FSDreamTeam forum
Developer's Backdoor => GSX Backdoor => Topic started by: Speedbird ATC on September 08, 2018, 05:56:33 am
-
Honestly? Highly underwhelming. The hype said that it would automatically replace ALL default jetways. I loaded the demo version on FSDTs CYVR. NONE of the SODE jetways match up to the default. Additionally, Umberto claimed the product would replace static jetways as well. Well, as you can see, not a single one of the static jetways is replaced. I don't have time to customize 128 parking spots. Especially when it's to an airport I will never fly to. I had very high expectations for this product and it looks like we have been sorely let down. Or perhaps am I the one at fault? Am I doing something wrong here?\
https://i.imgur.com/B1eTDsl.jpg
-
Also unrelated but how do you change the height of the jetway
-
Honestly? Highly underwhelming. The hype said that it would automatically replace ALL default jetways.
It surely does.
I loaded the demo version on FSDTs CYVR. NONE of the SODE jetways match up to the default.
I see your confusing. You confuse "default jetways", with "custom jetways using the default animation system". They are NOT the same thing and GSX L2 correctly replaces automatically ONLY the first kind, because surely nobody wants to see the old jetway model anymore.
Custom jetways using the default animation system, which GSX L2 CAN replace, but not automatically, are something which has been custom modeled and placed by a scenery developer, and it would be WRONG if we just blankly replace them, and this would require modifying a 3rd party scenery (ok, you said FSDT CYVR, but that's not the issue, we'll shortly release updates for our sceneries anyway, like we *DID* for JFK2 right now), which is not what we think is the right way to do things. Scenery developers would rightfully be angry if we started to patch their own sceneries, which would be the only way to replace such jetways automatically.
Instead, we did it in the right way, by creating separate exclude files that will stay in our own folder, and giving the flexibility to decide WHICH sceneries and WHICH gates should be replaced, and this is the ONLY way to achieve that, respecting other developers work. I would be very upset if there was another product that started to "patch" GSX files, for example. Nobody in his right mind could think is right to do this.
Additionally, Umberto claimed the product would replace static jetways as well.
Never claimed that GSX can replace any kind of static jetways "automatically". I always said GSX can replace static jetways if you tell it to do it, by creating an Exclude file AND if these static jetways have been modeled as a separate object in the scenery.
I don't have time to customize 128 parking spots.
You don't have time to read the manual either. If you did, you would have known it's possible to customize multiple parkings at once with just a single click.
-
I don't have time to customize 128 parking spots.
from Virtuali:
You don't have time to read the manual either. If you did, you would have known it's possible to customize multiple parkings at once with just a single click.
I read that, but did not find a way to customize all Gates with that one click, because as i read i have to customize every one to bring it at the correct position.
How exactly should that work?
I have tried to change a Gateway in EDDP with installed German Airports Szenerie and the result without changing the position in GSX 3D Editor you can see in the attached Picture.
So...again, how can i change ALL Gates ( as example in EDDP ) with only one or maybe two clicks ??
Matthias
-
I have tried to change a Gateway in EDDP with installed German Airports Szenerie and the result without changing the position in GSX 3D Editor you can see in the attached Picture.
I'm not sure what you are reporting there as a problem. The double jetway ? Are you aware that, in order to replace a jetway, you must first exclude the original one ? Please have a look at the video tutorial here and, if there something which is not clear, report back:
http://www.fsdreamteam.com/forum/index.php/topic,18372.0.html
-
No, it's possible to add a BGL exclude file with jut a single click, which I did. Doing so did in fact get rid of the jetways using the default animation system. However, the static jetways are still visible. I am assuming they aren't modeled as a separate object? Additionally: In your own preview videos, you show FlyTampas Amsterdam, an airport with custom jetways using the default animation system, being replaced with SODE jetways. Obviously the SODE jetways use the models created by FSDT, but that isn't the point. How am I supposed to know that if I buy the full product and want to customize say, a FlyTampa airport, I won't be stuck adjusting the positions of 200 induvidual jetways.
-
In the GSX position editor, click airport at the top, and press the jetway exclude button. It excludes all the jetways
-
No, it's possible to add a BGL exclude file with jut a single click, which I did
Were you replying to me ? Yes, of course it's possible.
However, the static jetways are still visible. I am assuming they aren't modeled as a separate object?
That's not certain. As you might have noticed, the default Exclude radius is 1.0 meters, which is perfectly fine to exclude the primary jetway without risking removing other things in the parking. However, there IS a reason why it can be changed and, it's precisely to allow you to exclude ALSO a nearby static jetway. Assuming, of course, it's modeled separately.
So, you might try enlarging the Exclude radius to something like 5-6 meters (too large values will risk excluding something you don't want to exclude), which might be enough to also exclude a nearby static. If the static doesn't disappear with a larger radius, then it's likely modeled as part of the terminal so nobody, except the original scenery developer, can remove it.
Quoting from the GSX manual, Page 35:
Change the Jetway exclusion range, if needed. On most cases, the default 1.0 meter range should be fine, but sometimes you might want to change it, especially when the scenery has MORE than one Jetway: one animated and the other/s static (it’s not possible to have more than one animated Jetway with the default Jetway animation system) and, if your goal is to have all of them replaced with working SODE Jetways, by setting this range a bit higher, you might be able to exclude all the existing Jetways for that parking spot: the animated one, and the static/s.
Obviously the SODE jetways use the models created by FSDT, but that isn't the point. How am I supposed to know that if I buy the full product and want to customize say, a FlyTampa airport, I won't be stuck adjusting the positions of 200 induvidual jetways.
I really don't understand the question, and now it relates to the preview video. I realize I didn't include something important in the video, which people always seem to miss: EVERY setting in the GSX parking customization page (and the Jetway settings are no different) can be applied to a SINGLE gate, to several selected gates (CTRL+Click on them to do a multiple selection), to an entire terminal, or even the whole airport at once.
So no, you don't have to "customize 200 individual jetways", if you don't want to. You surely can start with a rough initial adjustment, by applying the same kind to many parkings at once, and eventually fix the individual ones with special needs.
-
As you can clearly see in the screenshot, I did customize the entire airport with exclusion zones. As you can also see, NONE of the new SODE jetways are in the right position! If I wanted them to be at the right position, I would have to go back and customize ALL OF THEIR POSITIONS. Furthermore, I set my exclusion zone to be very large: 100 meters.
-
As you can clearly see in the screenshot, I did customize the entire airport with exclusion zones. As you can also see, NONE of the new SODE jetways are in the right position!
GSX obviously reads the jetway position from the AFCAD so, they cannot be "wrong". OF COURSE, if you started customizing the airport with an AFCAD conflict, it's entirely normal nothing will match.
So, before doing any customization, first check if the right AFCAD is in use by GSX, and if it's not, understand why and fix the conflict before customizing.
-
In my case, I purchased Level 2 already and am very happy with the software. But for some reason, I cannot create any "Exclude.bgl" file, and although I read all the manual and this part (creating Exclude.bgl) maybe three times. Tried on three airports Heathrow, Sydney and Amsterdam Aerosoft, and the removed jetways are still there...
I think I used FSDT GSX Control Panel correctly, Everything worked as showed in the video and the manual, except the ols jetways are still there :-[
Where exactly should these files be located ?
Please help
-
Where exactly should these files be located ?
Addon Manager\Fsdreamteam\Exclude\Scenery
But the GSX Control Panel should clearly indicate if it was able (or not) to create the Exclude file so, there's no real need to check it manually.
Tried on three airports Heathrow, Sydney and Amsterdam Aerosoft, and the removed jetways are still there...
Are you trying to remove static or animated jetways ? Not all statics can be removed, they must be modeled separately from the terminal building.
-
As you can clearly see in the screenshot, I did customize the entire airport with exclusion zones. As you can also see, NONE of the new SODE jetways are in the right position!
GSX obviously reads the jetway position from the AFCAD so, they cannot be "wrong". OF COURSE, if you started customizing the airport with an AFCAD conflict, it's entirely normal nothing will match.
So, before doing any customization, first check if the right AFCAD is in use by GSX, and if it's not, understand why and fix the conflict before customizing.
Deleted the ORBX AFCADS. Unfortunately bridges still appear where they shouldn't. Is GSX unable to detect where they should and shouldn't be? It's a small issue that I can fix myself I guess, but I would like to know if I am doing this right https://i.imgur.com/Ub0isTy.jpg
-
Unfortunately bridges still appear where they shouldn't.
That's not a bug, it exactly how it's supposed to be.
The jetway that apppears "by default", is one that has the same specs as the original DEFAULT jetway, which already comes with a bridge and ground markings, so this is the model you are supposed to use to replace the default jetways in the default scenery. It's designed to be as similar as the original one as possible, just much better looking, and using SODE.
It might still be useful in case you have a non-default scenery, which incidentally happen to have its original jetways placed at a distance that's compatible with the default jetway bridge size.
But normally, when customizing a non-default airport, you are supposed to choose another model, one that doesn't come with a bridge, but allow you to select one from multiple variations AND allows you to select/unselect ground markings, for example.
Is GSX unable to detect where they should and shouldn't be?
It obviously isn't. How could GSX possibly know how the rest of the scenery is made which kind of bridge (if any) should be chosen ? How do you expect it to interpret a bunch of polygons (this how a scenery raw data looks like) and understand which one is the terminal wall ? Even assuming we *tried* something as complex and still useless as trying to read the whole scenery, polygon by polygon...
-
No, i report just that is is not possible to change a high amount of gates at a airport just with one lick.
Yes, you can create the Exclude file for all Gates with one click, but the set up of the new Sode Gates after that takes a long time,
because we have to do it for every gate
-
No, i report just that is is not possible to change a high amount of gates at a airport just with one lick.
That's not true, because you surely can do that.
The set up of the new Sode Gates after that takes a long time, because we have to do it for every gate
Well, of course if you want to do a PROPER job, and perfectly adapt each jetway to each parking, as in real life, that takes time.
-
That's not true, because you surely can do that.
Ok, lets take my default Airport EDDP as example
Here we have the Gates 128, 130, 132, 134, 136 with Gateways
1 pic, a view to the eddp default gates
2 pic is in the gsx editor making the exclude file. ( here i miss the gate 134...why ever it is missing )
After compiling the scenerie excludes in the GSX Control Panel, the default Gates are still there , i dont know why.
I did it exactly like in the Video, just with the FSX because i did not have P3D installed at the moment.
Even after trying it with only gate 126 the default gate is still there.
also in pic 3 you can see, that every new sode gate is at the wrong position.
So even if it works with the excluding the gates, i must configure every gate.
So...no chance for one click editing
-
After compiling the scenerie excludes in the GSX Control Panel, the default Gates are still there , i dont know why.
If these jetways were static and not modeled as a separate object, they cannot be excluded.
-
Theres alot of airports that are flat not going to work with this update until their developer make them compatible. Many of the Jetways just are too customized. Some are made with the older version of Sode and proprietary.
-
Theres alot of airports that are flat not going to work with this update until their developer make them compatible.
Well, this is not entirely true. They might not be *easily* excluded, but they surely can, a way or the other. Even if they cannot be excluded using the normal method, usually because they are modeled as part of the terminal building polygonal mesh, there's still a way out, see here:
http://www.fsdreamteam.com/forum/index.php/topic,19375.0.html
Some are made with the older version of Sode and proprietary.
This can be surely excluded by removing their SODE XML file. Again, it's nothing we could do automatically, since we stick to the principle of NOT touching ANY files belonging to 3rd party sceneries, but you can surely do it yourself.
-
Maybe there is hope for orbx old PSP after all?