NEW AFCAD FOR KLAS

[masped]

Check the file above, should be good now.

Although the bunching up has returned. I'm seriously wondering if maybe Jim Vile's approach file is causing the issue. It also affects the runways used with winds calm...

Thanks, that one seems to do the trick. Although according to AFX some of the hold shorts are too far from the runways...

[global express]

If you're still having problems with the GA even though you have enough free spaces, it'll be because of parking priority. Makes sure all the GA have the correct codes "GA3J" "GA2J" "BBJ0" etc.... and ensure they are at the top of the parking list. It wont cause problems with airlines parking at GA spots as all the GA spots are parking ramps, not gates.

[Mike...]

Although according to AFX some of the hold shorts are too far from the runways...

That's nothing to worry about. Only the hold short node where AI enters the runway needs to be close enough to the runway. "Exit hold short nodes" can be too far without causing problems.

[Mike...]

I think I've finally figured out the bunching up issue and it does indeed have to do with link width. There are two sides to a hold short node. One solid side and one side with teeth. The teeth should always point to the runway. If the width of the link on the solid side, where AI queue, is set to 1ft, it may trigger the bunching up problem. I say may, because it doesn't appear to affect everyone, my only guess on that, is that the kind of AI aircraft and its FDE (aircraft.cfg + air file) matter. To suppress the hold short marker it suffices to set the width of the link last drawn to or from the hold short node to 1ft. It is not necessary to set the width of the links on both sides to 1ft.

You can simply redraw the link on the runway side to make sure it is last drawn. With widths on both sides set to 100ft, verify the teeth are pointing to the runway. Then set the link on the teeth side to 1ft (leave the other set to 100ft) and the marker should disappear. The marker direction setting of the hold short node does not seem to be relevant, reversed or not, the last drawn link is in control.

Knowing this you can have a normal width on the queue side and still suppress the marker by reducing the width on the runway side.

Interesting, no?

Edit: attached is my Afcad with the above taken into account.

[harpsi]

Harpsi, your latest file is pretty good. A slight problem in that with the radiuses that global express suggested you can't have any overlap in parking spots otherwise the wings overlap - I needed to reduced the size of Parking 6 - Parking 10. Also the Janet parking spots should be on the west side of the airport, which you have numbered Parking 1-5. There's plenty of room to turn these into larger radius spots. The good news is that I no longer have any GA jets parking at the gates, the bad news is that it's now apparent that there's not enough airline parking! Some overflow parking would be good, as seen in Google Earth.

Well, I read in one post that they should be on the west side. Never mind. It can be changed. There are more than 100 parking positions for GA trrafic. The problem is: I can not figure it out for every user´s traffic... I changed a lot of parking radius so that you can a lot of them with 15, 16 or 18. It should be enough. I will post a new file with these minor changes but after that, unless big changes are needed, I will not post much more, simply because you say that you need 100 parking positions with radius 16 and then, 10 minutes after, there will be another user which needs 120 parking positions with radius 18 and then I have to rework everything again.

Another thing is: I work with Lee Swordy´s tool 2.21 and not with AFX from Flight1. I know that there are some conflicts between them, so be aware of that as well.

Last question: the 1 feet width between hold shord nodes doesn´t affect my scenery or my AI aircraft behaviour at all, so I changed all to 100 feet. With 1 feet width I had no AI traffic.

harpsi

[Mike...]

What would those conflicts be?

[virtuali]

Last question: the 1 feet width between hold shord nodes doesn´t affect my scenery or my AI aircraft behaviour at all, so I changed all to 100 feet. With 1 feet width I had no AI traffic.

Can you clarify this ? If the 1 ft didn't affect the AI behaviour, why you changed it to 100 ? And, if you don't have AI traffic with 1 ft, that means it DOES affect your AI, doesn't ?

[harpsi]

Last question: the 1 feet width between hold shord nodes doesn´t affect my scenery or my AI aircraft behaviour at all, so I changed all to 100 feet. With 1 feet width I had no AI traffic.

Can you clarify this ? If the 1 ft didn't affect the AI behaviour, why you changed it to 100 ? And, if you don't have AI traffic with 1 ft, that means it DOES affect your AI, doesn't ?

Sorry. I didn´t explain it very good... Before 100 feet width no AI traffic in the airport. After 100 feet width Ai traffic returned...

I give you another example: ESSA from aerosoft. The afcad file was made with AFX and it is stated in the forum that you can not modify the file with afcad tool from Lee Swordy. If you do it, you will have traffic problems, and in fact I tried this before reading the post and problems came. It means you can not modify a file made by AFX using the Lee Swordy´s tool...

harpsi

[virtuali]

Sorry. I didn´t explain it very good... Before 100 feet width no AI traffic in the airport. After 100 feet width Ai traffic returned...

Have you read my post and, have you tried the AFCAD I've posted there ? Because, I have full AI traffic regardless of that taxi width.

 

I give you another example: ESSA from aerosoft. The afcad file was made with AFX and it is stated in the forum that you can not modify the file with afcad tool from Lee Swordy. If you do it, you will have traffic problems, and in fact I tried this before reading the post and problems came. It means you can not modify a file made by AFX using the Lee Swordy´s tool...

I don't know what AFX has something to do here: we compile BGL with BGLCOMP. The AFCAD I've posted in the forum is your AFCAD, edited with AFCAD 2.21

[harpsi]

Have you read my post and, have you tried the AFCAD I've posted there ? Because, I have full AI traffic regardless of that taxi width.

Now, it gets confused... Let me see if I understood: You are trying to say that you still have AI traffic when you use 1 width taxi lines? Is this so? Sorry, I lost something then... Then where is that file you posted with 1 feet width and all traffic? Can I try that one as well?

There is one thing that I didn´t understand: what is the influence of having 1 or 100 feet width in the scenery? Does it matter? I ask this because I don´t have any changes in the scenery at all...

harpsi

[virtuali]

Now, it gets confused... Let me see if I understood: You are trying to say that you still have AI traffic when you use 1 width taxi lines? Is this so? Sorry, I lost something then... Then where is that file you posted with 1 feet width and all traffic? Can I try that one as well?

Yes, of course, you might have missed the messages posted here:

http://www.fsdreamteam.com/forum/index.php?topic=1770.msg14114#msg14114

That screenshot was taken using one of your AFCAD (the current version at the moment of that post), just changed with links in proximity of hold short zones to 1 ft.

We released the scenery with an AFCAD made like this, I guess that if that affected the AI traffic, we would have had thousands of reports of users losing AI, by now...

There is one thing that I didn´t understand: what is the influence of having 1 or 100 feet width in the scenery? Does it matter? I ask this because I don´t have any changes in the scenery at all...

You should see a difference, that's another strange thing you are having. When the width at an hold zone is set to a normal value, the default hold short marker will be shown. And, this would conflict with the custom hold short zone marker we have in the scenery, because you would see both. By setting the width at the link close to the hold short node to 1 ft, the default marker will not be drawn anymore.

Now, there's still something that is not 100% clear, is if setting the width on *both* sides of the hold short marker to 1 ft makes any difference on AI behaviour. It doesn't on my machine, using the AFCAD I've posted on that thread. However, Mike says he sees AI bunching up at hold short zones, if the width is set to 1 ft to both sides of the marker. But, perhaps, this happens with his AFCAD only, because he removed the Aprons, that sets the surface type and act as a flatten as well, and are needed because we don't have real "taxiway" links to set the surface type, only "apron links", so this *might* have an effect on the AI behviour at the hold short zones.

I don't see such issues with my AFCAD but, if setting the width to 1 ft only to one side of the marker it's enough to get rid of the default hold short marker, so be it...

[harpsi]

Hi

Ok. Now I understood:

1. I don´t see any default hold short markers with width set at 100. This is maybe what you find strange but in fact, it happens to me.
2. With the width set to 1 feet I don´t have traffic landing and takeing off from KLAS.

We released the scenery with an AFCAD made like this, I guess that if that affected the AI traffic, we would have had thousands of reports of users losing AI, by now...

Strange or not that´s what happened here before.

harpsi

[Mike...]

But, perhaps, this happens with his AFCAD only, because he removed the Aprons

See a couple posts back, I had reincorporated the aprons back into my Afcad. Still I was able to reproduce the bunching up consistently. In any case, my Afcad now conforms to your design choices completely, no bunching up, supressed markers, so I'm happy.

I give you another example: ESSA from aerosoft. The afcad file was made with AFX and it is stated in the forum that you can not modify the file with afcad tool from Lee Swordy. If you do it, you will have traffic problems, and in fact I tried this before reading the post and problems came. It means you can not modify a file made by AFX using the Lee Swordy´s tool...

It's not so much the true Afcad it self, the airport data, but what other elements editors support. AFX supports exclusion rectangles, which Afcad may not and remove. But on the other hand, AFX may strip out elements (it warns you about that though) it does not like. In case of ESSA, I think there was also approach data included in the Afcad and that should never be done, no matter what the Afcad editor supports. Approach data goes in a separate file and is placed in a different folder. Either way, it is best to use one editor for a certain Afcad, whichever editor that may be.

[Dillon]

Harpsi I'd like to add one more tid bit of info here.  Some airliners aren't parking right up to the gate, their back farther in their parking spots than they should be.  Moved up a little closer to the parking stand at the terminals would look allot better for aircraft parked at the various gates.  Please note not all gates have the problem of aircraft sitting farther back from their parking stands than they should be...   

[Sekhet]

Harpsi,

I find your last KLAS AFCAD seems to be working very well for me.  I did notice that you have not placed the parking for EG&G’s (a.k.a. Janet) terminal.  I made some small changes to your AFCAD to implement dedicated parking for “Janet” AI at “Parking 1 through 10”.  Since most available “Janet” AI packages use JAN as their parking code I chose to use that as well.  I have been able to change the parking spaces so that parked 737 won’t cross wings in the scenery.  Please note that the spaces do overlap in the AFCAD but as I said before not in the sim.

Changes that were made:

Parking 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, and 10 were changed to parking type “Gate Small” with a radius of 101.7 ft. and given the parking code of JAN for the “Janet” 737s

Parking 7 and 9 were changed to parking type “Ramp GA Small” with a radius of 32.8 ft. and given the parking code of JAN to preclude any other AI from parking in these two spots.

I have attached the AFCAD in a zip.