FSHud 1.3. Beta Wow!!!!

[tup61]

1 hour ago, Tony P said:

bump - anyone ?

Do you see the Edit flight option? If so the flight can't be started until you edited it. Happens every now and then with SB plans.

[tup61]

3 hours ago, Noel said:

So FShud creates different routing than what SimBrief provides?

No, the route itself stays as it is, only runways (dep and arr), SID, STAR and approach may change depending on for instance the weather. Doesn't happen every time but quite regularly, also because FSHud somehow keeps the other traffic in mind and might consider another runway a better option. But that's not a problem because all other traffic will use that runway too. FSHud controls you just as it controls tha AI: there is no difference. You are simpy one of the many pilots out there as far as FSHud is concerned.

[Fiorentoni]

Well I just went ahead and bought it, still mid-flight as of now, but I gotta say I like it so far. It's solid, blends in very well with AIG and feels like how-default-ATC-and-traffic-AI-should-be. Only dislikes so far are that jetways don't connect to ai planes and that there's no pushback for ai planes (instead they just turn around 180 degrees on the spot at the gate). I know that is because traffic is injected directly and not via the MSFS traffic engine, but the 180-turn right at the gate looks awful and kills immersion. That's my only complaint so far.

EDIT: Have to change my review: Had to go around because an aircraft was cleared for takeoff while I was on final. of course it moved really slow and 30 seconds later I got the instruction to go around. Also there was hardly any traffic generated at KJFK, perhaps 10-20 aircraft on the ground (I maxed out every option to "max 200 aircraft" in FSHud, still...). I immediately compared with AIGTC (same time of day) which had about 100 aircraft on the ground. Now that is really an immersion killer for me. Why is there an option for 200 aircraft anyway?

[Tony P]

1 hour ago, tup61 said:

Do you see the Edit flight option? If so the flight can't be started until you edited it. Happens every now and then with SB plans.

Thanks - something with the flight plan it didn't like but not sure what yet.

Tony

[tup61]

1 hour ago, Tony P said:

Thanks - something with the flight plan it didn't like but not sure what yet.

Tony

Usually the problem lies where the text is red (easy to fix) or where the text becomes black (harder to fix). Quite often it just is a planned altitude you should simply lower a bit. Black text problems are a bit harder to solve... Quite often you need to add a space just before the black text and a popup menu should appear with suggestions once you press the spacebar. It is in the manual LOL It sounds a bit complicated and frankly... it is. It is the only problem I have with FSHud. BTW You can also use the editing option to create an entire flight plan from scratch!

Read all about it here: https://www.fshud.com/#/site/manuals/flight-planning

BTW Take note that when you import a Simbrief plan and it needs editing it is automatically saved, edited and all, in the FSHud database once you start the flight. So of for some reason you need or want to redo that flight do not use the SB import again but load that saved flight instead. 

Also take note that FSHud 1.3 assignes ALL procedures on the fly in real time so loading a saved flight again and again doesn't mean it will be the exact same experience again and again because runways, SID, STAR and approach may be different every time! 

[FSHud]

13 hours ago, tup61 said:

No, the route itself stays as it is, only runways (dep and arr), SID, STAR and approach may change depending on for instance the weather. Doesn't happen every time but quite regularly, also because FSHud somehow keeps the other traffic in mind and might consider another runway a better option. But that's not a problem because all other traffic will use that runway too. FSHud controls you just as it controls tha AI: there is no difference. You are simpy one of the many pilots out there as far as FSHud is concerned.

Actually it does in those cases: 

If you continuously see that FSHud forces you to edit flight plan with red (error waypoints) almost for every flight - it means that AIRAC you're using in SimBrief and FSHud mismatches.
If it happens occasionally - there should be a one of the reasons for that:

1. Your simulator airport scenery runway name mismatch with used AIRAC - therefore such procedure can't be assigned.

2. Your aircraft aircraft profile ceiling altitude mismatch - for example, you definitely can create SimBrief flight with C172 that performs jet aircraft procedures.

3. SimBrief doesn't validate ATS airways and procedure constraints, however FSHud will try to correct it as much as possible without changing the flight plan.
If it's not possible - it will bring you to flight editor.

Overall - if FSHud can't handle SimBrief flight plan on it's own - it means there is something wrong with this flight plan (according above) and user intervention and awareness is required.

It can't just somehow completely change the flight plan without notifying the user about it.

[FSHud]

11 hours ago, tup61 said:

Usually the problem lies where the text is red (easy to fix) or where the text becomes black (harder to fix). Quite often it just is a planned altitude you should simply lower a bit. Black text problems are a bit harder to solve... Quite often you need to add a space just before the black text and a popup menu should appear with suggestions once you press the spacebar. It is in the manual LOL It sounds a bit complicated and frankly... it is. It is the only problem I have with FSHud. BTW You can also use the editing option to create an entire flight plan from scratch!

Read all about it here: https://www.fshud.com/#/site/manuals/flight-planning

BTW Take note that when you import a Simbrief plan and it needs editing it is automatically saved, edited and all, in the FSHud database once you start the flight. So of for some reason you need or want to redo that flight do not use the SB import again but load that saved flight instead. 

Also take note that FSHud 1.3 assignes ALL procedures on the fly in real time so loading a saved flight again and again doesn't mean it will be the exact same experience again and again because runways, SID, STAR and approach may be different every time! 

Just to clarify - RED waypoint means the problematic waypoint where from application doesn't know how to go forward - black text is rest of text that wasn't parsed.

But there is something to understand:
In beta version all this process of editing flight plan is completely invisible as long as those conditions are kept:

1. FSHud and SimBrief AIRAC is identical - as long as you have valid active Navigraph subscription, there is no problem.
But when you don't have - there is problems starting:
SimBrief don't have an option to choose AIRAC 2101 - which was dictated to us by Navigraph to use as default AIRAC for non-subscribed users.
This point was raised to Navigraph - at least to allow us ability to include one of the AIRAC's that still present in SimBrief - and it was rejected.

2. BGL scenery airport runways match to AIRAC airport runways - especially for selected flight in SimBrief.
FSHud does able to change runway and change procedure accordingly as long as it doesn't impact the flight plan planned waypoints.
In some cases, changing that can cause completely different vertical profile (you would be located at some planned waypoint much more higher or lower) and it can break
rules of rest of constraints - therefore it would be asked from user to modify flight plan.

3. Aircraft ceiling altitude and profile matches to selected flight and procedures - as mentioned in previous topic.

You may ask two main question above all of that:

1. Why don't I just type any waypoints for flight plan - without much of messing up and editing:
You definitely can, and there should be no problem with that as long as 2 of conditions above are kept.

2. Why I can't just bind into FSHud some external nav-database file:
FSHud database keeps consistency between many things - starting from AI Traffic generated flight plan to waypoints/airports names to generate for vocal
pronunciation - it is not just static database with NavData that can be used on side.

In other words - at some point, you expect to see AI Aircraft that performs flight according flight plan with all constraints and capable with AI Aircraft profile including
pronouncing the waypoints and procedures that aircraft inbounds in relatively short amount of time.
And the same is for the user flight - because ATC engine is agnostic if it's AI Aircraft or user - same flight plan format with same rules and constraints is used.

In order to make it happen - there should be something more consistent rather than just taking static NavData from some external source.

To understand - other ATC software (which doesn't support AI Aircraft flight plans on such level) - requires you to install MS SQL Database.
And this is completely reasonable - because there are many things needs to be consistent.
This part comes much more complex when it comes to handle AI Aircraft flight plans, so it is necessary to keep the application data as something under the
hood and not visible to user.

Something more to understand - in real world there is a consistency between everyone that is called "current AIRAC cycle" which allows to clarify things making it more consistent.
While FSHud is located between 2 lights:

SimBiref selected AIRAC and flight validation. 
BGL scenery matching to FSHud installed AIRAC.

[techman]

 

 

19 hours ago, Noel said:

I am flying SIDS/STARS provided by SimBrief, and also World Planner (if in B738).  So FShud creates different routing than what SimBrief provides?  I find in general default ATC announces altitudes/FL steps that are generally compatible w/ those created by VNAV in the planes I use and constraints are in the ballpark as well.  Does FShud allow the user to request a short final?

Well, in the real world you are flying the STAR that ATC gives to you, and not the one that was planned maybe hours ago. So FSHUD does give you an approach that is appropiate for the time you arrive at the airport. And you have the possibility to ask for a different approach. FSHud also sequences the other traffic so that you are not in conflict with other planes. I didnt see an option for visual approach though. But all approaches that are published (Navigraph) are available.

The main difference to default ATC is that FSHud does control the other traffic as well. That makes a huge difference.

 

[Shrek1970]

I have an issue that when I take off FSHud give me a heading to track, then after a minute or so i receive an instruction to proceed directly to a waypoint and then as flight filed..  Most occasions the waypoint instructed to fly to I have already passed and I have to back track. Is this normal?

[FSHud]

1 hour ago, techman said:

 

 

Well, in the real world you are flying the STAR that ATC gives to you, and not the one that was planned maybe hours ago. So FSHUD does give you an approach that is appropiate for the time you arrive at the airport. And you have the possibility to ask for a different approach. FSHud also sequences the other traffic so that you are not in conflict with other planes. I didnt see an option for visual approach though. But all approaches that are published (Navigraph) are available.

The main difference to default ATC is that FSHud does control the other traffic as well. That makes a huge difference.

 

Visual approach is called "Direct" option in arrival selected menu.
What happens actually - it vectors you up to final, ending up by saying "Cleared for visual approach, report runway insight".

For the Flight plan - any syntax that ends with  ".....DCT APTICAO.RUNWAY" - will cause to use Visual Approach (if it wouldn't changed by application, selecting another approach).

[FSHud]

1 hour ago, Shrek1970 said:

I have an issue that when I take off FSHud give me a heading to track, then after a minute or so i receive an instruction to proceed directly to a waypoint and then as flight filed..  Most occasions the waypoint instructed to fly to I have already passed and I have to back track. Is this normal?

Another abstract talking...
Please open a ticket to specify what airport was used, what departure was used?
By the end what version are you using?


Because in most case it doesn't happen and shouldn't happen.
I just don't understand the point of broadcasting all over the world such messages as "Sometimes something somewhere over the rainbow happens" - how you expect it to be handled?
Especially if you're talking about beta.

Well - it's thousands of airports all over the world with different procedures that built differently according to country or state rules - some of them completely not standard and there are many edge cases.

If we will start digging up and checking all those thousands airports - you will see version 1.3 come to production in 5 years ahead - something that I don't think someone wants.

[techman]

BTW - "Failed to create ticket" since Saturday... @fshud

 

 

[FSHud]

46 minutes ago, techman said:

BTW - "Failed to create ticket" since Saturday... @fshud

 

 

Please check your internet connectivity

[Noel]

4 hours ago, techman said:

The main difference to default ATC is that FSHud does control the other traffic as well. That makes a huge difference.

How does the "control" differ from default, if you will?  I ask because default is always delivering directives to other AI planes in the vicinity, using correct airframe and livery.  This was a huge change from FSX default.

[Fiorentoni]

21 minutes ago, Noel said:

How does the "control" differ from default, if you will?  I ask because default is always delivering directives to other AI planes in the vicinity, using correct airframe and livery.  This was a huge change from FSX default.

The "control" aspect differs from other ATC tools, not from default ATC. However default ATC is awful in "controlling", which is why 3rd party tools exist in the first place.