FSDreamTeam forum
Products Support => GSX Support FSX/P3D => Topic started by: airbadger on July 06, 2019, 03:57:18 am
-
This has happened to me twice now... I haven't customized the pushback at all, just letting GSX use the AFCAD. It happened at PACSIM's RKSI and ImagineSim's WSSS. I've never seen GSX do this until the latest update.
Screenshots: https://imgur.com/a/dDKNtNW (https://imgur.com/a/dDKNtNW)
-
If you really haven't customized the pushback before, so it used the standard Left/Right logic, it's possible a BUGFIX that we added to it to fix crashes in other airports, has made the automatic Pushback not working on a particular airplane in a particular airport, like in your case.
As explained so many times on the forum, it's simply not possible to have an automatic pushback that would work *everywhere*, based on 3rd party AFCADs, which might be made in the most different ways.
But while this might have been a problem with older version, the new Custom Pushback will surely be able to fix every Pushback, since you can create a custom route NOT reliant on the underlying AFCAD.
-
The large swing on pushback was a bugfix? I have never seen anything wrong before. Now at every airport the large swing of the pushback truck to over-do the turn means at every airport the heavy aircraft is being first pushed into the grass as it does the large swing around to go back on the taxiway. I really would not like to have to create a custom pushback at every single airport I fly a 747 to.
-
The large swing on pushback was a bugfix? I have never seen anything wrong before.
You don't seem to understand. I said it might have been a fix reported by another user for ANOTHER airport or another airplane. The "large swing" on pushback WAS precisely a problem of the OLD version. But we haven't fixed this automatically, because it just cannot be done.
When you see such swing, it means that pushback was impossible to do given how the AFCAD was made and the total length of the airplane + pushback vehicle + eventual towbar.
This cannot be "fixed", we could only change the strategy we have to remove wrong nodes, overlapping nodes, wrong links, unconnected aprons, and all that sort of mistakes found in 3rd party AFCAD. What I said is that, to FIX mistakes in the AFCAD that would result in the pushback crashing with an error in OTHER place, might have resulted in the automatic pushback not working with extremely large airplanes, which almost invariably require some kind of special pushback in real life too.
Now at every airport the large swing of the pushback truck to over-do the turn means at every airport the heavy aircraft is being first pushed into the grass as it does the large swing around to go back on the taxiway. I really would not like to have to create a custom pushback at every single airport I fly a 747 to.
No, it doesn't do that in "every" airport (especially because you cannot possibly have tested them all). It's likely does it *there*, because that position was clearly more difficult than usual, being at an angle, so it's the exception, not the norm, and it's a texbook case for a Custom Pushback.
Exactly as in real life, there are not many airports that can *accept* a 747-8, and those that can, only on a very few gates. So no, you don't have to customize the pushback on "every airport", but on the FEW gates that can use a 747-8, and only on the airports that can take the 747-8.
-
I fly at cargo aprons and now every pushback it swings me too far to the opposide side it puts me in the grass. As Singapore Cargo ramp I will put up a picture when I land stand 602, pushing tail right nose left. the big swing when turning puts me in the eastern grass before the plane comes back to on the taxiline. Before the update the pushback was fine.
-
I fly at cargo aprons and now every pushback it swings me too far to the opposide side it puts me in the grass
No, it doesn't. It does it only a the few gates you might have tried, and you are assuming it does it everywhere.
As Singapore Cargo ramp I will put up a picture when I land stand 602, pushing tail right nose left. the big swing when turning puts me in the eastern grass before the plane comes back to on the taxiline.
You don't say which airport you are referring to so, as explained so many times before, it's impossible to say what my be the problem in that specific case. Clearly indicate the airport used, and it's not default, help identify the scenery.
Before the update the pushback was fine.
I think I already explained, quite clearly, why this might have been changed: to fix more serious problems that would result in a *crash* in OTHER airports.
-
Since there was no indication of which scenery was used, I tried a pushback with the default Singapore airport, which has only 2 cargo parking positions ( Parking 2 and 6 ), I chose 2, selected "Right" ( tail right nose left ), and it did a perfect pushback, with no swings and without touching the grass.
Yes, of course, the airplane is very long, so it could follow the curved line exactly, it went a bit large, but it was otherwise perfectly normal.
That is without customizing the pushback. With a customization, in Free mode, it can be made just perfect, by moving the approach corner closer to the parking spot.
-
Well, I hope in the future that the default left/right pushbacks can work properly with large aircraft again. 90% of the time the default options worked great in previous versions when pushing back from spots clearly designed for heavies. Now, it sounds like I need to create a custom pushback every time unless I use the same spots over and over again.
-
Well, I hope in the future that the default left/right pushbacks can work properly with large aircraft again. 90% of the time the default options worked great in previous versions when pushing back from spots clearly designed for heavies. Now, it sounds like I need to create a custom pushback every time unless I use the same spots over and over again.
As I've said in my previous post, the default pushback in a default airport using the 747-8, works just fine, it simply made a curved a bit larger, but nowhere the truck swayed around, let alone pushed into the grass.
The customization only made it "perfect", but it wasn't required at all to make a reasonable pushback.
-
Ok, but in my usage of heavy aircraft since the patch (777 and 747-8), I've gotten consistently worse results from using the default pushback option compared to the previous patch. This doesn't mean it will fail every time (as your experience notes), but it now means I should probably just go ahead and set up a custom pushback for every flight. If it used to work fine 90% of the time and now it works maybe 50% of the time, I might as well not take my chances with it.
-
Ok, but in my usage of heavy aircraft since the patch (777 and 747-8), I've gotten consistently worse results from using the default pushback option compared to the previous patch.
I highly doubt the previous version would have been able to push an airplane that large perfectly, it would surely make a somewhat larger curve.
Again, I can only refer to my test using the default Singapore scenery, which is a very simple parking so no, in that case, it's not a question of GSX having changed the default pushback because, what might have changed, would only possibly affect 3rd party sceneries with a lot of nodes close together but, in the default scenery I tested, there wasn't any alternative so, nothing in the update could possibly affect this, and the pushback was reasonable, but not "perfect". That would require a customization even in a previous version, a customization that is now easier and more flexible so on, even the previous version couldn't do a perfect pushback with no customization.
But as I've said, several times by now, on a 3rd party scenery with many more nodes than a default, something might have changed, and of course for the better, because it might have resulted in errors and crashes in the previous version, mabye in OTHER airports. So, clearly, it's more important to prevent crashes, and this might possibly affect the default choice of nodes on some 3rd party airports, when there are many of them to choose from.
This doesn't mean it will fail every time (as your experience notes), but it now means I should probably just go ahead and set up a custom pushback for every flight. If it used to work fine 90% of the time and now it works maybe 50% of the time, I might as well not take my chances with it.
As I've said in my previous message, it works fine with the current version, and it doesn't show any of the problems you reported. It's not by any means perfect, but it's absolutely reasonable. The the whole point of having a customization to begin with, is for those wanting to change "reasonable" into "perfect", which is clearly possible now, and it wasn't before.
-
Must be lucky I had not a problem using the pushback in the previous gsx version.
This is what happens at every airport in the PMDG 747 and 748 when the taxiway has grass on the other side of the gate. Pushing back from gate 601 Imaginesim WSSS
the large swing on pushback takes me into the grass.
https://i.imgur.com/RU6CO6s.jpg
This is what the afcad looks like
https://i.imgur.com/Z10U9XK.png
a simple layout and every airport where the taxiway ends behind the gate I am being pushed at a very large radius into the grass before back around on the taxiway line.
-
I've broken quite a few nosegear struts at this point
https://imgur.com/a/hwPOb4t
(https://imgur.com/a/hwPOb4t)
-
Please read again my previous answers, they already cleared everything that was required to know to understand this is not a GSX problem, but a fix for crashes that might have happened elsewhere which users might have reported in the past.
It's possible that fixing these bugs, has resulted in a more large DEFAULT curve when using on an extremely long airplane like that. I'm not sure we might fix both cases without resulting in the old problems coming back again, but we'll check this.
-
Please read again my previous answers, they already cleared everything that was required to know to understand this is not a GSX problem, but a fix for crashes that might have happened elsewhere which users might have reported in the past.
It's possible that fixing these bugs, has resulted in a more large DEFAULT curve when using on an extremely long airplane like that. I'm not sure we might fix both cases without resulting in the old problems coming back again, but we'll check this.
My request is to make the default curve less because this is happening to me at every airport when I push back. Thanks
-
My request is to make the default curve less because this is happening to me at every airport when I push back. Thanks
No, it's not happening at every airport. It's happening only at the airports you tried, at the parking you tried, with a specific airplane model which is particularly long. But nevertheless, we'll check this, as usual, and we'll try to improve it even for such limited cases, hopefully not breaking it up elsewhere.
-
I thought I made a pretty good free mode pushback here, but it still made the curve too wide (not that it really makes a difference in this particular case). Is it possible that even if you make a perfect curve using free mode that it'll still overshoot?
https://imgur.com/a/SkBVaxP (https://imgur.com/a/SkBVaxP)
-
Is it possible that even if you make a perfect curve using free mode that it'll still overshoot?
No, it simply means you haven't placed the approach node in the best possible position. Of course, you cannot expect to do impossible things: if in real life a 747-8 couldn't possibly be pushed from *that* position because it's just too tight, the same will happen in GSX.
Always remember we still don't have the ability to Pull, which is what will happen in real life when trying to push a large airplane out of tight spaces.
Of course, the ability to Pull, which will be added with a later update, won't make the pushback customization any easier, because in addition to just specify two points, as it is now, you will likely have to create multiple route segments, and specify for each one to use either push or pull.
-
ONE SOLUTION: With PMDG B748 tested at multiple locations I've also found that even in the easiest cases that the tug will always push too far resulting in a overshoot of the final parking heading. I've found that if I set up the pushback with the Snap to AFCAD checked and exit the Parking Customization mode, but then open the Parking Customization mode and un-check the Snap option and use the three values derived from the first step that the overshoot does not occur. Always step through the stop and bend spots first to make final adjustments (for example the AFCAD links may not line up with the scenery surface marks) making sure that the bend spot is on the parking centerline and is at least behind the tail of the aircraft when it is parked. I've done this dance several dozen times now and am starting to find workarounds. Hope this helps.
-
I am having the same kind of issue here. I am using the PMDG777 the when pushing back, it over shoot the taxi line every single time. Hopefully the FSDT developing team can do something to fix it!!
-
ONE SOLUTION: With PMDG B748 tested at multiple locations I've also found that even in the easiest cases that the tug will always push too far resulting in a overshoot of the final parking heading. I've found that if I set up the pushback with the Snap to AFCAD checked and exit the Parking Customization mode, but then open the Parking Customization mode and un-check the Snap option and use the three values derived from the first step that the overshoot does not occur. Always step through the stop and bend spots first to make final adjustments (for example the AFCAD links may not line up with the scenery surface marks) making sure that the bend spot is on the parking centerline and is at least behind the tail of the aircraft when it is parked. I've done this dance several dozen times now and am starting to find workarounds. Hope this helps.
This was helpful, thanks.
-
ONE SOLUTION: With PMDG B748 tested at multiple locations I've also found that even in the easiest cases that the tug will always push too far resulting in a overshoot of the final parking heading. I've found that if I set up the pushback with the Snap to AFCAD checked and exit the Parking Customization mode, but then open the Parking Customization mode and un-check the Snap option and use the three values derived from the first step that the overshoot does not occur. Always step through the stop and bend spots first to make final adjustments (for example the AFCAD links may not line up with the scenery surface marks) making sure that the bend spot is on the parking centerline and is at least behind the tail of the aircraft when it is parked. I've done this dance several dozen times now and am starting to find workarounds. Hope this helps.
End user should not have to find workarounds for one of the most popular P3D aircraft. This is for the dev and if the response is, we have given you tools to fix (what before was not broke) than that is the wrong answer. End of story.
-
I just set up two GSX2.6 parking customizations at the Aerosoft EDDK F-ramp, one for a B748 and the other for a B77L. The snap to AFCAD option worked well for the B77L and it had a nice turn from straight back to the taxiway at 90 deg with a nice wide radius arc and no overshoot of completed heading. On the other hand, the B748 push back totally failed with the tug pushing the bird almost all the way to the taxiway, quite a longer than normal distance, and then trying to make the 90 deg turn on the spot, which of course overshoot significantly the taxi line and had the tug pushing at a hard right angle to the longitudinal axis of the aircraft.
I restored the B748 to the parking stand, cleared the Snap options, stepped through the pushback customization and moved the corner or intermediate spots into the parking stand on the parking centerline such that they were behind the tail of the aircraft and now pushback works.
-
End user should not have to find workarounds for one of the most popular P3D aircraft. This is for the dev and if the response is, we have given you tools to fix (what before was not broke) than that is the wrong answer. End of story.
I'm sorry but, we looked into this and I don't think this is the case.
The pushback I checked on Cargo Parking 2 at WSSS, which as I've said is perfectly FINE, although it wasn't "perfect" and could be made perfect by using a Free mode customization, couldn't possibly be ANY different with the previous version.
My previous reply about possibly choosing different final nodes and/or a different approach node in this version that might have fixed problems in some airports, cannot possibly happen THERE, because that's a very straightforward parking, with no possible choice of nodes other than the two left/right and just one approach node.
It's just not possible THAT parking I tried could behave any different in the previous version, because when there's no customization at all, the ONLY thing that could make a difference is the choice of nodes used, but on THAT parking there weren't any other possible choices, considering how simple the default AFCAD is on that place.
So, if a 747-8 can't do a perfect curve now *THERE*, it would have been exactly the same in the previous version. It's just the airplane is simply too big to be pushed using the default strategy and it was exactly like that in the previous version, the changes we made to fix problems in some airports could possibly be a problem only on more complex (or with errors) AFCAD, with many more nodes to choose from as equally usable alternatives.
This "problem" you are reporting here, was exactly the same in the old version so, please, stop saying we "broke" something, because that's just not the case. The 747-8 is simply too large for the GSX default pushback algorithm and it was already like that in the previous version. And no, please don't try to say it worked well before. If it did, it was just by accident because if a 3rd party airport had the approach node (the one GSX chose) CLOSER to the parking, it would made GSX works easier.
Because THIS is the REAL issue ( which has been there probably since GSX was released ), if the approach node, the one you CAN now customize in Free mode, is placed at the intersection of the final taxiway, in a position perpendicular to the final pushback position, the resulting curve will result in very LONG airplanes to make a larger curve around the approach node. GSX ALWAYS worked like this, and this is more common on default airports.
If the approach node is closer to the parking, or there is an intermediate node in between, the curve will be tighter, and this usually happens only on 3rd party airports. However, if the approach node is TOO close to the parking, the curve will be TOO tight, resulting in the very well known problem of the tow truck making a 180 around the front gear ( so no, it didn't "worked fine before" ) and THIS is something we changed, obviously for the best, since I hope everybody would agree it much better having a somewhat large curve than seeing the tow truck making a 180.
In these cases, when we detected approach nodes which are too close to the parking spot itself, we skip them ( to prevent the 180 turn problem ) and use the next one. And if the next one is too far, similar to what happens with default airports, it would result in the "too large" curve problem, because the curve wasn't tight *enough* with an airplane so long.
What we CAN do, is to change ( for the FIRST TIME after GSX was released in 2012 ), the default pushback strategy, and automatically MOVE the approach node if it's too far from the parking, which should fix the problem of pushing very long airplanes, which GSX ALWAYS HAD, but you didn't noticed, because you don't use default airports, so GSX usually found closer nodes, and it sometimes worked, but sometimes resulted in the 180 deg turn.
-
What we CAN do, is to change ( for the FIRST TIME after GSX was released in 2012 ), the default pushback strategy, and automatically MOVE the approach node if it's too far from the parking, which should fix the problem of pushing very long airplanes, which GSX ALWAYS HAD, but you didn't noticed, because you don't use default airports, so GSX usually found closer nodes, and it sometimes worked, but sometimes resulted in the 180 deg turn.
I believe this will resolve the issue. Thanks.