Author Topic: Wingwalker on the wrong side  (Read 7852 times)

Beat578

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 274
Re: Wingwalker on the wrong side
« Reply #15 on: February 26, 2019, 03:29:58 pm »
I rest my case. nobody is forced to use the software if he doesn't like it.
And i think you'll find more companys that never do updates at all than ones that do them constantly. And December 7th is not that long ago, what makes you think you are legitimated to more updates? It has never been writen anywhere.
Really, mabe it would be best to close this topic, as it would lead nowhere.
Beat578

torsten48

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 9
Re: Wingwalker on the wrong side
« Reply #16 on: February 26, 2019, 08:41:54 pm »
I never say i dont like the Software.
I dont like how the Requests and issues are handled, that is a big difference.

blaunarwal

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 116
  • Computerpilot since FS4 (1990)
Re: Wingwalker on the wrong side
« Reply #17 on: February 27, 2019, 09:12:16 am »
Just have a look at the initial setup for any aircraft on any airport. The push back truck stands inside the baggage train. If I say, this wasn't before, you say it never changed.

If I ask to place the initial positions better, you say, I could change it myself on every of the 50000 airports. It's such an obvious bug, if vehicles already sit on each other initially. Do the beta testers not see this?

Another example. I asked for a pushback truck disable check box. The question was why. Because there are a lot of stands, that don't need pushback and it is more realistic to not have it there. No further answer to this. Just got ignored.
« Last Edit: February 27, 2019, 10:43:27 am by virtuali »

virtuali

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 46949
    • VIRTUALI Sagl
Re: Wingwalker on the wrong side
« Reply #18 on: February 27, 2019, 10:27:39 am »
My compliments, you managed to be wrong on each single of your arguments. Let's see:

Quote
1. GPU Request by Markoz  : http://www.fsdreamteam.com/forum/index.php/topic,7114.msg60080.html#msg60080

A message from 2012!! We later confirmed the GPU WILL come!

Quote
2. Roller Board luggage by rcoultas62 : http://www.fsdreamteam.com/forum/index.php/topic,19584.0.html

As explained, so many times already, it's very possible some message might be missing. Sometimes it's just the fact I log from different computers, or even my phone (BECAUSE I ALWAYS CHECK THE FORUM, EVEN WHEN I'M NOT SUPPOSED TO, like on Vacations, Weekends, etc.), which might result in missing a few message, since the local cookie on each system might not match.

Quote
3. requests without any answer: http://www.fsdreamteam.com/forum/index.php/topic,19151.0.html

Neither the question, nor the anwer, was required here, since GSX ALREADY HAS that feature, the Jetway GPU unit (which obviously makes the external GPU less required), that charges the Battery on default airplanes, and 3rd party airplanes with a simulator of External power already know how to interface with it.

Quote
4. Here he dont unerstand, that this message is absolutely nonsense, why is GSX saying that ??? : http://www.fsdreamteam.com/forum/index.php/topic,17642.0.html

I'm not sure what you are trying to say here but, I asked clarifications about what those acronyms which referred to 3rd party products really meant, and asked more details about the problem, but the user never came back so, it WAS an "unanswered" post, but NOT by me!

Quote
5. http://www.fsdreamteam.com/forum/index.php/topic,16335.0.html


And what, exactly, are you trying to say here ? Rob asked for what he acknowledge as a non realistic procedure, just to make life easier for video editors to work more quickly. Do you find this to be a GSX "bug" or something that should have an higher priority ?


Quote
6. i read anywhere in the Forum about the Luggage dollies, which are filled when you start DEBOARDING...

Confirmed so many times already the Baggage Loader, which is the first service we made for GSX, is quote old and WILL be remade. But again, that's just a cosmetic issue. Your ability to care for the minor things seems to be unequalled.

Quote
f you start a flight at any Position ( not a Turnarround ), as we all do most of the times i think,  they are going away first and come back to load the luggage in the airplane. Absolutely nonsense

I already explained SO MANY TIMES TO YOU, which this is CORRECT and it's NOT "nonsense". Please stop calling that, just because you don't understand the explanation I gave you so many times.

Quote
http://www.fsdreamteam.com/forum/index.php/topic,18453.0.html

Not sure what's more to add, other to repeat that water/lavatory vehicles will come. Why you think there's already an option to configure their points in the airplane editor ?

Quote
and so on and so on ..... the list has no end

Sorry, but making a list of wrong points, doesn't make it any useful for anybody.

virtuali

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 46949
    • VIRTUALI Sagl
Re: Wingwalker on the wrong side
« Reply #19 on: February 27, 2019, 10:43:44 am »
Quote
Just have a look at the initial setup for any aircraft on any airport. The push back truck stands inside the baggage train. If I say, this wasn't before, you say it never changed.

It surely doesn't start there.

The default placement, if an airport hasn't been customized by the user, is to have the Pushback on the LEFT side of the airplane (looking from behind), angled 90 degree with the parking, and the Baggage Trains on the RIGHT side of the plane so no, they don't clash with each other.

Quote
If I say, this wasn't before, you say it never changed.

It hasn't. We changed the position of the Baggage *loaders*, but even more on the right (so it's really impossible they would clash with the Pushback), but the position of the Baggage Trains hasn't changed.

Quote
If I ask to place the initial positions better, you say, I could change it myself on every of the 50000 airports. It's such an obvious bug, if vehicles already sit on each other initially. Do the beta testers not see this?

They haven't, since it clearly doesn't happen. Check if you are using an airport customization. If the user (or whoever made it) customized the position in a certain way, GSX will use it as it is, regardless how silly it might be.

Quote
Another example. I asked for a pushback truck disable check box. The question was why. Because there are a lot of stands, that don't need pushback and it is more realistic to not have it there. No further answer to this. Just got ignored.

You can use the scenery customization to place the truck in a different place, possibly even in another parking, and just NOT call the Pushback.

Before, GSX used to read the AFCAD and, if the scenery was set to "None", it didn't allow Pushback there, for the precise reason that some parking don't allow pushback. But many 3rd party developers are lazy, and don't set the Pushback preference, even when Pushback IS needed so, how GSX could known the difference ?

This is of course clearly explained on the manual, that's why there's an option to OVERRIDE the Pushback preference. This is how GSX always was, but a certain point USERS asked to always have a Straight pushback OPTION, even when the parking was flagged as "None" Pushback, so we added that option which, of course, means that by default, we should create the Pushback truck in all cases.
« Last Edit: February 27, 2019, 10:45:18 am by virtuali »

DreamSkywards

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 133
Re: Wingwalker on the wrong side
« Reply #20 on: February 27, 2019, 11:15:40 am »
Man, I can only commend Umberto for being THIS patient with people. Really have the patience of a saint.

torsten48

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 9
Re: Wingwalker on the wrong side
« Reply #21 on: February 27, 2019, 01:18:52 pm »
Just have a look at the initial setup for any aircraft on any airport. The push back truck stands inside the baggage train. If I say, this wasn't before, you say it never changed.

If I ask to place the initial positions better, you say, I could change it myself on every of the 50000 airports. It's such an obvious bug, if vehicles already sit on each other initially. Do the beta testers not see this?

Another example. I asked for a pushback truck disable check box. The question was why. Because there are a lot of stands, that don't need pushback and it is more realistic to not have it there. No further answer to this. Just got ignored.


you speak exactly my words ... and the Answers was exactly what i expect

virtuali

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 46949
    • VIRTUALI Sagl
Re: Wingwalker on the wrong side
« Reply #22 on: February 27, 2019, 01:32:43 pm »
you speak exactly my words ... and the Answers was exactly what i expect

Except what he reported doesn't happen, and if with "the Answers was exactly what i expect" you meant I always reply with the correct answers to every problem reported (which is not even a problem, as it usually is), then yes, it was exactly as you expected.

blaunarwal

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 116
  • Computerpilot since FS4 (1990)
Re: Wingwalker on the wrong side
« Reply #23 on: February 28, 2019, 12:47:44 pm »
Correct. No more words needed, waste of time.
« Last Edit: March 01, 2019, 02:21:57 pm by virtuali »

virtuali

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 46949
    • VIRTUALI Sagl
Re: Wingwalker on the wrong side
« Reply #24 on: March 01, 2019, 02:22:05 pm »
Quote
Correct. No more words needed, waste of time.

You posted a list of problems that supposedly happen in GSX.

I replied by saying they don't, if you don't agree, you should reply when exactly they happen to you, so we can check if it's really a problem of GSX, or it was (as I already explained), some issue with an airport customization done badly, which is the likely explanation for what you reported, the baggage loaders supposedly clashing with the pushback which, by default, is not possible, since they are placed on opposite sides of the parking.

That's called checking facts using a scientific method, and I'm sure that, if you filed a proper report of the case (instead of just saying GSX has a bug), we would understand why it's happening to you, and as usual, if it *really* was a GSX "bug", it would be fixed.

Instead, you continue arguing and yes, that's a "waste of time", because by not providing any data or evidence to replicate a problem, it's not even possible to BEGIN to understand what's happening, and if it is a bug indeed. AFTER (not before), we'll establish it's really a bug, it will be fixed. Assuming it is.