No AI departures at non controlled airfields

[mikced76 57]

So everything works great at airports with a tower but at my non towered airports AI aircraft are generated and visible but they just remain on the tarmac all day, no movements (UK 2000 Cumbernauld and Sim720 Oban in this case). Any idea what to do? Since I use Fsaerodata I have little control of the com frequencies unfortunately which I suspect have something to do with this! I did try to create fake Tower frequencies and move these two airports above the "FSAERODATA Communication" in the scenery library just to try, but VoxATC seem to use the Fsaerodata info anyway. (and yes I did run the VoxATC indexer) 🙂 Any idea?

Edited December 31, 2019 by mikced76

[vadriver 247]

12 hours ago, mikced76 said:

but they just remain on the tarmac all day

it is unusual for AI to remain (visible) all day ...... normally spawned 15mins or so before taxi & disappear soon after parking.

i assume you (your aircraft) is communicating with voxatc.

have you checked your sims traffic list for aircraft spawned by voxatc (& not by the sim slider not @ zero).

[jabloomf1230 2,445]

13 hours ago, mikced76 said:

So everything works great at airports with a tower but at my non towered airports AI aircraft are generated and visible but they just remain on the tarmac all day, no movements (UK 2000 Cumbernauld and Sim720 Oban in this case). Any idea what to do? Since I use Fsaerodata I have little control of the com frequencies unfortunately which I suspect have something to do with this! I did try to create fake Tower frequencies and move these two airports above the "FSAERODATA Communication" in the scenery library just to try, but VoxATC seem to use the Fsaerodata info anyway. (and yes I did run the VoxATC indexer) 🙂 Any idea?

Sooo, does it make a difference if you file a VFR vs an IFR flightplan? Or are you not filing a flightplan at all? For me, these three different options seem to produce different AI movement at a non-tower airport.

[mikced76 57]

Thats interesting, i always assumed my flightplan had nothing to do with how AI behaved. In all sessions I have tried I have not filed flightplans at all. Will try later when I have access to my computer. Thanks!

Edited January 1, 2020 by mikced76

[vadriver 247]

this is more than interesting .....

[jabloomf1230 2,445]

4 hours ago, mikced76 said:

Thats interesting, i always assumed my flightplan had nothing to do with how AI behaved. In all sessions I have tried I have not filed flightplans at all. Will try later when I have access to my computer. Thanks!

Without a flightplan the user can either do TAGs or a local flight. And the AI aircraft do the same which can get awfully annoying.

Another factor is which flightplans and AI aircraft use a specific non-tower airport. The two have to match the airport's configuration.  For example you can't have a 747 flightplan utilizing an airport with limited parking.

[Mad_Mac 21]

Even when I file a flight plan, the GA AI seem to do Just touch and goes, in pairs, usually in close formation. They hardly ever leave the pattern. If I hang around long enough, one or both will call for a full stop landing (and actually land and park). Is there a way to get them to do cross country flights? I use MT6 with default flight plans. I haven’t wanted to mess with AIG because I do primarily GA flights, and I want to spend more time flying than tweaking the program.  

Edited January 1, 2020 by Mad_Mac

[mikced76 57]

MadMac, just update the GA from VFR flights to IFR flight and you wont see a single T&G again 🙂

[Mad_Mac 21]

4 hours ago, mikced76 said:

MadMac, just update the GA from VFR flights to IFR flight and you wont see a single T&G again 🙂

What setting do you change to do this?

[mikced76 57]

For starters you need a program to update flightplans. In fact In my opinion two programs are absolutely essential to get VoxATC to work ultimately. A flightplan editor and a program to update Airport. I use AIFP for flightplans and Scruffy Duck Airport design editor to update all my Airports with correct taxiways, parkings etc. From many years of using VoxATC one thing I notice is that Vox it is much more sensitive to small errors like incorrect taxiways, runway and taxiway links that are not connected properly, parkig positions, width etc etc etc than the default AI and ATC system.

With incorrect airpot files you may get Aircraft that dissapear, Aircraft that wont show up etc, just an example to illustrate.: I have a small airline flying B200 and if I set its parking radius to anything other than 10m it simply wont show up. I Always update each addon airport very carefully. It does not matter if its a quality addon from Orbx or a lower quality addon from someone else. Developers in my opinion generally seem to spend much more time with Visuals than things "behind the scenes" that gets the Airport to "function". Fortunately though one can do this oneself 🙂  

Likn to flightplan editor below:

http://stuff4fs.com/newpage.asp?Folder=AIFP  

Edited January 2, 2020 by mikced76

[vadriver 247]

1 hour ago, mikced76 said:

Developers in my opinion generally seem to spend much more time with Visuals than things "behind the scenes" that gets the Airport to "function".

if i may be so bold to suggest there is only a minority who want to see 'function" in preference to "kandy" ..... and hence we ("the dark side") need to "tweak & adapt" as you write.

my bet for 2020 is that MSFS2020 (or whatever it is called) will be the "lemon of its decade" for us on the "dark side".

& that "thought" unfortunately includes PMDG whose current's don't work well with voxatc anyway & may well not (period) work with any atc in MSFS............

[jabloomf1230 2,445]

5 hours ago, vadriver said:

my bet for 2020 is that MSFS2020 (or whatever it is called) will be the "lemon of its decade" for us on the "dark side".

If that happens, it will be because MS was so responsive to the "flightsim community". I think that the original goal was a pretty-looking version of FSX, but then everyone with an opinion started adding suggestions for features such as VR, better ATC, an updatable navigation database, a totally open SDK, realistic AI aircraft, etc..  Not that these features aren't needed for a serious flight simulator, but now the effort on Asobo's part almost seems insurmountable. They seem to be falling into the same trap that DTG and IPACS did with their respective flight simulators. Anyone who has used VOXATC for even a few flights realizes that the AI aircraft/ATC feature is extremely challenging to implement correctly. No one else has even come close to matching this realism, except if one wants to include online ATC. And online ATC isn't really a simulation as it's more like Robby the Robot (Hey, there's a guy in that robot suit!).

But that said, I am still optimistic about the chances that MSFS will be a good product and not a lemon. It may take a few years, but it probably will dominate the market.

Edited January 2, 2020 by jabloomf1230