FSDreamTeam forum

Products Support => GSX Support FSX/P3D => Topic started by: Terblanche on September 07, 2018, 10:02:23 PM



Title: Could GSX Jetways Replace Static Jetways if ...
Post by: Terblanche on September 07, 2018, 10:02:23 PM

I was under the impression that GSXv2 could add jetways when the static jetways are NOT part of a building or other structure ...

Here is the scenario:
With LIPZ and LJLJ (both from RFSB) the jetways are a separate *.bgl file that you could delete/disable and then they are not visible anymore but GSXv2 only see the stand as a stairway-to-door and therefore no option to add a jetway.
Did I miss something somewhere somehow ...?

Will really be nice because there are a lot of 3rd party scenery with the possibility to replace static jetways with SODE jetways.




Title: Re: Could GSX Jetways Replace Static Jetways if ...
Post by: virtuali on September 07, 2018, 10:19:53 PM
I was under the impression that GSXv2 could add jetways when the static jetways are NOT part of a building or other structure ...

Sure you can.

Quote
GSXv2 only see the stand as a stairway-to-door and therefore no option to add a jetway. Did I miss something somewhere somehow ...?

You should be able to set "Parking has a jetway" in the drop down box, so the jetway customization tab will appear.


Title: Re: Could GSX Jetways Replace Static Jetways if ...
Post by: Terblanche on September 07, 2018, 10:25:44 PM
I've tried for over 2 hours to add jetways at any of the two mentioned airports and no tab appears ... but I'll go back to P3D now and see if I've missed something the first round.


Title: Re: Could GSX Jetways Replace Static Jetways if ...
Post by: virtuali on September 07, 2018, 10:27:05 PM
Are you sure these airports don't *also* have SODE jetways in addition to the static ones ? If yes, they cannot be edited.


Title: Re: Could GSX Jetways Replace Static Jetways if ...
Post by: Terblanche on September 07, 2018, 11:32:49 PM
Are you sure these airports don't *also* have SODE jetways in addition to the static ones ? If yes, they cannot be edited.

Nope, no SODE and I've just checked again ... I can select [This Stand has a Jetway] and apply but that's it. No other tab to open or edit or add a jetway. Very strange.
I've checked both airports. Same result.


Title: Re: Could GSX Jetways Replace Static Jetways if ...
Post by: virtuali on September 07, 2018, 11:35:50 PM
See here, GSX can clearly add a jetway where no jetways was ever present:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SIlETE7__Fg

In addition to that, another user just posted a configuration file for RFSB LIPZ scenery, in the Sharing area:

http://www.fsdreamteam.com/forum/index.php/topic,18404.msg128003.html#new


Title: Re: Could GSX Jetways Replace Static Jetways if ...
Post by: Terblanche on September 08, 2018, 01:06:42 AM
Okay, my "mistake" was that I didn't make sure it took my regkey and when I doubled checked, it was still in demo mode.
Now we're in business but the Q flips through different type of jetways and does not [Increase Object Height] and with Z nothing happens.
I'll page through the forum to see how to map these keys because without being able to adjust the height, it does not align properly.

One step at a time .... steep learning curve  ;D


Title: Re: Could GSX Jetways Replace Static Jetways if ...
Post by: virtuali on September 08, 2018, 01:33:08 AM
Now we're in business but the Q flips through different type of jetways and does not [Increase Object Height] and with Z nothing happens.

GSX manual, Page 42, there's a scheme for the keys used when editing a jetway. Q/Z change the logo.

Quote
without being able to adjust the height, it does not align properly.

The height is not adjustable. You can:

- Choose a different model. JBT models are lower than Thyssen.

- Choose the model you like, but use a "slanted" bridge to connect to the terminal. The bridges with the "S" in their name.

- Rotate the jetway, it's best if you keep it "open", so that it will have to rotate counter-clockwise to reach the airplane door.

- Change the airplane stop position.

Any combination of all the above...


Title: Re: Could GSX Jetways Replace Static Jetways if ...
Post by: Terblanche on September 08, 2018, 11:04:34 AM

GSX manual, Page 42, there's a scheme for the keys used when editing a jetway. Q/Z change the logo.



Ahhhh ... it was late in Cape Town and I printed the FSX one on page 37
Will get going with it today. Thank you, once again, for your help.


Title: Re: Could GSX Jetways Replace Static Jetways if ...
Post by: portanav on September 08, 2018, 08:32:06 PM
When adding a GSX jetway to an already existing static jetway, will GSX remove the existing jetway (LatinVFR scenery)?

Thanks,


Title: Re: Could GSX Jetways Replace Static Jetways if ...
Post by: Terblanche on September 08, 2018, 08:51:54 PM
When adding a GSX jetway to an already existing static jetway, will GSX remove the existing jetway (LatinVFR scenery)?
Thanks,

Nope ... only if the dev has the jetways in a separate bgl file that you could rename or delete. It's a bummer at quite a few airports that we would love to see movable jetways  :(


Title: Re: Could GSX Jetways Replace Static Jetways if ...
Post by: virtuali on September 08, 2018, 08:58:17 PM
Nope ... only if the dev has the jetways in a separate bgl file that you could rename or delete.

You don't have to delete anything. Just create an Exclude file for the parkings you need to remove jetways, as the GSX manual suggest to do. Removing a .BGL is not the correct way of doing this, because:

- That .BGL might eventually come back, if the scenery has some kind of update system

- That .BGL might contain other objects too, which you don't want to be replaced.

- Removing a library .BGL that contains the jetway model, and keeping the jetways in the scenery AFCAD, is considered an error, and it would be flagged as such by the simulator, if the appropriate diagnostic command ( MissingLibraryalert in the simulator .CFG file) is enabled. This because the simulator will *try* opening that file, not finding it, and this might possibly cause issues like stuttering, especially when many of these fails happens.

So, the way of creating Exclude files is the proper one, which doesn't require touching any of the original scenery files.


Title: Re: Could GSX Jetways Replace Static Jetways if ...
Post by: portanav on September 08, 2018, 09:14:43 PM
Nope ... only if the dev has the jetways in a separate bgl file that you could rename or delete. It's a bummer at quite a few airports that we would love to see movable jetways  :(

Thank you very much.


Title: Re: Could GSX Jetways Replace Static Jetways if ...
Post by: Terblanche on September 08, 2018, 09:34:49 PM

You don't have to delete anything. Just create an Exclude file for the parkings you need to remove jetways, as the GSX manual suggest to do. Removing a .BGL is not the correct way of doing this, because:

So, the way of creating Exclude files is the proper one, which doesn't require touching any of the original scenery files.

As I understood his question, "will GSX remove and existing static jetway" and the answer per manual is not if the jetway is part of scenery (i.e. building etc) The LatinVFR scenery that I have, has animated jetways and therefore it's easy to remove with GSX as Umberto described but a lot of other scenery (LICC from RFSB for example) have static jetways that are visible in P3D but GSX does not pick up that they are there and therefore cannot 'exclude' them. You can create new jetways but can't get rid of the original (visible) jetways. Please correct me if I'm wrong because I've spend half of today trying to manipulate scenery to get rid of their static jetways that are not specified in any bgl file.


Title: Re: Could GSX Jetways Replace Static Jetways if ...
Post by: virtuali on September 08, 2018, 09:50:26 PM
static jetways that are visible in P3D but GSX does not pick up that they are there and therefore cannot 'exclude' them. You can create new jetways but can't get rid of the original (visible) jetways.

Exactly. If a jetway is embedded in the terminal building, there's only one person that can exclude it, and it's the original scenery designer.

Well...technically, this is not *entirely* true. You might be able to fix such sceneries by opening their .BGLs with this tool:

https://www.scenerydesign.org/modelconverterx/

- Find the .BGL that contains the terminal with the embedded jetways

- Open it in ModelConverterX

- Open the icon named "Object Hierarchy"

- The Hierarchy editor will open. Be sure "Highlight selected" is enabled.

- Scroll through the object Hierarchy, and see what's being highlighted in red. Eventually, you'll find the jetway.

- Click the "Remove" button. The jetway will disappear.

- Repeat this for all those static jetways.

- Save back the .BGL file.

This MIGHT work but, please, do not ask for further support: you are really on your own with this, and it would be much better if you pressed the scenery developer to model jetways as separate objects, which will make life easier for everybody.


Title: Re: Could GSX Jetways Replace Static Jetways if ...
Post by: portanav on September 08, 2018, 10:18:21 PM
static jetways that are visible in P3D but GSX does not pick up that they are there and therefore cannot 'exclude' them. You can create new jetways but can't get rid of the original (visible) jetways.

Exactly. If a jetway is embedded in the terminal building, there's only one person that can exclude it, and it's the original scenery designer.

Well...technically, this is not *entirely* true. You might be able to fix such sceneries by opening their .BGLs with this tool:

https://www.scenerydesign.org/modelconverterx/

- Find the .BGL that contains the terminal with the embedded jetways

- Open it in ModelConverterX

- Open the icon named "Object Hierarchy"

- The Hierarchy editor will open. Be sure "Highlight selected" is enabled.

- Scroll through the object Hierarchy, and see what's being highlighted in red. Eventually, you'll find the jetway.

- Click the "Remove" button. The jetway will disappear.

- Repeat this for all those static jetways.

- Save back the .BGL file.

This MIGHT work but, please, do not ask for further support: you are really on your own with this, and it would be much better if you pressed the scenery developer to model jetways as separate objects, which will make life easier for everybody.
Thank you Umberto.


Title: Re: Could GSX Jetways Replace Static Jetways if ...
Post by: Terblanche on September 08, 2018, 11:50:27 PM
Oh GREAT Umberto -

There goes my Sunday!!
 ;) ;D :'( :D


Title: Re: Could GSX Jetways Replace Static Jetways if ...
Post by: JRBarrett on September 10, 2018, 12:43:45 AM
I tried removing static jetways at Sunskyjet KPHL without success.

This scenery contains non-moving static jetways at all terminals. I have confirmed that they are not part of the terminal itself by going into the airport scenery folder. There are two jetway BGL files, and when I temporarily removed them and reloaded the sim, all the jetways were gone. I realize, of course, that this is not a proper solution.

I reenabled the jetways and used the GSX editor to add a SODE jetway at gate D5, which worked fine - the new jetway appeared adjacent to the old one. I then set an exclude radius of 1 meter, saved and exited from the sim.

I used the stand-alone GSX Level 2 config program to compile an exclude bgl, and verified that the file was present in the GSX excludes folder.

However, on re-loading the sim at that gate, the original static jetway is still present adjacent to the new SODE jetway. I repeated the process with increasing exclude radii up to 10 meters, but still cannot get the static jetway to disappear.

The only proviso is that this is an FSX scenery being used in P3DV4, (but installed using the add-on.xml method). In general the scenery works very well in P3D, but perhaps this is preventing the GSX exclude from working?

I did verify, using the Lorby scenery config program, that GSX Excludes has the highest priority in the scenery library, above all other entries.



Title: Re: Could GSX Jetways Replace Static Jetways if ...
Post by: portanav on September 10, 2018, 10:29:13 AM
I tried to adding an SODE jetway to LatinVFR Piarco scenery using the GSX editor with the exclude BGL file feature; but it did not work, the SODE jetway was added but the static jetway also remained. I checked the scenery folder and there is one jetway BGL for all gates, if I remove the BGL the jetways disappeared.

I checked the exclude BGL and it was generated by GSX, I know you said it was not a good choice to manually remove the jetway BGL so I don't know what else to do, or why the exclude BGL did not work.

Regards,


Title: Re: Could GSX Jetways Replace Static Jetways if ...
Post by: virtuali on September 10, 2018, 10:35:20 AM
I know you said it was not a good choice to manually remove the jetway BGL so I don't know what else to do, or why the exclude BGL did not work.

The exclude .BGL will work only if the jetway object is modeled separately.

It's still possible the exclude might not work, even if the object is separated, if its center point is not in its real center. This is clearly a mistake of the scenery, since it will cause lots of problems to the simulator optimizations and LODs. The Exclude creation assumes the object is properly modeled, with its center matching its actual center, so it will create a very small exclude area around the center of the jetway, which you can control in size but, if it's too large, you risk excluding something you don't want.

If removing the jetway library .BGL works for you, then just do it. It might only become a problem if you have *lots* of removed .BGLs so, if the Exclude method works, better try this first.

Also, regardless if the Exclude method works or not for a specific scenery, you MUST enabled the Exclude checkbox in the GSX editor page, otherwise it wouldn't let you edit the jetway.


Title: Re: Could GSX Jetways Replace Static Jetways if ...
Post by: portanav on September 10, 2018, 11:07:19 AM
Understood, thanks.


Title: Re: Could GSX Jetways Replace Static Jetways if ...
Post by: JRBarrett on September 10, 2018, 11:55:25 AM
Quote

It's still possible the exclude might not work, even if the object is separated, if its center point is not in its real center. This is clearly a mistake of the scenery, since it will cause lots of problems to the simulator optimizations and LODs. The Exclude creation assumes the object is properly modeled, with its center matching its actual center, so it will create a very small exclude area around the center of the jetway, which you can control in size but, if it's too large, you risk excluding something you don't want.

I think this may be the problem with KPHL. Each static jetway emerges from a hemispherical structure that sticks out of the terminal wall a few feet, and when the jetway bgl is disabled, those structures remain. Any new GSX jetway automatically originates a few feet to the right of the structures - where the terminal wall is flat, which must be the actual center.


Title: Re: Could GSX Jetways Replace Static Jetways if ...
Post by: virtuali on September 10, 2018, 01:11:46 PM
Ok, here's an undocumented trick, which might be helpful. We haven't put in the manual, because it would made people's head spin...

If the parking originally had at least one animated (CTRL+J) jetway, the center of the Exclude radius area is ALWAYS the original jetway insertion point. So, you just enlarge the radius and, if there's a nearby static jetway, it will likely be excluded too.

But if the parking does NOT have an animated jetway, you can still set an Exclude radius but, its center will be the coordinates YOUR airplane is located when you enable the Exclude. This was meant as a way to exclude static jetways from parking that have *only* a static jetway, to let the editor know the center coordinates of the exclude in some way, since a jetway is missing.

So, you might be able to control the exclude center too, by moving the airplane around when editing.


Title: Re: Could GSX Jetways Replace Static Jetways if ...
Post by: portanav on September 10, 2018, 01:18:29 PM
Ok, here's an undocumented trick, which might be helpful. We haven't put in the manual, because it would made people's head spin...

If the parking originally had at least one animated (CTRL+J) jetway, the center of the Exclude radius area is ALWAYS the original jetway insertion point. So, you just enlarge the radius and, if there's a nearby static jetway, it will likely be excluded too.

But if the parking does NOT have an animated jetway, you can still set an Exclude radius but, its center will be the coordinates YOUR airplane is located when you enable the Exclude. This was meant as a way to exclude static jetways from parking that have *only* a static jetway, to let the editor know the center coordinates of the exclude in some way, since a jetway is missing.

So, you might be able to control the exclude center too, by moving the airplane around when editing.
Thanks again for the added info.

Regards,


Title: Could GSX Jetways Replace Static Jetways if ...
Post by: JRBarrett on September 10, 2018, 01:28:32 PM
Ok, here's an undocumented trick, which might be helpful. We haven't put in the manual, because it would made people's head spin...

If the parking originally had at least one animated (CTRL+J) jetway, the center of the Exclude radius area is ALWAYS the original jetway insertion point. So, you just enlarge the radius and, if there's a nearby static jetway, it will likely be excluded too.

But if the parking does NOT have an animated jetway, you can still set an Exclude radius but, its center will be the coordinates YOUR airplane is located when you enable the Exclude. This was meant as a way to exclude static jetways from parking that have *only* a static jetway, to let the editor know the center coordinates of the exclude in some way, since a jetway is missing.

So, you might be able to control the exclude center too, by moving the airplane around when editing.
Thanks for the info. Iíll give that a try. Iím pretty sure that none of the default jetways are CTL-J versions in this scenery.

Jim Barrett