that will have all tested pushbacks with this new method imposed by FSDT.
We haven't imposed anything new.
The problem happened you made made your custom pushbacks based on the assumption you could set any random point along the taxiway, when in fact, the custom pushback ALWAYS worked by using EXISTING AFCAD nodes, to be used as attractors, and GSX is smart enough to not push longer than necessary, and will stop as soon the pushback truck and the airplane are aligned to the taxiway, without going all the way to the selected node.
This was always explained in the GSX Manual, Page 33:
Not so true. As you say, well actually everybody says, those instructions are not good. And not even Shakespeare would be able to resume this process in a have page size instructions. Those instructions are open so much to interpretations that if I after doing 97% of the shared files, can get confused, after a few hundred hours of working your configurations,i would not dare to imagine the rest. To be able to improve, one has to be able to be autocritic. They are poor, short and confusing. If everybody says it is night time, then it must be, dont you think?
We’ll use the Lat/Lon coordinates of two existing AFCAD nodes, that will work as “attractors” for the two Pushback options.
...
Lat/Lon Coordinates Snap
It’s not necessary to be 100% precise with Lat/Lon coordinates. GSX will snap to the closest node in the AFCAD. However, is still suggested to be precise and use Copy & Paste Lat/Lon coordinates of the node from your AFCAD editor of choice
The way you did your custom pushback nodes (ignoring the advice of using coordinates of existing AFCAD node), caused the "Snap" algorithm to still take the closest node, but this could be any node, not necessarily one that made any sense, and this would cause errors.
So, with the last update, we simply enforced what was always suggested to do in the manual: to be precise and trying to match the original lat/long coordinates of a node if possible so now, the program will just ignore a custom pushback position which is not within 5 meters of an existing AFCAD node, to prevent crashes.
That is good, but not if it messes up your customers config without leaving NO TRACE of it other than having your customers go through this process:
(and this is twice per stand, in EGLL would be aproximately 400 times)
1. the acutal fact of doing that precise pushback, on that parking spot, on that direction,
2. Open a file explorer, go on to a specific folder, open a text file,
3. Read tons of lines till you find a line saying that pushback had been eliminated...
4. In a scenery such as let say EGLL with 216 stands, this process 216 times x each direction.. 400 times.. if you do it on accelerated mode.. 1.5 minutes (this is being fast). 600 minutes=10 hours, just to fix 1 large scenery.
Are you serious?
Umberto, you cant pretend to have people pitch in and help if we are not working together. You say you dont have time and that you will create that check log. What i am saying is IF YOU KNOW that is going to mess my files, because you knew ahead of the update, dont bring it in an update UNTIL you have the log capability ready. Then, i would have gladly go into all the parking spots reported on the log, and corrected that pushback to a more suitable one, using the ONLY NODE system. Does this sound unreasonable?
Now, you sent me a message about still getting crashes, which I replied to, asking for more data but, this issue is probably related to the ability to do more services at once, it doesn't have anything to do with the pushback.
In addition to that, following the video you posted originally about a problem with EDDK, we found what was what that might have required you to customize the pushback to begin with, which was a parking with two approaches, in opposite directions, which caused what I saw in your video of the pushback doing a 180. We fixed this as well in an update we'll release soon so, it's possible that many pushback that previously required to be customized to prevent this problem, would work straight away with the default Left/Right strategy.
Mmmm not really .. there are many things here. (yes, never said this had to do with pushbacks, at all)
First, the video that I sent you had several things on it.
1st. yes indeed, it crashes only with Quality Wings 787 when demmanding to do the refueling. That just alone. Not with other services. The rest, you can do them ok. But never call the refueling service. It crashes.
2nd. If you are using that same plane, with a perfect AFCAD file of barcelona LEBL, it will tell you that you have 13 suitable parkings for that plane (H). Then you scroll through the menus and all the Heavy dont show up. But if you go to that parking spot, your jetways are there, the gate is recognized if you open the GSX configurator, but if you try to Go to that parking by warping there the plane, you will never be able, because GSX says it does not exist on the CTRL+S+f12 menu.
I have also added many other crashes that happened in many other situations. Takes time, but i have sent them to you.
Most of all you say Now you send me this, now that, as if you are anoid? or maybe I am being susceptible? I think this requires a lot of patience. On both sides. Trust me when I tell you it takes time all this reporting, logs reading, crashes editing, saving sending.. so a good thank you somewhere i believe is good to be heard.
Have a good day.
