FSPXAI Boeing 787 wingspan

[Christopher Low 5,332]

I have just noticed that the wingspan of the FSPXAI Boeing 787-8 and 787-9 is defined as 155.4 feet in the aircraft.cfg file. It should be 197.2 feet. I checked because I noted that a TUI 787-8 was parked at a gate at EGNT Newcastle that has a radius of only 24 metres (the minimum should be 31 metres for a 787). You may want to check this if you have these AI planes installed.

Edited October 2, 2018 by Christopher Low

[Dave_YVR 968]

 I fixed that the day it came out. You sure wouldn't want to look at Traffic Global's models then, they are WAY WAY off on nearly all of them,

[simbol 5,814]

1 minute ago, Dave_YVR said:

 I fixed that the day it came out. You sure wouldn't want to look at Traffic Global's models then, they are WAY WAY off on nearly all of them,

Looks like TG needs people like you Dave 😉

[Dave_YVR 968]

Har Har... lol 

  It's just a good habit to check and correct the wing_span for every new AI aircraft you add to the collection.

Edited October 2, 2018 by Dave_YVR

[jabloomf1230 2,445]

That mistake has been there for awhile and it probably  was caused by the author editing the FSPX MD11 aircraft.cfg to make the new 787 version of the file.

[UAL4life 237]

This would be explain a lot 🙂 thanks. 

[Nemo 1,305]

I cannot really understand how those mistakes can happen ... neither freeware nor payware. It is not a small detail, and every ai a/c developer should know that the wingspan together with atc_parking code and atc_airline defines which parking/gate the a/c will be assigned to, Even I know this.

Edited October 3, 2018 by Nemo

[simbol 5,814]

2 hours ago, Nemo said:

I cannot really understand how those mistakes can happen ... neither freeware nor payware. It is not a small detail, and every ai a/c developer should know that the wingspan together with atc_parking code and atc_airline defines which parking/gate the a/c will be assigned to, Even I know this.

You will understand when you start building AI Models and get a close encounter of how difficult it is to tweak the FDE, 3DMax and Aircraft.cfg files to make the airplane behave as it suppose too :).

Things happen.. that is why beta tests are important, now how are we going to get @Dave_YVR into TG beta team is the question..

[Dave_YVR 968]

Yeah lol that's just not going to happen. I do own TG, but I only bought it to test and try it out. I can't see it ever being nearly as good as my freeware setup, I really don't like the look of the majority of the models or repaints compared to what I already have and the flightplans aren't optimized in the slightest. It would be like jumping a few years into the past to go with any of the payware projects vs what I've got with freeware. 

[simbol 5,814]

You see? I knew it would be a hard job.. 

But just think for a moment of the posible changes and positive changes you can induce to the product, you have the opportunity to make a change.. I will be at Cosford this weekend and I will meet with Justflight, just saying 

Regards,
Simbol

[ErichB 3,638]

42 minutes ago, simbol said:

You will understand when you start building AI Models and get a close encounter of how difficult it is to tweak the FDE, 3DMax and Aircraft.cfg files

This may be true.  However, the detail is important, especially as wingspan parameters have knock-on effects on the behaviour of AI traffic - which is the aspect of flightsim you're trying to improve as a builder of AI aircraft

Slapdashery

[simbol 5,814]

12 minutes ago, ErichB said:

This may be true.  However, the detail is important, especially as wingspan parameters have knock-on effects on the behaviour of AI traffic - which is the aspect of flightsim you're trying to improve as a builder of AI aircraft

Slapdashery

Well you know very well now that I am an advocate of level of details, but seriously.. doing FDE and Aircraft.cfg files from scratch is so SLOWWWWWWW and Complicated that it would be faster to build a real aircraft instead.

So I understand how the copy and paste got in the way here.. just saying.. there are always 2 sides of a history.. the fault was the lack of testing, but we have people like @Dave_YVR for that lol.

Regards,
S.

[JoeFackel 760]

I recall vaguely i've read in the AIG forum that the wingspan value should NOT be the real world value because it may cause problems with not enough right parkings spots available at airports.

Not sure were exactly, already some months ago i read that.

[kiek 1,212]

PSXseeconTraffic does not care about wing_spans. All AI aircraft in your simulator (representing real live aircraft) are positioned at or go to the correct gate automatically 😉

[ErichB 3,638]

10 minutes ago, kiek said:

PSXseeconTraffic does not care about wing_spans. All AI aircraft in your simulator (representing real live aircraft) are positioned at or go to the correct gate automatically 😉

Off topic - I have just recently started to use PSXseeconTraffic, and although still experimenting, it is great using the Parked feature which fills a huge gap when landing at airports on VATSIM alone  Good work there