Author Topic: GSX Pro Short-term Roadmap: what to expect in the next updates.  (Read 41263 times)

WebMaximus

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 442
Re: GSX Pro Short-term Roadmap: what to expect in the next updates.
« Reply #75 on: February 06, 2023, 07:07:12 pm »
I was thinking it could be just the way it is now. Meaning those who like it the way it is now don't need to do anything. While those who don't want this question can simply tick the box.

Don't you think that would work?
Richard Åsberg

virtuali

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 50653
    • VIRTUALI Sagl
Re: GSX Pro Short-term Roadmap: what to expect in the next updates.
« Reply #76 on: February 06, 2023, 07:20:12 pm »
While those who don't want this question can simply tick the box.

You are still missing the point. What GSX should then do with the pilots and crew, when the option to skip the question is selected ?

- Before this was even a problem ( it never was in years ), GSX always boarded/deboarded everybody.

- Then users complained they didn't want to wait for pilots/crew to arrive or they are simulating a turnaround, so we added the question.

- Now even the question seem too much so, again, what should be doing, revert to always board/deboard everybody, as it always was in years ?

How many seconds you'll think will pass after such change, that will see users asking for things like:

"I'm annoyed by the question, but I always board pilots, but not the crew"

"I'm annoyed by the question, but I always board the crew, but not the pilots"

"I'm annoyed by the question, and I only want to board passengers"

See how just an "Yes/No" option wouldn't really work, for something that is INHERENTLY a 4-ways choice ?

WebMaximus

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 442
Re: GSX Pro Short-term Roadmap: what to expect in the next updates.
« Reply #77 on: February 06, 2023, 07:41:31 pm »
No, I don't think I'm missing the point but I fear maybe you are.

When the option would be ticked, GSX Pro would do the same thing with the pilots and crew as it already does today when you select 'Nobody'. Meaning it won't simulate them boarding/deboarding but only simulate the passengers boarding/deboarding.

Again, this way those who like to have the possibility to choose if the pilots and/or crew should board/deboard would simply leave the suggested option unticked. All fine. Where those of us who find it a bit annoying having this question on every flight could tick the box and by doing so, only have the passengers boarding/deboarding.
Richard Åsberg

Justinthomas7

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 46
Re: GSX Pro Short-term Roadmap: what to expect in the next updates.
« Reply #78 on: February 07, 2023, 06:40:57 am »
While those who don't want this question can simply tick the box.

You are still missing the point. What GSX should then do with the pilots and crew, when the option to skip the question is selected ?

- Before this was even a problem ( it never was in years ), GSX always boarded/deboarded everybody.

- Then users complained they didn't want to wait for pilots/crew to arrive or they are simulating a turnaround, so we added the question.

- Now even the question seem too much so, again, what should be doing, revert to always board/deboard everybody, as it always was in years ?

How many seconds you'll think will pass after such change, that will see users asking for things like:

"I'm annoyed by the question, but I always board pilots, but not the crew"

"I'm annoyed by the question, but I always board the crew, but not the pilots"

"I'm annoyed by the question, and I only want to board passengers"

See how just an "Yes/No" option wouldn't really work, for something that is INHERENTLY a 4-ways choice ?

Perhaps something simple when first using GSX at an airport (could be done when selecting a parking spot), the user selects a profile
-Single flight (full boarding / deboarding)
-Turnaround (boarding / deboarding of pax & bags only)
-Fuel Stop (boarding / deboarding of pax only)

And have a global option to disable the prompt, so users can just get full boarding every time if they like without questions.

virtuali

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 50653
    • VIRTUALI Sagl
Re: GSX Pro Short-term Roadmap: what to expect in the next updates.
« Reply #79 on: February 08, 2023, 11:40:53 am »
No, I don't think I'm missing the point but I fear maybe you are.

I obviously haven't, but it really seems you are. Or, more precisely, have failed to see what the likely complains about what you are suggesting would be.

Quote
When the option would be ticked, GSX Pro would do the same thing with the pilots and crew as it already does today when you select 'Nobody'. Meaning it won't simulate them boarding/deboarding but only simulate the passengers boarding/deboarding.

And again, who's deciding what would be the correct default action when the option to skip the menu is enabled ? BEFORE we had the questions, for years, GSX always boarded pilots and crew and there was no question.

So, if we disabled the question, logic would dictate we should go back to the previous behavior, which was boarding everybody with no question. But now you are instead suggesting a change which, again, makes my point that a YES/NO option wouldn't be enough, because everybody would want a different "default" behavior, if the question was to be skipped.

WebMaximus

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 442
Re: GSX Pro Short-term Roadmap: what to expect in the next updates.
« Reply #80 on: February 08, 2023, 12:48:42 pm »
I fail to understand why you always have this urge to over-complicate things. Very often to not use the word always, what seems most important to you is to be right and have the last word. Regardless whether you're right or not.

I made a very simple suggestion which I think many of us would appreciate. With the risk of repeating myself, with the suggested box unticked (which would be the default), people would be able to choose exactly what the like. Just like it already is. However, for those of us who would like to skip the crew and pilots boarding part for turnaround flights or simply to save some time, we could tick this box. Meaning the passengers would board and deboard with no further questions asked. Simple as that.

Now give me that famous last word of yours Umberto, telling me how I'm wrong and you're right so we can end this debate and spend out valuable time on something more fruitful  ;)
« Last Edit: February 08, 2023, 12:50:20 pm by WebMaximus »
Richard Åsberg

virtuali

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 50653
    • VIRTUALI Sagl
Re: GSX Pro Short-term Roadmap: what to expect in the next updates.
« Reply #81 on: February 08, 2023, 01:07:40 pm »
Now give me that famous last word of yours Umberto, telling me how I'm wrong and you're right so we can end this debate and spend out valuable time on something more fruitful

It would have been enough to re-read my post more carefully: it included all you need to read to understand it, so I'll copy it again: that's how users will say if we tried to do a YES/NO option like you suggested:

Quote
"I'm annoyed by the question, but I always board pilots, but not the crew"

"I'm annoyed by the question, but I always board the crew, but not the pilots"

"I'm annoyed by the question, and I only want to board passengers"

See how just an "Yes/No" option wouldn't really work, for something that is INHERENTLY a 4-ways choice ?

But that's besides the point. The point is: where, exactly, I said it would be a "problem" making a drop-down choice with 4 choices ? Have I said this would cause issues, or made up some kind of excuse about NOT doing it ? Where, exactly, have you read that from any of my replies ?

Yes, we can add the option, and yes, it WILL be a 4 choices, because IT IS the best choice, way better than just an YES/NO option like you suggested, without even realizing your suggestion that GSX should board "Nobody" in case it was deselected, which is exactly the opposite how GSX always worked when there was no question: that in itself should be ample evidence that a 4 way choice is the better option, since we couldn't even agree on what should be the default, when the question is skipped.

WebMaximus

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 442
Re: GSX Pro Short-term Roadmap: what to expect in the next updates.
« Reply #82 on: February 08, 2023, 01:11:31 pm »
There we go and great to hear what is coming 👍

...and edited to add, what would have been enough would have been for you to say from start:

"That's a great suggestion Richard and you know what, I'll make it even better by adding multiple options. To cater for all needs. Thanks for your feedback and for using my product."
« Last Edit: February 08, 2023, 01:16:35 pm by WebMaximus »
Richard Åsberg

NordoNyle

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 3
Re: GSX Pro Short-term Roadmap: what to expect in the next updates.
« Reply #83 on: February 10, 2023, 09:29:00 pm »
Two things I want to ask regarding the future of GSX Pro.

1.) Any plans to incorporate a feature to have the tugs tow your aircraft to your parking stand? I feel this is something that would be appreciated by many and can be possible already with the current pushback system.

2.) Any plans to make configurations to have GSX be more "business jet/GA friendly" for aircraft like the Citation Longitude, CJ4, Cessna 172/152's etc? Some things like out-of-the-box compatibility with aircrafts, (for the GA side of things) the options to only have pushback/towing for the 172/152, and maybe new things like limos/vans rather than a bus to load pax, loading bags via a single ground crew member/no baggage cart, etc would be very nice to see with GSX making it more dynamic and usable for more than just commercial/freighter jets.

virtuali

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 50653
    • VIRTUALI Sagl
Re: GSX Pro Short-term Roadmap: what to expect in the next updates.
« Reply #84 on: February 11, 2023, 11:12:10 am »
1.) Any plans to incorporate a feature to have the tugs tow your aircraft to your parking stand? I feel this is something that would be appreciated by many and can be possible already with the current pushback system.

Of course. That was the 2nd most asked feature on GSX Creators Discord, after Remote Deicing so yes, we are fully aware is a requested feature.

However, this won't come before we'll have the chance to add all the upcoming additions to the SU12 Navdata API update, which will allow us to have a much better reliability whenever jetways and passengers are concerned. Since we expect SU12 Beta to start very soon, that will be the highest priority.

Next, as this Roadmap thread indicated, will be the extra Refueling trucks for airplanes with wings lower than 3.40 meters ( 737 and below ), which will also come before we'll ever look at the pushback Pull option, which is quite complex.


Quote
2.) Any plans to make configurations to have GSX be more "business jet/GA friendly" for aircraft like the Citation Longitude, CJ4, Cessna 172/152's etc? Some things like out-of-the-box compatibility with aircrafts, (for the GA side of things) the options to only have pushback/towing for the 172/152, and maybe new things like limos/vans rather than a bus to load pax, loading bags via a single ground crew member/no baggage cart, etc would be very nice to see with GSX making it more dynamic and usable for more than just commercial/freighter jets.

Yes, but I'm afraid to do it right, it might require a dedicated add-on, considering the huge amount of new characters animations required. In addition to new crew that would perform things like manual pushbacks pushing the wings on smaller GA planes, there's the issue of having to basically redo ALL passenger animations that are currently tailored for airliners.

NordoNyle

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 3
Re: GSX Pro Short-term Roadmap: what to expect in the next updates.
« Reply #85 on: February 11, 2023, 02:15:18 pm »
Awesome, thanks for the update! I'll happily be ready to buy that new addon once it comes out :)

Hoynedawg

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 1
Re: GSX Pro Short-term Roadmap: what to expect in the next updates.
« Reply #86 on: February 21, 2023, 10:09:36 am »
Quote


Ability to specify the Jetway floor height in the GSX Airport profile

The Jetway root floor height is data that doesn't exists in the SDK, it's only included in the GSX jetways and in a small internal database of 3rd party Jetway models. Currently, if a jetway model in a 3rd party scenery is not found in that database, GSX will use a default height of 4.60 meters from ground, which might result in passengers walking either too high or too low, if the actual floor is on a different height.

The update will add a Jetway tab page to the scenery customization dialog, where all different models found in a 3rd party scenery will be listed, so their height can be specified precisely, and saved in the airport profile. Only one number for each different Jetway model used by the scenery is required, not for every gate.

Any news on this? Cheers

virtuali

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 50653
    • VIRTUALI Sagl
Re: GSX Pro Short-term Roadmap: what to expect in the next updates.
« Reply #87 on: February 21, 2023, 11:08:53 am »
Any news on this? Cheers

This feature has been there for a while, and there are many custom profiles that already use it.

AUA9085

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 118
    • My Youtube Profile :)
Re: GSX Pro Short-term Roadmap: what to expect in the next updates.
« Reply #88 on: February 21, 2023, 05:21:51 pm »
How is the Plan of the possibility to manually add stands/ gate Like the deice stands but as normal gate:)

vahtmestar

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 1
Re: GSX Pro Short-term Roadmap: what to expect in the next updates.
« Reply #89 on: February 21, 2023, 07:59:05 pm »
One thing I would love to see is possibility to use stairs in stands, that have jetways. Is that planned feature?