Hi Folks,

What I find helpful - is Jan Martin (Project AI vet) - produced a set of standardized AI FDE's for most AI aircraft - optimizing performance for as realistic as possible within the confines of the current engine - then documented the performance metrics for review... I'm working on testing these in v4 now...

Regards,
Scott

1 hour ago, simbol said:

Well we can disagree don't we? :) the fact is that since FS95 nobody (MS, DoveTail, LM, etc.) has adjusted the ESP engine / ATC to handle AI traffic accordingly.

The problem with the breaking scalar factor setting is that it doesn't work perfectly as AI will not always brake to exit the runway at the correct relative exit point, so you still get AI backtracking the runway or taking long time to exit the runway, it also has some issues as sometimes different simulator platforms will interprete this setting differently (IE FS9, FSX, P3D V3, P3D V4, etc.), as a result you need to change the setting and test it accordingly for each individual AI model under different platforms and circumstances, this is the reason why you don't see developers changing these settings, it is impractical since their objective is provide AI traffic solutions for multiple simulator platforms.

All these of course is my personal opinion, and I believe we all need to stop doing these stupid hacks and attack the problem at the source which is the ESP AI Handling.

Regards,
Simbol

I guess we will have to disagree then.

Maybe I'm looking at it the wrong way, but aren't aircraft somehow part of AI traffic? As a customer I don't have any understanding for developers who are cutting short quality control because it is too much work for them or "impractical". Don't sell it, if you can't do it properly. 

Even if you would change the AI controlling mechanism, you still have to solve the interaction between adjustable parameters and the logic processing them. It doesn't matter how "good" you make the AI logic if an aircraft dev still has the option to undermine it by providing funny values. So nothing would change, even with a superior AI solution, You still need different aircraft behaving differently, and the developers of those aircraft still need to adhere to a rock solid spec and rigorous testing so everything works together correctly. That didn't work out too well in the past 25 years.

Best regards

 

Oliver,

Thanks again for your work on this.  Why to you think UTL respawns those sleepers when your in sim utility deletes them?  It is so troubling to have most every gate filled most of the time.  I was so hopeful that we (you) were close to solving this.  Thanks again Oliver, you do such great work!!

 

Dave

3 hours ago, Lorby_SI said:

I guess we will have to disagree then.

Maybe I'm looking at it the wrong way, but aren't aircraft somehow part of AI traffic? As a customer I don't have any understanding for developers who are cutting short quality control because it is too much work for them or "impractical". Don't sell it, if you can't do it properly. 

Even if you would change the AI controlling mechanism, you still have to solve the interaction between adjustable parameters and the logic processing them. It doesn't matter how "good" you make the AI logic if an aircraft dev still has the option to undermine it by providing funny values. So nothing would change, even with a superior AI solution, You still need different aircraft behaving differently, and the developers of those aircraft still need to adhere to a rock solid spec and rigorous testing so everything works together correctly. That didn't work out too well in the past 25 years.

Best regards

 

Oliver or Simbol, both of you mentioned that there are tools which assist or can do the breaking scalar "hack" . Could you guide me to them. I have done so many AI "hacks" until now that one or two more won't hurt.

24 minutes ago, Nemo said:

Oliver or Simbol, both of you mentioned that there are tools which assist or can do the breaking scalar "hack" . Could you guide me to them. I have done so many AI "hacks" until now that one or two more won't hurt.

Hello Harry,

a long time ago I was using some kind of a swiss army knife tool for FS9 and FSX aircraft. Raking my brain what it was called. FlusiFix? Probably not.

Ultimately I have written my own tools to do this kind of maintenace. One of my payware addons does it too, but not as a batch job, you would have to adjust each aircraft individually. A few months ago I made a tool that adds the missing radios to all aircraft that don't have them, and which would be ideally suited for the brake scale too. But I haven't invested the time yet to make it fit for a public release. I can do that tomorrow if you are interested, it's not a big deal though.

Best regards

You can always join Boston Virtual ARTCC:

http://forums.bvartcc.com/index.php?topic=14258.0

This a freeware package of models and schedules and they have permission of from all the modelers and painters to use everything (unlike most of the freeware scam packages). This is confirmed  at AIG:

http://www.alpha-india.net/forums/index.php?topic=26813.0

since there was an initial concern about piracy.

7 hours ago, Pete Dowson said:

Yes, as I said. 

You seem to have completely misread what I wrote. Yes, the Sim should be doing what it is given in the BGLs. So why does it stick aircraft at gates more than 2 hours before their scheduled departure time? THAT's what I said shouldn't happen if the sim was properly obeying the FIXED timetables in the BGLs!

Pete

 

 Lol, the sim IS doing EXACTLY what the BGL is telling it to do. It's just that the MyTraffic schedules aren't well written and certainly not optimized in any way, it's within those timetables that has aircraft sitting for hours or days. 

 As an example, if you look at traffic bgl's created by the gang at AIG, you will find accurate real world turn around's, and fleet numbers. Unlike MyT, their schedules are created to fit as accurate as possible into a 1 week period which is a limitation of the sim. If an aircraft sits for a few hours on the gate, that's because it's what it was scheduled to do irl.

13 minutes ago, Dave_YVR said:

Lol,  the sim IS doing EXACTLY what the BGL is telling it to do. It's just that the MyTraffic schedules aren't well written and certainly not optimized in any way, it's within those timetables that has aircraft sitting for hours or days. 

Not for me they don't! Oliver's utility is the business.

24 minutes ago, Lorby_SI said:

Hello Harry,

a long time ago I was using some kind of a swiss army knife tool for FS9 and FSX aircraft. Raking my brain what it was called. FlusiFix? Probably not.

Ultimately I have written my own tools to do this kind of maintenace. One of my payware addons does it too, but not as a batch job, you would have to adjust each aircraft individually. A few months ago I made a tool that adds the missing radios to all aircraft that don't have them, and which would be ideally suited for the brake scale too. But I haven't invested the time yet to make it fit for a public release. I can do that tomorrow if you are interested, it's not a big deal though.

Best regards

Oliver,

 If you find some time, ... that would be great. I wish I could create such things myself.  It is so good to have guys like you in our community. Thanks in advance.

And yes, it was FlusFix.

1 minute ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

Not for me they don't! Oliver's utility is the business.

But they do!  And that's just my point, you shouldn't have excess idle aircraft occupying gates, it's 100% due to a fault of MyT. Use higher quality traffic and you wont have that issue at all.

12 minutes ago, Dave_YVR said:

But they do!  And that's just my point, you shouldn't have excess idle aircraft occupying gates, it's 100% due to a fault of MyT. Use higher quality traffic and you wont have that issue at all.

They exist for 20 seconds before Oliver's utility removes them. What is the problem with that?

It's not the traffic that's the problem but the schedule. Can you name a package that doesn't inject any Ai that don't depart within 90 minutes?

42 minutes ago, Dave_YVR said:

Lol,  the sim IS doing EXACTLY what the BGL is telling it to do. It's just that the MyTraffic schedules aren't well written and certainly not optimized in any way, it's within those timetables that has aircraft sitting for hours or days. 

No it isn't. This happens to most of the bgl traffic files I have installed - and I don't use MyTraffic. Aircraft are spawned at the gates looooooong before departure. 

1 hour ago, jabloomf1230 said:

You can always join Boston Virtual ARTCC:

http://forums.bvartcc.com/index.php?topic=14258.0

This a freeware package of models and schedules and they have permission of from all the modelers and painters to use everything (unlike most of the freware scam packages). This is confirmed  at AIG:

http://www.alpha-india.net/forums/index.php?topic=26813.0

since there was an initial concern about piracy.

Is this a stand alone package or does it need to be used in conjunction with something else?

 

Thanks, Mark

2 minutes ago, newtie said:

Is this a stand alone package or does it need to be used in conjunction with something else?

 

Thanks, Mark

This is just AI models which can be used with Vpilot so when you fly online you get matching models.

As it stands (until they release it and we know more) it doesn't seem to have schedules and traffic files for offline traffic generation.

However you could create schedules and traffic files for offline flying using these models but of course it would be a manual process.

You could also replace UTL models with these ones via another manual process.

Regards 

Simbol 

11 minutes ago, simmerhead said:

No it isn't. This happens to most of the bgl traffic files I have installed - and I don't use MyTraffic. Aircraft are spawned at the gates looooooong before departure. 

 

22 minutes ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

It's not the traffic that's the problem but the schedule. Can you name a package that doesn't inject any Ai that don't depart within 90 minutes?

 As I said, higher quality plans won't do this to your sim. UTL also spawns aircraft early and has limited sense of fleet sizes, but not nearly as bad as MyT.