marshaller was not seen on parking gates without jetways...this means that the 2 gates where i didnt see marshaller was gates on which there were not jetways..may be the marshaller is inside the building in front of it..
Which just make my point: if the parking doesn't have a jetway, the program calculates a larger optimal distance based on the EYEPOINT of your cockpit, assuming that, if there's no jetway, maybe there's no building too. But if there is a building, the marshaller would have a better chance of getting inside of it, if there's no jetway.
What I meant about parking with fake/static jetways, instead, is that since GSX doesn't have a way to *detect* them (they don't exist), it will not use the smaller distance calculation that is usually done when there IS a jetway, but this is a different issue that doesn't apply to your case, but I had to explain it nonetheless, since you haven't said if that parking had a jetway or not.
So in order to rectify this i should decrease the maximum marshaller distance right?? what is the optimum value??
Don't you think if there *was* an "optimal" value that would work everywhere, we wouldn't had that setting, and would have that optimal value already calculated by GSX ? There's no optimal value, of course!
It depends how the scenery is made and where the objects and, as I've said, GSX doesn't have any clue (except for the parking locations in the AFCAD) how the scenery is made, which is why that setting is user-settable to begin with. You must try different values, until the marshaller is exactly in front of the building wall. And, best if you do it with an airplane with an high cockpit ( like a 747, 777 or A340 ), so you know that would be the maximum amount GSX would ever try to calculate.
