FSPXAI Boeing 787 wingspan

[ErichB 3,638]

19 minutes ago, JoeFackel said:

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.

But isn't everything supposed to be uniformly scaled in the sim?  (apart from autogen)

Does that also not imply that the airports are not properly scaled?  

[Christopher Low 5,332]

Quote

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

IMO, the best way to do it is for the AI plane builder to define the correct wingspan value in the aircraft.cfg file, and for AFD file builders to adjust their parking spot radius values to suit. If you try parking a large wingspan aircraft like a Boeing 787 in parking spots that are far too small for it, you are going to have problems.

[simbol 5,815]

5 minutes ago, ErichB said:

Does that also not imply that the airports are not properly scaled?  

You cannot control this as many vendors are developing airports, sometimes some developers create gates with wrong parking radius sizes or too small, not because they do mistakes but because they do not have the information available.

You can correct this via AFCAD modifications but as usual when you develop any product you need to think about these things as you cannot tell all users: "Go and edit the AFCAD file".. you have also the issue with default airports were they are not accurate in terms of Gates / Parking spaces, so if end users only have generic scenery some airplanes will never find a parking space.

It is all about finding a compromise.

S.

[ErichB 3,638]

6 minutes ago, simbol said:

You cannot control this as many vendors are developing airports, sometimes some developers create gates with wrong parking radius sizes or too small, not because they do mistakes but because they do not have the information available

I agree.  But the commentary which was quoted made a general assertion that the aircraft span needed to be less than real world values because it would cause problems at airports otherwise.  But I can't imagine that this would apply in all cases..  The AFCAD argument makes more sense and that has always been the limitation.

[simbol 5,815]

1 minute ago, ErichB said:

I agree.  But the commentary which was quoted made a general assertion that the aircraft span needed to be less than real world values because it would cause problems at airports otherwise.  But I can't imagine that this would apply in all cases..  The AFCAD argument makes more sense and that has always been the limitation.

I see, the limitation is that the SDK instruct content developer to set the RADIUS parameter for the parking space or Gate for any scenery, this information is used in combination with parking codes wing spam parameter configured inside SimObjects in order to assign parking space, there is no auto scale or any automatic conversion inside the ESP code as it is all in the hands of 3rd party developers.

If this is not done properly then things start to go wrong, you can see why things go downhill.. 

S.

[vadriver 247]

all

let us remind ourselves (imho) that there is not one scenery developer who gives a "tupenny" about AI ... just think what we've seen recently with GSX !

[jabloomf1230 2,445]

The AI aircraft community is upset about GSX2 but the solution for them is buy only 3rd party airports that already have SODE jetways at every gate by default. GSX will work for both the user's gate and AI aircraft will be handled without GSX eye candy by SODE.

I'm actually surprised that FSDT hasnt marketed their SODE jetway models as an additional add-on package so that users could upgrade stock airports. Like some other GSX objects, the GSX2 SODE jetways are copy-protected.

 

Edited October 3, 2018 by jabloomf1230

[Dave_YVR 968]

7 hours 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 😉

 So it uses a different method to sort and park aircraft by size.

7 hours ago, JoeFackel said:

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 in the slightest, if you have well placed and sized parking to go with your traffic, it works VERY well. The proper sized aircraft park where they should and there's never any overlap.

[kiek 1,212]

57 minutes ago, Dave_YVR said:

 So it uses a different method to sort and park aircraft by size.

Indeed, a real live air traffic controller does that job ...

[Dave_YVR 968]

For airports that have ADS-b ground operations etc etc.

[JoeFackel 760]

2 hours ago, Dave_YVR said:

 Not in the slightest, if you have well placed and sized parking to go with your traffic, it works VERY well. The proper sized aircraft park where they should and there's never any overlap.

I've found the thread and i had that indeed wrong in my memory, i mixed that up. The wingspan has to be the real world width.

[vadriver 247]

12 hours ago, jabloomf1230 said:

GSX will work for both the user's gate and AI aircraft will be handled without GSX eye candy by SODE

jay

the issue still remains with 3rd party addons is that the full & brilliant potential (user autodock) of SODE can not be used compatibly with GSX1.

12 hours ago, jabloomf1230 said:

I'm actually surprised that FSDT hasnt marketed their SODE jetway models as an additional add-on package so that users could upgrade stock airports

exactly .... using them SODE way (except as above) & including at FDT airports themselves, the potential of SODE is realised including then have that option to use or not AI docking.

alternatively, if FSDT used the SODE install directly I'd be buying GSX2 (& avoiding FSDT updates of KLAX etc.)

[jabloomf1230 2,445]

49 minutes ago, vadriver said:

if FSDT used the SODE install directly I'd be buying GSX2

They can't do this without decrypting the GSX SODE gate models which would then leave FSDT open to piracy of all those SODE jetway models that they painstakingly created. Couatl.exe (which is a Python  language Interpreter) handles all the GSX2 animations and the SODE jetway operation at the user's gate. At AI aircraft gates, one has either non-animated gates (that visually, are identical to the GSX2 SODE gates) or the SODE gates provided by a third party airport.