Isn't there an option in the GSX parking editor to set a radius?

Yes there is Fenric, but I'm unsure what the radius relates to and after changing it what are the affects. If I increase the radius does this effectively 'open up' the gate and in doing so, effectively say to GSX this is a bigger gate than by default. The reason I ask, is that GSX took me and the NGX to the other side of Bristol airport in the UK last night, because it said all the gates were too small. But the gates are not too small as they are used all the time for 737s and A320's! How do I overcome this? It has also told me that a certain gate is unavailable, when it clearly is available?

All it does is allow you to move the GSX service vehicles closer or further away from your aircraft (maybe by the tug is inside a building or some other airport feature), it does not effect the radius of the parking spot as far as FSX is concerned, nor will it allow you to trick GSX into allowing you to park in a space that is not meant for your aircraft. This is all covered in the GSX manual strangely enough :)

This is all covered in the GSX manual strangely enough :)

Sarcasm is the lowest form of wit Andrew... :( :( I have read the manual but cannot find anywhere that helps with the issue of being told the gate is too small.

Thanks to you both Howard and Andy for the clarifications!Perhaps FSDT will consider adding a "GSX Parking Radius" parameter to a future update so this issue can be managed without having to edit an AFCAD.

Perhaps FSDT will consider adding a "GSX Parking Radius" parameter to a future update so this issue can be managed without having to edit an AFCAD.

I'm not quite sure what modification you want to GSX which currently obeys the FSX rules for parking matching user aircraft size and user identity (airline code) needs as per FSX. If you are not prepared to use a parking editor to change the current parking sizes and allocations why expect GSX to provide you with the same facility. A "GSX Parking Radius parameter" would do exactly the same job that can be done ADE or AFX and ADE is free!If contributors think there is somehting fishy about GSX parking handling then they should at least have a look at the offending parking spots with an airfield editor to identify the problem properly rather than jumping to conclusions.

John,My line of thinking attempted to parallel what I took to be FSDT's intent to include the ability to have its own data for pushback direction and to manage the placement of the marshaller and vehicles around the aircraft. Perhaps I came to my conclusion in haste and did not consider all aspects of the situation as you suggest.Following what I believe to be your line of reasoning, certainly users could move scenery objects - buildings and jetways - to give vehicles the correct amount of room that a scenery-defined parking space would call for (etc.) without recourse to the GSX parking editor. I'll concur that's undeniably correct.Then again I had also thought that sharing a user-generated text file that would accommodate multiple aspects of GSX's "parking spot" structure with - for instance a commercial airport scenery - should be far less problematic than sharing an actual user-modified commercial scenery file itself. Maybe not though?

Fenric,It is clear that GSX relies on the FSX parking system and thus the FSX parking rules to derive its needs I think is quite a reasonable approach. I have the view that any other approach to the GSX design would escalate the cost of development, thence further delay and increased purchase cost, to a none viable level. We mustn't forget that MS changed the whole aircraft parking environment for FSX , unfortunately MS didn't get around to adjusting the default parking spaces available from the FS9 standard. Thats something we have to live with or correct ourselves.There may be another issue in the background for those users who use ex FS9 aircraft for AI traffic as some of these aircraft might have config files where wingspan was irrelvant until FSX came along. A similar problem may be evident for users who chose to use commercial AFCADS that were designed around the FS9 parking environment. These issue can all be fixed with a little effort by users.I can say that since using the FSX rules for parking in both airfields and Aircraft Configs I have never had GSX do anything but offer me my intended parking spot amongst its choices.One issue I do have with GSX is those idiotic remarks after parking, examples such as "That wasn't very good parking" are irrelevant, not constructive and make an uneccesary interruption to the completion of a flight. I am not a fan of the static message bar across the top of my cockpit which I cannot dismiss unlike the more usual ATC message boxes.

John,I've never had a "parking spot size problem" with GSX. I make a dispatch release before each flight and I know which spots my aircraft can fit into according to the BGL data. (And I generally don't fly heavies so I have more options than other users.) And GSX always lets me have the spots I opt for. But I have read where others describe arrving at a spot with clearly enough room, but because of some design reason - maybe the developer builds for FS9 and ports to FSX or maybe they use Andy's tiny-parking-radius trick to always have a space free, or whatever - GSX plays by the rules and says, "you can't go there."I've made a few GSX parking files for some of my airports that have "static" jetways, ill-defined pushbacks, and buildings placed too close to the park spot. So I'm glad FSDT has given us the chance to define elements of "our" parking for GSX, because GSX is "our" ground services... not services for AI. AI can follow the BGL-written rules, but our eyes allow us to (literally, duh) see things differently.You know, I've never gotten a good parking grade from GSX either - and I know I've parked dead-center of the circle well within a degree of the heading. Oh well, more practice needed. :(