1 hour ago, Christopher Low said:

I remember watching several Matt Davies YouTube videos when he was flying online with VATSIM, and I noticed every time that some of the other planes were not on the correct taxiways (or parked properly at the gates). I realised that this was because the VATSIM users that were online at the time were not using the same version of a particular airport, and therefore the taxiways/runways/parking spots did not match. Quite an immersion killer in my opinion.

FSAeroData are working on an automated way to update the "basic" airports with correct taxiways, new runways etc etc. I think it'll be a revelation if/when it gets released. This won't be add-on scenery, but an update of the built-in airports.

10 hours ago, Richard McDonald Woods said:

My AI proposal attempts to bring an element of CPDLC interaction when no real ATC is on duty.

 I'm obviously not getting something about this but WHY? What could I possibly ask AI via CPDLC that could be of any value? I'm not being deliberately obtuse but I just cannot see what benefit such a facility would deliver and therefore why anyone would spend their time developing it?

Edited June 15, 20187 yr by BillC

Hi Bill,

Please see my post at https://www.avsim.com/forums/topic/537799-cpdlc-explained/ for information. I feel that GFO CPDLC functions will give us further immersion into the commercial flying world.

As Kyle says, if you don't wish to use the CPDLC functions, then don't. But I hope that you do.😁

Regards, Richard

 

On 6/12/2018 at 3:05 PM, scandinavian13 said:

I thought you were only referencing the gate assignment process, and not the aspect of how those get assigned. As far as that aspect goes, I'd trust a rampie over someone who simply is part of a VA.

Sorry for being so late to reply. All data is potentially useful. If you can get all the current gates used by an airline worldwide based on information from employees at that airline, albeit via a VA, that’s got to be more valuable than observations from a rampie.

7 hours ago, kevinh said:

that’s got to be more valuable than observations from a rampie.

Having been a rampie, I disagree.

A VA might have data about gate locations or something, perhaps a cursory idea of what can go on each gate, but as rampie, I knew what could go on the gate, but also what usually ended up on those gates. A lot of gates out there actually mask other gates. A3G and A4G at IAD used to mask A3C and A3D, and A4C and A4D, respectively. So, if you needed to, you could stuff an aircraft in on G in a pinch, but you'd end up masking C and D to get that done, so you're down two gates to fit one plane. That's common around the world, actually. There are tons and tons of alternate -B, -C, or -W gates all over. A VA might be able to hand me that data, but the rampie will be the one who says "well, the line is there, but we only use it in IRROPS if we're desperate."

Moreover, even as a rampie for IDE and UAL, I still knew that the generic gates (open to carriers who didn't have a hub there, or a specific gate location, and shared the gate with other airlines) usually had some sort of usual use. KLM, for example is usually parked at A15 (B-something at the time I worked there). You won't find that kind of info in Jepps, or other sources.

Sure, anything is better than nothing, but to just hand the keys over to VAs under the assumption that they'd know best is not entirely accurate.

Disappointing. The hype was way out of sync to what's going to be delivered.

1 hour ago, Muley said:

Disappointing. The hype was way out of sync to what's going to be delivered.

Exactly.

13 hours ago, scandinavian13 said:

Sure, anything is better than nothing, but to just hand the keys over to VAs under the assumption that they'd know best is not entirely accurate.

Where did I say you should hand the keys over to VAs? All I said was that some VAs may have reliable data you could use.

13 hours ago, Muley said:

Disappointing. The hype was way out of sync to what's going to be delivered.

What did you expect them to deliver? Given that RSR stated in april already that it will be something they haven't done before nor the sim community has seen before. It effectively rules out any new aircraft from PMDG.

13 hours ago, Muley said:

Disappointing. The hype was way out of sync to what's going to be delivered.

Can you explain why you think this?

11 hours ago, Nuno Pinto said:

Exactly.

See above. Do you have a specific reason?

Boo to the moaners, I think this sounds like a jolly good idea. Just to clarify because I can’t find the info in the forum and the video (with the greatest of respect) is a tad too long for me to sift through and the sound’s not great - is this a one-off purchase or a subscription based service?

27 minutes ago, rondon9898 said:

Boo to the moaners,

I'm sorry, but a lot of people, like me, are unsure as to what this product will offer us for our individual simming needs. As such, they get branded as "moaners", "whiners" or whatever in expressing these thoughts and not going along with the "pack".

If PMDG released a cardboard box, I'm sure there would be hoards claiming it was the best, most technologically advanced cardboard box ever made.

Given that PMDG do not do refunds, it is a bit of an ask to purchase a product, unless it is a subscription product where you can easily cancel, only to find it doesn't do what an individual wants from their sim. Now, I've been a PMDG customer since, well, since they made manuals - if I recall, I reckon I have bought just about every product they have produced, including the Fly! products for those as old as me who remember that platform.

This one has yet to grab me and make me say "that's a day 1 purchase". As an example, the 747-8 for me is a release day purchase.

I remain to be convinced that it suits what I want. Maybe it will when I read feedback or see more information, but to brand people who have similar doubts as "moaners" or "whiners" is a bit offensive.

 

 

Edited June 17, 20187 yr by DavidP

12 minutes ago, DavidP said:

I'm sorry, but a lot of people, like me, are unsure as to what this product will offer us for our individual simming needs. As such, they get branded as "moaners", "whiners" or whatever in expressing these thoughts and not going along with the "pack".

The presentation outlined what GFO offers and given a little thought it's not hard to decide whether this kind of detail suits your needs or not. I hope PMDG make a formal announcement here to back up the presentation and perhaps fill in some detail which might answer some questions. Certainly it would be good to be able to see the presentation slides properly.

The big question for me is how much, if anything, of GFO will be included in the price of a PMDG aircraft addon. Will users have to purchase or subscribe to some or all of GFO? Obviously I wouldn't expect actual prices and timescales to be announced, but I think we should be given an indication of the charging model, if there is one, and whether any of GFO will be included free with OC2.

53 minutes ago, DavidP said:

This one has yet to grab me and make me say "that's a day 1 purchase". As an example, the 747-8 for me is a release day purchase.

Yeah, I'm in the same position as you with this one. I'll certainly get the 747-8 when it comes out. As for GFO, I need clarification on something first, which I asked, but never quite got that confirmation, so hard to say with this one. Unfortunately, it sounds like I might not be able to use it given the way I fly.

24 minutes ago, kevinh said:

The presentation outlined what GFO offers and given a little thought it's not hard to decide whether this kind of detail suits your needs or not. I hope PMDG make a formal announcement here to back up the presentation and perhaps fill in some detail which might answer some questions. Certainly it would be good to be able to see the presentation slides properly.

I'm sure the presentation gives some information as to what GFO offers, but unfortunately, I don't have time to sit and watch a video that's however long it is, especially knowing that I will most likely miss something and have to go back and replay it, which eats up more time. It's far more easier for me to read an official announcement on the forum, and that way, I can read it at my own pace. I'd like to think I could find a use for GFO, but it's hard to say at this point without more information.

7 hours ago, DavidP said:

I'm sorry, but a lot of people, like me, are unsure as to what this product will offer us for our individual simming needs. As such, they get branded as "moaners", "whiners" or whatever in expressing these thoughts and not going along with the "pack".

This sounds like we all must buy this product and object to it. However, I'm fairly certain that we all can decide ourself whether we buy it or not.  I don't really understand this complaining and whining. 

If developer X makes a product you won't like, will you go to their forums posting crap about the product and telling the whole world how you will never pay for it and it's not for you? Because that's what people are doing here. They are like "oh this is not for me, this is a terrible software, I will never pay for it". Well, luckily no one forces them to buy it.

They are whiners. Nothing but a bunch of whiners and moaners. They don't want to buy a product from PMDG, fine. But why need to tell the whole world about it?