Recommended Posts

*me wondering aloud*

It's a small thing, but I wonder if GSX could include repeated trips/longer trailers for the cargo/baggage handlers like they already do with the pax and fuel, seems a bit unrealistic to load up 8 ULDs on a 747 when it can hold 30, or about 20 bags on a 737 when clearly there's more than 120 passengers. Also maybe more variation in the ULDs and bags (whoops, read FSDT's posts, apparently this is harder, so...more colours instead of different models?), I'm sure they can do this when they already have pretty varied passengers, it'd add so much more to the immersion. 

Edited by Robert3512

Share this post


Link to post
Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

Good post as I too have observed that anomaly in hilarity.

Share this post


Link to post

Maybe,

Airlines are charging too much for checking luggage, so GSX is simulating this by making all passengers having carrying on bags instead hehe.:wink:

Share this post


Link to post

Maybe 20 luggages are compressed into one and it pops open in the cargo hold? Plane_luggage.rar at work I guess... 😂

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post

And here I am just wanting the baggage belts to stop driving under the airplane. GSX is a hot mess. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post

Agreed, plenty of issues especially with static elements but it's the only ground handling service we have so we just have to deal with it.

In other news, GSX+GSX2 is selling on SimMarket for €46 and change instead of €55 and change. 

Share this post


Link to post

If they could at least fix integrated stairs it would be great. TBH the bags seem fine for me as when I only fly with bags it's like with low cost so makes sense. Also I'd like to see the ULDs wearing the same scheme both when boarding and deboarding. ANd also the KLM skin still makes teh push-truck thing yellow.

But as someone said it's teh only one in town so we'll have to deal with it

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, Chapstick said:

And here I am just wanting the baggage belts to stop driving under the airplane. GSX is a hot mess. 

I agree, the worst GSX thing is the erratic baggage belt loaders behavior. Instead of going directly to the plane they drive all around the plane and then under it. This has been posted a lot on the GSX forum, but we are still waiting for an update to fix that.

Share this post


Link to post
5 minutes ago, Midnight Music said:

I agree, the worst GSX thing is the erratic baggage belt loaders behavior. Instead of going directly to the plane they drive all around the plane and then under it. This has been posted a lot on the GSX forum, but we are still waiting for an update to fix that.

I've been able to put an end to that behavior by customizing the parking spots I frequent using the tool in GSX and positioning the loaders so they don't do that (front loader at ~2 O'Clock angled towards the front cargo door, rear loader at ~3-4 O'Clock on opposite heading of acft).  Same sort of thing with baggage trains...if positioned right, they won't pirhouette or circle the acft.  The routing of bags/cargo to the jet during loading is still a real problem, though.

Regards

Share this post


Link to post
37 minutes ago, w6kd said:

I've been able to put an end to that behavior by customizing the parking spots I frequent using the tool in GSX and positioning the loaders so they don't do that (front loader at ~2 O'Clock angled towards the front cargo door, rear loader at ~3-4 O'Clock on opposite heading of acft).  Same sort of thing with baggage trains...if positioned right, they won't pirhouette or circle the acft.  The routing of bags/cargo to the jet during loading is still a real problem, though.

Regards

And here’s the fundamental flaw with GSX... customizing those positions is boring and tedious. Why can’t we set default vehicle positions by aircraft type and not by gate?

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, Chapstick said:

And here I am just wanting the baggage belts to stop driving under the airplane. GSX is a hot mess. 

The most hilarious part is when I call for a refuelling truck and it just sails into a baggage loader awaiting or a stairway awaiting 🤣

Edited by vc10man
typos

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, Robert3512 said:

only ground handling service we have

Good thing we have AMD and Radeon, otherwise Intel and Nvidia would run the roost!🤣

20 minutes ago, Chapstick said:

And here’s the fundamental flaw with GSX... customizing those positions is boring and tedious.

Precisely. What are we paying for?

Share this post


Link to post

Sometimes I just imagine that the Three Stooges are the ground crew!!!

Share this post


Link to post

I've had a problem recently with the boarding/deboarding. It will go on forever unless I reset the position.

Also, the pushback stop is a bit erratic. Especially when selecting 'stop pushback and complete procedure here'. It makes sure to really speed up before stopping so that you are nicely put on the grass that you wanted to avoid.

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, Chapstick said:

And here’s the fundamental flaw with GSX... customizing those positions is boring and tedious. Why can’t we set default vehicle positions by aircraft type and not by gate?

For the obvious reason that it's the scenery around the airplane that's always different and usual requires customization so, a fixed customization by airplane will surely cause conflict with scenery objects, which will then have to be customized anyway, exactly as they are now.

I think the best solution might be having both systems: a default configuration "by airplane", and the ability to customize "by gate". 

 

Share this post


Link to post
8 hours ago, Robert3512 said:

. Also maybe more variation in the ULDs and bags (whoops, read FSDT's posts, apparently this is harder, so...more colours instead of different models?), I'm sure they can do this when they already have pretty varied passengers, it'd add so much more to the immersion. 

ULD are assigned to their correct type for the airplane used. Of course, if you always use the same airplane, you cannot expect seeing many different ULDs, other than different logos.

Yes, the Baggage loader is a vehicle that we made a long time ago, so it wasn't made in the smartest possible way with regard to flexibility in making the bags independent from the vehicle, but it was a very efficient way of saving memory and fps. We'll surely redo it from scratch in the future, since it's starting to look old nowadays.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, vc10man said:

The most hilarious part is when I call for a refuelling truck and it just sails into a baggage loader awaiting or a stairway awaiting 🤣

When multiple services running at the same weren't available (for good reason), users asked for them, and I always replied it would increase the issue of vehicles running into each other, but nobody listened...

Edited by virtuali
  • Like 1
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, Chapstick said:

And here’s the fundamental flaw with GSX... customizing those positions is boring and tedious. Why can’t we set default vehicle positions by aircraft type and not by gate?

Agreed. Also add non-intuitive and convoluted. User friendly it is not. Disappointed that it's so functionally problematic. 

Share this post


Link to post
4 hours ago, w6kd said:

I've been able to put an end to that behavior by customizing the parking spots I frequent using the tool in GSX

Which is precisely what we always suggest to do to fix this. The issue is, most 3rd party AFCADs out there are made in unusual ways, likely to trick AI to do things they are not really supposed to do, and they are the cause of most of the problems. Most of the code in GSX is there just to DEFENDS itself against errors in the AFCADs, it's like a sort of real-time ADE "fault-finder", because it tries to catch all possible problems, throwing out wrong, orphaned, unliked, nodes but the problem is, after you start ignoring all the errors, sometimes might become impossible to calculate a proper routing.

Share this post


Link to post
4 minutes ago, Lenny777 said:

Agreed. Also add non-intuitive and convoluted. User friendly it is not. Disappointed that it's so functionally problematic. 

If you have suggestions to how to make it better, it would be more productive if you posted them on our forum or the support email. A comment like that doesn't tell anything, since I don't recognize any of the adjectives you used to describe it. That's the issue with judging user friendliness: it's totally subjective, and what might be obvious to you, might not be obvious to someone else.

But of course, if you made a precise report of what, exactly, you don't like, in the proper channels (fsdt forum or email), we might have a look at each one of them, and consider changing, if it's possible and compatible with the sim limitations (the editor could be made WAY more user-friendly if we could just DITCH FSX, for example...), and as usual, make a proper reply about what might be possibly changed and, if something cannot be changed, clearly explaining why.

Share this post


Link to post
7 hours ago, LH340fan said:

If they could at least fix integrated stairs it would be great.

What's there to fix ? They work just fine. If they don't for you, have you made a report on our forum, explaining which airplane you used, how was configured, and they we can check if there's really something to fix (which we always fix, of course), or it's just because the airplane configuration wasn't correct.

We have included some configuration for some popular planes, like the Maddog X, and they work fine there, but they are easy enough to add to any airplane.

 

Quote

Also I'd like to see the ULDs wearing the same scheme both when boarding and deboarding. 

This has been explained so many times on our forum, and it is explained on the manual too...

The ULD WILL keep the same livery, but only if your airplane has its atc_airline_codes properly configured. If the aircraft.cfg file is missing the airline code, the ULD logo will be chosen again using like the other vehicles, by airport.

But normally, when the airplane is properly configured and not missing the airline code, ULDs won't change, because they will match the airline livery of the plane you are flying (if it's in GSX, of course)

Edited by virtuali

Share this post


Link to post

Don't know why users  post their issues in here  for and  not in the correct  forum,  if  they have  issues,  how  do  you  expect  to  get  it fixed 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
16 minutes ago, pete_auau said:

Don't know why users  post their issues in here  for and  not in the correct  forum,  if  they have  issues,  how  do  you  expect  to  get  it fixed 

Reason issues are posted here and not in the so-called correct Forum is because they never get answered there or it's many days later when they do get an answer!

Share this post


Link to post
13 minutes ago, vc10man said:

Reason issues are posted here and not in the so-called correct Forum is because they never get answered there or it's many days later when they do get an answer!

They are all always answered, especially when they contain a clear report of the issue or a clear question.

For example, the post you made here about our supposedly "silly" naming convention used in the JFK AFCAD, was replied to here first, with a very long and exhaustive post, but the only reason why I didn't reply "immediately" in the FSDT forum (other than it was posted on Friday evening), was that another user already explained to you the reason, so I seemed enough to me.

I replied on Monday, the first working day after your post, after you didn't seem to accept that other user explanation, and I had to make a shorter version of the same explanation I posted on Avsim, to which you replied with a "At last, a thorough explanation!"...

Edited by virtuali

Share this post


Link to post
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.