OnCourse Software
http://www.ocs-support.co.uk/forums/

Airports with limited facilities
http://www.ocs-support.co.uk/forums/viewtopic.php?t=663		 Page 1 of 1
Author:  johnhinson [ Fri Jan 28, 2011 12:00 pm ]
Post subject:  Airports with limited facilities
There is strange behaviour by PFE at airports without separate Clearance Delivery or Ground frequencies. I have noticed this at several but most recently at LIBD Bari.
  • Tune to tower and attempt to request clearance (key 0). This actually speaks as requesting permission to taxi
  • ATC response and gives you your clearance
  • Use key 0 to request pushback, but speaks as requesting permission to taxi
  • Permission to taxi is granted.
  • TGS starts
  • You push back
  • TGS shuts down before you have even moved in a forward direction.
This is a consistent problem, it happens every time and is easily reproduced so there should be no need to ask for a log.

John
Author:  vololiberista [ Fri Jan 28, 2011 4:05 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Airports with limited facilities
Are you using the stock default airport? If so the taxiway designations are incorrect.
The rwy links East to West should be Alpha, Bravo, Charlie, Delta, Echo and Golf.
The connecting taxiway is Tango.
The Apron links to Tango are Apron 2, Lima and November. Apron 4, Papa
This is the airport plan as at the end of last year.
I suggest you do a new afcad file then run makerwys and then update PFE.
Also there have been navaid changes which will also have to be built into your new afcad.

vololiberista
Author:  johnhinson [ Sat Jan 29, 2011 5:58 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Airports with limited facilities
vololiberista wrote:
Are you using the stock default airport? If so the taxiway designations are incorrect.
The rwy links East to West should be Alpha, Bravo, Charlie, Delta, Echo and Golf.
The connecting taxiway is Tango.
The Apron links to Tango are Apron 2, Lima and November. Apron 4, Papa
This is the airport plan as at the end of last year.
I suggest you do a new afcad file then run makerwys and then update PFE.
Also there have been navaid changes which will also have to be built into your new afcad.

vololiberista
With the greatest of respect, that is NOT the issue. Taxiway designations are irrelevant. The Comm frequencies are what is important - this event occurs at any airport without separate Clearance or Ground frequencies. Yesterday I experienced exactly the same at MUHA Havana. The first occasion was in India although I didn't pay much attention until I found it occurring elsewhere. This is definitely a general issue and I only offer specific examples of airports to demonstrate the problem.

If you, or anybody else, would undertake a quick exercise to attempt to reproduce the issue it would be very helpful. All that needs doing is to make the first steps of a flight, as far as starting to taxi, to see if the same problems are experienced. I don't think for a moment that this is a problem peculiar to my setup, but it would be useful to know for certain. I know Dave is up to his ears in non-computing matters just at the moment, so he might not be able to deal with this immediately.

Incidentally, I tried two different tricks at MUHA - I tried obtaining Clearance from FSS (which didn't help) and I pushed back without permission (which did help - it ensured TGS took me to the runway).

Thanks,

John
Author:  vololiberista [ Sat Jan 29, 2011 2:40 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Airports with limited facilities
johnhinson wrote:
vololiberista wrote:
Are you using the stock default airport? If so the taxiway designations are incorrect.
The rwy links East to West should be Alpha, Bravo, Charlie, Delta, Echo and Golf.
The connecting taxiway is Tango.
The Apron links to Tango are Apron 2, Lima and November. Apron 4, Papa
This is the airport plan as at the end of last year.
I suggest you do a new afcad file then run makerwys and then update PFE.
Also there have been navaid changes which will also have to be built into your new afcad.

vololiberista
With the greatest of respect, that is NOT the issue. Taxiway designations are irrelevant. The Comm frequencies are what is important - this event occurs at any airport without separate Clearance or Ground frequencies. Yesterday I experienced exactly the same at MUHA Havana. The first occasion was in India although I didn't pay much attention until I found it occurring elsewhere. This is definitely a general issue and I only offer specific examples of airports to demonstrate the problem.

If you, or anybody else, would undertake a quick exercise to attempt to reproduce the issue it would be very helpful. All that needs doing is to make the first steps of a flight, as far as starting to taxi, to see if the same problems are experienced. I don't think for a moment that this is a problem peculiar to my setup, but it would be useful to know for certain. I know Dave is up to his ears in non-computing matters just at the moment, so he might not be able to deal with this immediately.

Incidentally, I tried two different tricks at MUHA - I tried obtaining Clearance from FSS (which didn't help) and I pushed back without permission (which did help - it ensured TGS took me to the runway).

Thanks,

John

All I can say that ATC works perfectly at LIMZ. Which has two taxiways now because "I Had to" redo the afcad!!!!!! (previously the airport had no taxiway definitions)
Change your afcad first so that your ATC has actually something to work with!!!!
LIMZ in reality does not not push-back(only by prior request). Nor does LIBD. Just look at the airport ground/Apron plan for LIBD which is configured for turn outs only. And, it is clearly stated as such in their operational procedures. So you shouldn't be asking for push back anyway!
Your problem is not comms it's your afcad, sorry!
vololiberista
Author:  johnhinson [ Sun Jan 30, 2011 6:03 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Airports with limited facilities
vololiberista wrote:
All I can say that ATC works perfectly at LIMZ. Which has two taxiways now because "I Had to" redo the afcad!!!!!! (previously the airport had no taxiway definitions)
Change your afcad first so that your ATC has actually something to work with!!!!
LIMZ in reality does not not push-back(only by prior request). Nor does LIBD. Just look at the airport ground/Apron plan for LIBD which is configured for turn outs only. And, it is clearly stated as such in their operational procedures. So you shouldn't be asking for push back anyway!
Your problem is not comms it's your afcad, sorry!
vololiberista
Thanks, I appreciate your input but I still think you have missed the point. Please tell me what method you use to ask for Clearance because the only way I can find to do it is to tune to the Tower and use key 0. Every time, at every airport without Clearance or Ground frequency, the words that come out from the pilot's voice are a request for taxi. The ATC response is correct, with clearance instructions. That is the key issue.

The second problem is that when you expect to be asking for pushback, the words that come out from the pilot are a request for taxi, and that is what is acknowledged. Obviously you have to push back anyway if you are facing a wall, and I assume this confuses TGS and this is why it cancels itself.

I have proved that if you push back without asking, and then ask permission to taxi, TGS works fine.

To be honest, I don't really care whether push-backs occur in real life at any specific airport or not. Nor should the PFE software. Nor do I care whether taxiways have designations or not. PFE can handle that.

But let's concentrate on the first issue, because everything starts there - what words come out when you ask for clearance at, say, LIBD or MUHA (with comms unmodified)?

John
Author:  vololiberista [ Sun Jan 30, 2011 10:53 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Airports with limited facilities
johnhinson wrote:
vololiberista wrote:
All I can say that ATC works perfectly at LIMZ. Which has two taxiways now because "I Had to" redo the afcad!!!!!! (previously the airport had no taxiway definitions)
Change your afcad first so that your ATC has actually something to work with!!!!
LIMZ in reality does not not push-back(only by prior request). Nor does LIBD. Just look at the airport ground/Apron plan for LIBD which is configured for turn outs only. And, it is clearly stated as such in their operational procedures. So you shouldn't be asking for push back anyway!
Your problem is not comms it's your afcad, sorry!
vololiberista
Thanks, I appreciate your input but I still think you have missed the point. Please tell me what method you use to ask for Clearance because the only way I can find to do it is to tune to the Tower and use key 0. Every time, at every airport without Clearance or Ground frequency, the words that come out from the pilot's voice are a request for taxi. The ATC response is correct, with clearance instructions. That is the key issue.

The second problem is that when you expect to be asking for pushback, the words that come out from the pilot are a request for taxi, and that is what is acknowledged. Obviously you have to push back anyway if you are facing a wall, and I assume this confuses TGS and this is why it cancels itself.

I have proved that if you push back without asking, and then ask permission to taxi, TGS works fine.

To be honest, I don't really care whether push-backs occur in real life at any specific airport or not. Nor should the PFE software. Nor do I care whether taxiways have designations or not. PFE can handle that.

But let's concentrate on the first issue, because everything starts there - what words come out when you ask for clearance at, say, LIBD or MUHA (with comms unmodified)?

John
Para1. Yes you are correct there in as much that by pressing 0 twice the same request is made by P2. That has to be an issue addressed in a future upgrade (perhaps the powers that be on this forum can look into that!)

As far as ATC giving correct clearances that's also Ok at least for me and my P2 giving me taxi directions. (that part however, is down to modifying the afcad with proper taxiway designations. It is quite tricky to draw the taxiway makings for "turn out" the idea being that your AI has to follow the directions of turn out as marked on the tarmac. There was a discussion over at avsim I think under the heading "drive through parking". Once you do that your P2 should be awake enough to help you!
Trying to do what you want in a small "default" airport will always be tricky simply because the small default airports were never properly configured. so you can at least resolve one side of the problem. Even if you are facing a wall as at LIMZ a/c still have to turn out. Try to make your airport as authentic as possible. At least then you can "ask" for pushback by opening your window and asking the ground crew!!!!!!
vololiberista
Author:  johnhinson [ Sun Jan 30, 2011 12:30 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Airports with limited facilities
Thanks very much for that. Its useful to know that I haven't got a broken setup. I know Dave is busy with other things, no doubt he will look into the possibility of fixing this when he is available.

As to airport layouts, that raises an interesting point. As a matter of fact I have based my layout for LIBD on Google Earth, which is the most up-to-date layout I can lay my hands on. This airport has expanded a couple of times in recent years and with realistic levels of AI it is soon filled unless extra gates are added.

What is interesting, if you look closely at Google Earth, is that whilst the original terminal area is clearly designed to avoid push-back, the new part to the west comprises 7 stands where push-back is unavoidable.

I find myself wondering who, in the real world, authorises push-back at an airport that hasn't separate ground controllers. Surely not the tower? Another situation is MUHA Havana, Cuba, where push-back is unquestionably essential. But to some extent, the real world isn't the issue with me - finding a way to use PFE at such places is my priority. Even if it involves cheating the system by pushing back without asking, tsk tsk.

There are many other second-level airports around the world that have no separate ground frequency. By pure chance I discovered another in Indonesia today - WIBB. There must be hundreds of airports like this in FS, so it is an issue that needs addressing.

Thanks again for testing for me.

John
Author:  johnhinson [ Mon Mar 28, 2011 4:48 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Airports with limited facilities
I was wondering if you have had a chance to look at this yet, Dave? I remember you had some personal pressures when I first raised this two months ago.

John
Author:  vololiberista [ Mon Mar 28, 2011 4:02 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Airports with limited facilities
johnhinson wrote:

As a matter of fact I have based my layout for LIBD on Google Earth, which is the most up-to-date layout I can lay my hands on.

John
Actually Google Earth is very much out of date. You need always to do a search for the relevant airport charts. They frequently come as a pdf file which includes parking, taxiways, SID's STAR's etc.
Use Google Earth only as a last resort.
vololiberista
Author:  johnhinson [ Mon Mar 28, 2011 5:06 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Airports with limited facilities
vololiberista wrote:
johnhinson wrote:

As a matter of fact I have based my layout for LIBD on Google Earth, which is the most up-to-date layout I can lay my hands on.

John
Actually Google Earth is very much out of date. You need always to do a search for the relevant airport charts. They frequently come as a pdf file which includes parking, taxiways, SID's STAR's etc.
Use Google Earth only as a last resort.
vololiberista
That doesn't matter. My only point of mentioning it was to prove the push-backs do occur at this particular airport. You previously said they did not.

The whole point of this thread is to demonstrate that the product I paid for does not work correctly in these particular circumstances. It doesn't matter whether the A&F data is FS default or modified. It doesn't matter if it is this airport or any other FS airport without separate Clearance Delivery or Ground frequencies. That is the issue I am hoping Dave will fix.

John
Page 1 of 1 All times are UTC+01:00
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited