No Taxiing or aircraft in the air

[pmb 5,137]

Thanks so much Nico. Your work is really great, I just don't recall all the user wishes you implemented over time. Some commercial enterprises can learn from your customer support.

In my eyes, this is a great addition. I'll test it and write back.

Kind regards, Michael

[pmb 5,137]

I am just updating programs and found that you removed the minimum number of park positions in the ParkPosGenerator. This was a good candidate for my next question🙂 as I always lowered that number (I think to 5) but was afraid to just set it to 1 because of some side effects this might have.

You seem to read my mind...

Kind regards, Michael

[pmb 5,137]

After installing PSXSeecontraffic and running ParkPosGenerator, I tried a few of the lovely small NZ (ORBX NZNI) airfields with a hand full of parkings and they had indeed an AI plane around (that's what I would expect from the 35 % setting). Very nice. For my style of flying, this is better news than the "big" ones I heard from Las Vegas (aside NZWN from FB). 

There is still one little issue... may I? These AI planes pop up quite late on occasion, i.e. after I landed, which is a bit annoying seeing a plane popping up from nothing at the parking besides you. I don't think this is specific for the new version as I observed it before in some places. On the other hand, parkings/gates at larger hubs seem to fill more in advance. Can this be adjusted somehow?

Thanks again, Michael

[kiek 1,213]

7 hours ago, pmb said:

You seem to read my mind...

"Zwei Seelen, eine Gedanke"  🙂

 

[kiek 1,213]

6 hours ago, pmb said:

There is still one little issue... may I? These AI planes pop up quite late on occasion, i.e. after I landed, which is a bit annoying seeing a plane popping up from nothing at the parking besides you. I don't think this is specific for the new version as I observed it before in some places. On the other hand, parkings/gates at larger hubs seem to fill more in advance. 

Hi Michael,

Are you sure that plane was a parked (static) plane? It could also have been a live aircraft that started at the gate. You can tell the difference from the callsign, if it has an underscore as suffix it is a parked plane (If you select log matching you can follow the matching of liveries for parked planes too).

Well, assuming it was a parked plane:

There is no difference between large or small airports wrt parking. Parking starts if you are within 40 nm of your destinaton AND you have that destination filled in in the PSXSeeconTraffic interface. If you have not filled in your destination, parking will start when you are on the ground and PSXseeconTrafic concludes that this becomes your new origin airport....

Also note that the x percentage rule works better with larger numbers (say 60 or more parking positions) then with say 4 parking positions. What happens is that PSXseeconTraffic goes through the list of parking positions and with a random number generator it concludes for each position whether there should be a parked aircraft or not. Statistically speaking the target of x percentage will be better reached with large numbers then with small numbers.

Kind regards,

Nico

Edited June 11, 2018 by kiek

[pmb 5,137]

3 hours ago, kiek said:

There is no difference between large or small airports wrt parking. Parking starts if you are within 40 nm of your destinaton AND you have that destination filled in in the PSXSeeconTraffic interface. If you have not filled in your destination, parking will start when you are on the ground and PSXseeconTrafic concludes that this becomes your new origin airport....

So that's it. I made it a habit to rarely fill in the destination field. My tour yesterday was a small-airports-hopping just to see what's going on. I was too lazy to fill in the destination field, even more, as I don't know any of the (NZ grass) airports from head (but could heave read off the ICAO from moving map, of course).

Would it be possible to fill parkings a mile away within reach and/or below a certain altitude, perhaps as an option? 

Kind regards, Michael

[kiek 1,213]

1 hour ago, pmb said:

Would it be possible to fill parkings a mile away within reach and/or below a certain altitude, perhaps as an option? 

No, that's does not sound like a good idea. 

1. PSXseeconTraffic does not know where you are going so it has to check regularly for the closest airport, which is quite time consuming with 9900 airports...

2. The best moment to park aircraft is when you are still far away from the airport, that's why it starts at 40 nm. If you are at the glideslope with the airport in sight the process of parking airports may lead to stutters, especially for larger add-on airports.

3. That you are flying low will not always mean that you are going to land...

4. Especially areas with more airports close to each other are difficult to handle. For instance, when you fly to Heathrow from the East you will pass London City... 

5. If you use a flight planner the destination will be filled in automatically by PSXseeconTraffic.

My algorithms are more suited for flying an airliner, I agree. So you have to get used to filling in your destination, I'm afraid. See it as part of your paperwork 😉 It will also give you direct feedback whether there is an airport.txt file with parking positions available or not, so you will not be surprised when you get there and there are no parked aircraft.

Kind regards,

Nico

Edited June 11, 2018 by kiek

[pmb 5,137]

27 minutes ago, kiek said:

My algorithms are more suited for flying an airliner, I agree. So you have to get used to filling in your destination, I'm afraid. See it as part of your paperwork 😉 It will also give you direct feedback whether there is an airport.txt file with parking positions available or not, so you will not be surprised when you get there and there are no parked aircraft.

Okay, thanks. In fact, filling in the destination is not a big deal, you just have to get used to it. Usually you should know where you want to touch ground again (and you still can modify the entry in case of changing your mind, of course).

Best regards, Michael