FSX-MS AI Controller 1.4 (SID, Jet Route, STAR and Final Approach) (New) Beta

[SierraHotel 982]

Thanks again Roland, it's guys like you that keep the Flight Sim community going strong.

[liketofly1 11]

 

 

Did you try modifying the .bgl using ADE to set the takeoff runway to RW29?

 

Hi Roland, no - I did not, I just thought is a little impractical to modify the Airportfile for each session, and as it was just a sort of "test" after installing the Hotfix5 and MT6 my aim was mainly to evaluate the distance at which AI is to be seen in P3D and MT6....... but ofcorsethat would have been an option....

 

 

That's definitely where I'm headed for the next major release and I'll support an on-the-fly force departure runway specific to the ICAO (I'll probably revise the force landing runway to be specific to the ICAO too).

 

 

that would be excellent... as I suggested, maybe you could do one screen in the UI with depature icao + ldg & T/O RW(s) and the arrival icao with ldg & T/O RW(s) that way everything is covered....

 

regards

[Clipper Ocean Spray 189]

Guys, I pulled HF5.  Just found out the scenery.cfg absolute-path TO UNC-network-path translator in Prepar3d mode isn't working.

 

This is a pretty big deal for P3D-MyTraffic 6 users running AIMonitor on a networked client machine because MyTraffic 6 places an absolute path (pointing to a folder shared by different FS programs) in the scenery.cfg, so I would think they need the translator working.

 

A fix should be available soon.

 

-Roland

[lhpdx40 0]

I'm not sure what happening...While AI plane spotting at LAX, I notice that after the first plane departed, the next one positioned and hold and never departed creating a backlog of taxing aircraft...I'm also using UT2 and wondered if these programs are compatible...... 

[Capt Speirs 52]

Guys, I pulled HF5.  Just found out the scenery.cfg absolute-path TO UNC-network-path translator in Prepar3d mode isn't working.

 

This is a pretty big deal for P3D-MyTraffic 6 users running AIMonitor on a networked client machine because MyTraffic 6 places an absolute path (pointing to a folder shared by different FS programs) in the scenery.cfg, so I would think they need the translator working.

 

A fix should be available soon.

 

-Roland

That would explain this message when trying to download. "Invalid or Deleted File" Waiting eagerly for more, thanks for all your efforts, love it.

[philoub 0]

I try to convert some new french fsx airports and I have a problem :  ai always follow the same approach whatever the star they use, like in first version of 1.4 B. 

in 2 other airports I converted before, the program works very well. I don't now if someone else has this problem.

 

Thanks Roland for your great program and time you spend to develop it.

 

and sorry for spelling mistakes, I don't speak english very well.

 

Phil

[liketofly1 11]

Hi Roland,

 

Today I detected another strange issue at LOWW in regards to a prior post I made....

 

 

 

What I also observed is that all the AI doing a Go Around were vectored back to the last waypoint of the star - beginning waypoint of the transition (in the case of LOWW that was to Waypoint BALAD) Now the transition is pretty long, and usually aircraft would be vectored to a closer Waypoint most likely to the FAF or a 10 nm intersept of the ILS... doing this large round takes a minimum of 20 minutes - with these fuel prices an expensive sightseeing flight... :-))

 

not only are all go-arounds vectored to the BALAD waypoint and thereafter continue on the BALAD2N transition, actually all traffic arriving is vectored to the BALAD2N transition, never mind which star they came from - which ofcourse is wrong. 

 

I had force landing RW set to RW34 and watched arriving traffic. All traffic arriving, after their last Star waypoint received the BALAD Waypoint by AIController and then the BALAD2N transition even traffic which should have received either the NERDU4N; MABOD4N or the PESAT4N transition.

 

I'm using the Navigraph AIRAC1504 converted by SIDSTAR converter.... and I checked the correct Approach files are the folder, which they seem to be...

 

Any idea what could be the problem that AI dont receive the correct transition after the received the correct star?

 

kind regards

[chumley 0]

Just observed some strange goings with the latest version of AiController.

 

Before me an AI aircraft took off from Adelaide (YPAD) enroute to Perth (YPPH) and was correctly assigned the GILES SID. I followed on the same route also taking the GILES SID. The AI aircraft followed the SID and after passing the GILES fix and the end of the SID I expected it to be assigned a Jetroute. I was surprised to see the AI aircraft set course for a fix MBYNB which is the fix designated for Runway 23 - the runway we had both departed from. After reaching MYBNB the AI aircraft then turned towards the West and set course for the DERWY fix before being taken over by FSX rather than AiController.

 

I also noted for quite a while that no aircraft that came into the bubble was taken over by AIController until they were assigned STAR approaches near to Perth.

 

Is this behaviour something that is expected? 

 

I would add that I have observed this sort of behaviour on a number of occasions but all prior to the latest update.

[Clipper Ocean Spray 189]

I'm not sure what happening...While AI plane spotting at LAX, I notice that after the first plane departed, the next one positioned and hold and never departed creating a backlog of taxing aircraft...I'm also using UT2 and wondered if these programs are compatible...... 

 

I found a bug regarding this issue, thanks for reporting it!

 

 

not only are all go-arounds vectored to the BALAD waypoint and thereafter continue on the BALAD2N transition, actually all traffic arriving is vectored to the BALAD2N transition, never mind which star they came from - which ofcourse is wrong. 

 

Yes, AIController assigns a new STAR with the closest entry point to the AI at the time of the go-around.  So the same STAR will tend to get assigned over and over again for going-around AI.  The rationale is the all AI missing the approahc for the same runway should circle back to the same holding point when going around.  Still, perhaps I should determine the STAR (for the runway) with the closest exit waypoint?

 

 

I followed on the same route also taking the GILES SID. The AI aircraft followed the SID and after passing the GILES fix and the end of the SID I expected it to be assigned a Jetroute.

 

I'll take a look, probably something simple like the mode not getting reset after SID exit because it never departs the user's reality bubble.

 

EDIT: are you using enhanced approach mode (just asking for troubleshooting purposes).

 

 

ai always follow the same approach whatever the star they use,

 

Do you mean they follow the same STAR regardless of the selected STAR or the same final approach?

[liketofly1 11]

Hi Roland,

 

 

 

Yes, AIController assigns a new STAR with the closest entry point to the AI at the time of the go-around.  So the same STAR will tend to get assigned over and over again for going-around AI.  The rationale is the all AI missing the approahc for the same runway should circle back to the same holding point when going around.  Still, perhaps I should determine the STAR (for the runway) with the closest exit waypoint?

 

Unfortunately this is only half the problem as stated before.... Any Aircraft which prior had the correct Star assigned receives the BALAD2N transition after the last star waypoint....

 

Meaning for LOWW they correctly follow for instance the VENEN2W which ends at WP NERDU and they should then receive the NERDU4N transition to RW34. But what happens is they follow the VENEN2W STAR and at NERDU they receive the BALAD2N transition. This happens for all STARS... meaning they get the correct STAR (VENEN2W, LANUX6W, MIKOV7W,... etc) and after that they receive the BALAD2N transition wich is not the assosiated transition for the star.....

 

 

for the go-arounds, maybe it would be better not to send them to the closes approach entry point but to the Final Approach Fix..? Or to a fix 10 - 15 nm along the RW centerline...... or for a Fix which is common to all approaches, like in LOWW that would be WW974.... all transitions to final meet there...

 

kind regards

[Clipper Ocean Spray 189]

Meaning for LOWW they correctly follow for instance the VENEN2W which ends at WP NERDU and they should then receive the NERDU4N transition to RW34. But what happens is they follow the VENEN2W STAR and at NERDU they receive the BALAD2N transition. This happens for all STARS... meaning they get the correct STAR (VENEN2W, LANUX6W, MIKOV7W,... etc) and after that they receive the BALAD2N transition wich is not the assosiated transition for the star....

 

Got it, I think I can fix this.

 

 

 

for the go-arounds, maybe it would be better not to send them to the closes approach entry point but to the Final Approach Fix..? Or to a fix 10 - 15 nm along the RW centerline......

 

I like the fix 10 -15 nm along the centerline idea....I'll look into it.

[FlyTweety 2]

After all the most important is to keep the separarion. It won´t help if a AI that proceeding a GA come back at any WP and end up in a mess of more AI´s.

I´m still suffering under losses of separation at Waypoints which are the exit of several STAR´s. I see 3 or more AI´s arriving the same WP at almost the same time at the same altitude. And on top a couple of AI´s circling in a holding also at this WP. So, before you assign a WP after the GA, more important is: Where is space between incoming AI´s?

In my opinion there is still work to do, keeping the seperation under all circumstances is a barrel without bottom (german phrase)

[netshadoe 144]

 

 

a barrel without bottom

 

A bottomless pit!! 

 

It's neat how different languages have the same saying, but different in how they use it!  (I speak French too, and in that language, we just say "there's no bottom"!!)

[liketofly1 11]

Well, it is in fact a hell of a job, If it would be easy - we would not need ATC.... IRL...;-))

 

and thx for looking into that...

 

regards

[Capt Speirs 52]

 

 

Got it, I think I can fix this.

 

Anyone noticed how much support the author is giving his product? If Payware authors gave this much support, could you imagine how good addons would be. Thank you for all your hard work and dedication. You should seriously consider a "PayPal" donate button on your post. I would donate.