then you can add them on another version for your own enjoyment.
To discuss this further, please come to the Scenery Gateway forum at http://x-plane.org , it is much easier to communicate that way.
Thanks, Jan
You must be logged in to participate in the discussion
My submission (# 87394) had no elements that were outside the "acceptable boundaries". The tree elements are crucial to a realistic approach/departure.
Additionally, are static aircraft no longer "acceptable"? Nothing in this package is any different than many other airports I have submitted. Might as well just save myself a lot of hard work and not submit any more packages.
I need to know the answers to these questions as there is no clear guidance as to what is acceptable any more.
Jan Vogel December 7, 2021 11:09 AM
Any scenery outside the “airport fence” was always (last few years) not desired. It was “acceptable” for crucial buildings or characteristic features, modeling extensive forestry never was one of them…but the moderator gave some leeway. Not anymore, because those will clash with new XP12 autogen. So in a nutshell: NO objectes/trees outside the airport fence anymore, please. And 99% of your trees were not “crucial” to realistic arrival/departure procedures, usually only the first few trees in the climb/approach part are. “Fitting the ortho” is not crucial 😉
Static aircraft were never desired, either - except in very limited circumstances (like the firefighting practice hull on bigger airports). All spots where an aircraft COULD be parked should get a ramp start with the correct parameters to allow dynamic aircraft placement (and to have the ability to remove aircraft for online flyers or users of 3rd party traffic programs). Up to now the moderator allowed some leeway, not anymore.
I have been busy cleaning up your airports for the last few weeks, please don´t create any more work for me, thank you 😉
You make really good airports, and if you like to add those things for your own enjoyment (I bet you use ortho4XP), please upload a version devoid of those things for the Gateway and then you can add them on another version for your own enjoyment.
To discuss this further, please come to the Scenery Gateway forum at http://x-plane.org , it is much easier to communicate that way.
Thanks, Jan