FSDreamTeam forum
Developer's Backdoor => GSX Backdoor => Topic started by: virtuali on March 11, 2022, 04:13:44 pm
-
This is the 2nd Preview of GSX for MSFS 2020.
There's still lots of work left to do, the SDK limitations (lack of documentation and lack of features) are still not entirely fixed, but now most of the work left is modeling, texturing and animating, to have everything up to the a level of quality that is worth of the MSFS engine.
-
Looking forward to this. Nice to see the actual pin.
-
Wow! :o
Looking forward to the final version :)
Bye, Max
-
So where can I see the first preview? I can't find it by searching.
-
From a YouTube Comment:
"Some things which are incorrect or could do with a tweak, depending on the limitations of the sim obviously. None of this is meant to be a criticism, just thought it might help you get it a bit more accurate to the real procedure...
First, the bypass pin should always be inserted before doing anything else, there is 3,000lbs of pressure in the steering mechanism, so you want that disabled before you go anywhere near it with a towbar, which is why that pin goes in first. Next, the towbar is connected to the nose gear. Next the tug is driven up to the towbar and then it is connected to the tug, the person doing this then checks the shear pins at the head of the towbar to make sure these are not broken. You did show the wheels on the towbar being raised, but you don't do that with the pump handle, you turn a hydraulic release knob at the side of the pump handle, the pump handle is used to lower the wheels. Since there is a road behind the stand, you'd have a roadman with marshalling wands stood there to stop airport traffic going behind the aeroplane prior to pushing, the roadman is signalled to do that by the headset guy when the push is about to start, with a thumbs up signal. The headset guy then gives the tug driver a 'brakes on' hand signal (which is a clenched fist and he keeps it clenched). He then confirms the walkaround has been done and that all GSE is clear of the aircraft and the doors are secure, then he calls for brake release, the anti-collision lights should go on at or just before this time. The headset guy then asks for brake release and confirms this, then he signals the tug driver to release the brakes and start the push by opening his clenched fist and pointing in the direction of the push.
Many pushbacks specify that the engines cannot be started until the tug and aeroplane are at the designated Tug Release Point for that specific stand, which is usually somewhere on the taxiway adjacent to the centreline of the next stand along from the one you pushed off, but even when this is not the case, it's not a great idea to start the engines when still rolling back off the stand because there is often quite a lot of crap on the stands such as bits that have fallen off suitcases, wire luggage tag fasteners etc, and these can easily get ingested in the engines, so at the earliest, we normally start the engines the moment the main turn maneuvers have been completed and the aeroplane is in line with the taxiway centreline being pulled forward, so that's well clear of the stand. This also means there is less chance of a hot start from the tailwind component which is imparted by movement if cranking the engines when the aeroplane is being pushed backwards. Because this is the case, whenever I do a headset on a push, I say 'push commencing, standby engines 1 and 2', so the crew know to wait for the okay to start up. The headset person should be watching the engine starts closely, because he is the one monitoring for hot starts, fires and such, which is why there is an APU fire release bottle control in the headset connection bay that the headset person can use if necessary.
When the aeroplane's nose wheel is at the TRP, the tug stops and the tug driver signals 'brakes on' to the headset person, the headset person then asks the crew to set the parking brake, confirms this, then signals this has been done to the tug driver by also doing a brakes on hand signal. The headset guy then gets a chock and puts it in front of the nosewheel as a safety precaution against a brake failure during engine start. He then pumps the wheels down on the towbar, then he goes to the tug and disconnects the towbar at the tug. The tug then backs off and turns 90 degrees to the side more or less in line with the engine so the flight deck crew can see it. When the tug is clear, the headset guy then walks to the nose gear and disconnects the towbar from the nose gear and wheels it toward the tug. The tug driver will get out of the tug and connect this to the back of the tug, meanwhile the headset guy is confirming the engine starts are good, at which point if this is the case, he will then disconnect the headset, close the phono socket access door, then he'll remove the bypass pin, and last of all, he will remove the chock from the nose gear and give it to the tug driver who puts it on the back of the tug. The tug then drives off the taxiway with the headset guy walking alongside it, and when he gets to the edge of the taxiway, he signals the crew are good to go by holding up the bypass pin remove before flight tag so they can see it and they acknowledge this with a wave. The tug then drives across the rear of stand road back onto the stand as a protective measure for the headset person, since all traffic gives way to a tug coming off a taxiway.
Some of this might not be possible to animate or have as a function of the procedure, but what I wrote above is the 'proper' way it should be done. Keep up the good work,"
-
Some of these things suggested in that post are in fact limited by what can be done with the existing animation system.
Take the "headset guy" as an example: in P3D4/5 in *theory* we could have a rope/cable simulation, which an improvement of the system that came with FSX Acceleration helicopters. It's *possible*, but nobody really knows right now, that when helicopters will eventually came to MSFS and, assuming they will have some kind of attachment system with a cable/rope simulation and, assuming it will be open to 3rd parties, possibly through Simconnect ( this is an entire set of assumptions that might not all go well ), we might repurpose the system to make a *proper* headset guy. That was just the first example that came to my mind.
Also, we still have a very long work ahead in remodeling all objects/animations/textures to the MSFS level of quality so, at least at first, we are trying to keep the existing code, if only to ease testing and bug finding. Right now, the towbar is part of the pushback truck itself so, things like connecting the towbar separately are still not possible with the current system, but we *are* making things more realistic along the way. The baggage cart vehicles, for example, used to be made of one piece in FS/XP3D, while the MSFS version of the model has a proper joint between the cart itself and the front wheel dollies, which in addition to be more realistic to look at, it improves handling in tight spots.
But some procedural things discussed in that post can surely be improved.
-
So where can I see the first preview? I can't find it by searching.
Didn't search very much then - its in the next post down ::)
-
Can't wait, Umberto. Looking Excellent at usual. Will the PAX loading be included in the MSFS version? 8)
-
This looks excelent! I would like to come with some feedback too.
As someone mentioned above, the procedures for push is:
Bypass pin -> Connect Pushback -> Push -> Stop Push -> Remove Pushback -> Remove Bypass pin. I think you've got the idea already though.
Regarding an issue that has been annoying me in P3D is the "standby for engine start" when in freezing temperatures. I would love for an option to disable this is MSFS as this is not really
something every airport follows. At ENGM, where I work, there are no such restriction and planes can start engines even if it's -30degrees C and taxiways aren't covered in ice (which they rarely are as larger airports gets cleared from snow and ice). I know it's pretty common in the US and Canada to come with such commands, but from my experience I've never seen it done in Norway.
I see the guy above commented something similar, so an option to enable or disable this message would be nice. Perhaps include it as an tickable box to in airport-specific options
It would also be nice to have an option to load baggage without needing a belt loader. For example, in the front bulk on a 737. We usually just take bags straight from the trolley and into the bulk, as it's pretty close to the ground and a belt-loader isn't necessary. The same goes for Dash 8s (100-200-300) ATRs etc. Just something that would be nice to see! Perhaps have a 3D Person jumping into the bulk as well to load the bags. A timer to make the baggage load a bit slower would be nice too, as I feel like the actual loading of bags is quite a bit faster in GSX than IRL.
It would also be nice if one could specify where exactly the ground equipment would drive. In P3D, the baggage veichles, fuel truck etc. drives in the midle of the taxiways. It would be nice if someone could make some sort of profile where you can assign routes for these veichles so they use the internal/designated ground equipment roads. Just another layer to improve immersion.
This is more of a question, but will GSX support multiple jetways? Or is that a limitation to MSFS? Would be nice to have 2 jetways connect if flying a heavy for example, which currently isn't possible due to lack of a SODE-ish add-on in MSFS.
For the pushback, will it be possible to further expand the quickedit feature to allow pulling as well. At some gates, you push the plane to a certain point, and then might have to pull it as well. Would be nice if you could make several segments when doing a quick-edit push!
I totally understand if there are some limitations in the MSFS SDK for any or all of these.
Would love to hear your thoughts none-the-less. Hope GSX is closer than we think ;D
-
It would also be nice if one could specify where exactly the ground equipment would drive. In P3D, the baggage veichles, fuel truck etc. drives in the midle of the taxiways. It would be nice if someone could make some sort of profile where you can assign routes for these veichles so they use the internal/designated ground equipment roads. Just another layer to improve immersion.
This actually comes down to how the AFCAD for the airport was built. If the AFCAD had vehicle paths built in, the trucks would use them. The problem is that most don't, so the trucks have no way to know they're there.
-
As someone mentioned above, the procedures for push is:
Bypass pin -> Connect Pushback -> Push -> Stop Push -> Remove Pushback -> Remove Bypass pin. I think you've got the idea already though.
We noted. As already explained, the first step will be redoing all existing models/animations/textures for MSFS, which is already a huge work, so we'll keep the existing code at first and, once the program is complete, we might look into improving the procedural aspects.
I know it's pretty common in the US and Canada to come with such commands, but from my experience I've never seen it done in Norway.
Exactly, it's not as if we made an unrealistic procedure. It's the most common one in what is the biggest aviation market by far so, we can say it's quite common. But yes, an option to turn it off can be added.
It would also be nice to have an option to load baggage without needing a belt loader. For example, in the front bulk on a 737. We usually just take bags straight from the trolley and into the bulk, as it's pretty close to the ground and a belt-loader isn't necessary.
That's not as easy as it seems, because the baggage loader is one of most complex animations we have, that require a precise sync between several objects, the loader, the trolley and the guy. We'll look into it after release.
This is more of a question, but will GSX support multiple jetways? Or is that a limitation to MSFS? Would be nice to have 2 jetways connect if flying a heavy for example, which currently isn't possible due to lack of a SODE-ish add-on in MSFS.
That will require SODE, since the MSFS system doesn't support multiple jetways on an airport. The jetways you see in the video ARE replaced by GSX ( seems quite obvious, seeing how much better they look compared to the default ones ), but are still using the standard system.
Of course, when SODE for MSFS will eventually came out, we'll be the first supporting it.
It would also be nice if one could specify where exactly the ground equipment would drive. In P3D, the baggage veichles, fuel truck etc. drives in the midle of the taxiways. It would be nice if someone could make some sort of profile where you can assign routes for these veichles so they use the internal/designated ground equipment roads. Just another layer to improve immersion.
This has been discussed so many times and no, there's nothing we can or should do from GSX. What you see it's NOT "GSX vehicles driving on taxiways", it's the 3rd party airport you are using that has been badly made without any regard to ground vehicles.
OF COURSE GSX vehicles DO drive on proper vehicle paths. In fact, there's a proper weighted pathfinding that, even if the shortest route might be along a taxiway, the vehicle roads will get a better score so, the vehicles WILL use the vehicle paths, by preference.
But of course, in order for GSX to use them, they must be there in the first place! While default airport ( funnily enough ) are usually decently made, with vehicle parking spots and vehicle paths, too many 3rd party airports seems to be made as if ground vehicle didn't exist. They only seem to care about AI flow (when they do) or, at best, AI parking assignment (when they do) and there are lots of 3rd party AFCAD with either too few parking vehicles (or none at all) or two few vehicle path (or none at all) and this will obviously affect GSX and mislead users "GSX vehicles drive on taxiways". Of course they do, if there's no other path!
If GSX ignored taxiways altogether, and you were using it on one of those sloppily made airports with no vehicle paths, the result will be that, instead of driving on taxiways, they will drive straight across aprons and even grass towards you. So, clearly, in order to stay at least on some kind of path, GSX will use taxiways and even runways if all else fails.
With a recent release, we added the ability for users to create a CUSTOM AFCAD USED ONLY BY GSX, which can be placed in the %APPDATA%\Virtuali\GSX folder, the same where you normally have the GSX .INI profiles. The simulator won't use it, because it's not setup to look for files there, but GSX will use it instead of the standard AFCAD that comes with the scenery. This way, using ADE, you can fix a faulty 3rd party AFCAD, for example adding vehicle parking spots where they are supposed to be ( so vehicles won't take too far to arrive ), and adding proper vehicle paths that can reach most terminals easily without having to use taxiways.
This way, GSX vehicles will drive more realistically and user might finally realize it was the badly made AFCAD all the time.
In the real world, it would be like asking the poor ground crew to "drive over the proper vehicle roads", when the airport has none. Just to be more clear: even if you SEE them textured on ground, it doesn't automatically mean they are also defined in the AFCAD and/or are defined correctly, and the AFCAD is the only thing GSX can use.
For the pushback, will it be possible to further expand the quickedit feature to allow pulling as well. At some gates, you push the plane to a certain point, and then might have to pull it as well. Would be nice if you could make several segments when doing a quick-edit push!
This has been asked so many times and yes, of course it's planned, but it goes to the first reply: we need to release it first using the existing code, because the remodeling process is already very long.
I totally understand if there are some limitations in the MSFS SDK for any or all of these.
The SDK limitations are not so much in the procedural or animation side of things, considering in GSX all procedures are entirely custom ( we don't call into the Pushback default system, like all the existing products out there ) so we don't have many issues stopping us on this side.
What made us losing far too much time, is in the UI side. Asobo doesn't seem to have any plans to restore some functionality in Simconnect which has been there since FSX, like programmable custom menus and short screen messages. There is a new system based on a combination of HTML/JS, which not only is completely undocumented but, it has already changed quite a bit with the various Sim updates, breaking so many 3rd party airplanes and tools in the meantime which risked by using an undocumented system.
We managed to replace most of the lost functionality, but there are still some usability issues that needs to be solved, and will require an update of the sim/SDK, but the tricky part is convincing MS/Asobo to do it, we can only hope that, the more complex add-ons come out, the more developers will pressure them to improve the SDK, which right now is not even on par with FSX ( let alone P3D, which has an SDK that is far more powerful and give us almost complete control over the sim ) and, as limited as it is, it stays over a system that might be extremely powerful, if only the various subsystems were more integrated and, more importantly, their integration could be accessible programmatically and, more importantly, properly documented, which is the single most lacking feature in the SDK.
-
Thanks for the reply! I'm as you can tell not super active on the forums (or on forums in general) so apologies for asking question that has been asked several times before.
And thanks for the insight and taking notes on some of my points! Excited to see GSX finally release in the sim, hopefully 2022 will be the year!
-
Thanks for the update Umberto, I'm a long time customer (and forum reader) here and I always appreciate the time you take to answer to all the questions.
-
Looks great, can't wait. I've been wondering this for a while because it's something that annoys me with MSFS right now, but will GSX come with a de-ice feature for MSFS? With there being icing effects on the ground in cold weather, requesting a de-ice truck that can actually remove MSFS icing effect would be so awesome.
-
With there being icing effects on the ground in cold weather, requesting a de-ice truck that can actually remove MSFS icing effect would be so awesome.
MSFS doesn't allow to control icing on the airplane, there are variables that can tell us the amount of icing, but they can only be read, not set. The only thing we can do with deicing is to automatically turn on the deicing systems on the plane, which is similar to what we did on FSX/P3D.
We can only hope that, airplane developers might pressure Microsoft/Asobo to let them control the MSFS icing simulation so, once something becomes controllable/writable, we can access it from GSX as well.
-
That will require SODE, since the MSFS system doesn't support multiple jetways on an airport. The jetways you see in the video ARE replaced by GSX ( seems quite obvious, seeing how much better they look compared to the default ones ), but are still using the standard system.
Of course, when SODE for MSFS will eventually came out, we'll be the first supporting it.
MSFS not supporting SODE is so disappointing, it has regressed quiet a lot in integration capabilities compared to the sims it is supposed to succeed.
-
MSFS not supporting SODE is so disappointing, it has regressed quiet a lot in integration capabilities compared to the sims it is supposed to succeed.
I'm not in the position right now to say more but, I'm fairly confident that SODE for MSFS will eventually arrive.
-
It's looking incredible so far. Can't wait to have GSX in MSFS!
-
Hi Umberto,
Now that we've seen the release of a number of more complex airliners how about a new GSX preview! :)
Or even better, an update on how GSX progress is going - Its one thing that's really missing from MSFS!
Cheers
-
Well, I would love to know, if the closer cooperation with new aircrafts like PMDG 737 or Fenix A320 will be a thing? If GSX will be called from MCDU / FMC like in Aerosoft A320 in P3D? :)
-
Well, I would love to know, if the closer cooperation with new aircrafts like PMDG 737 or Fenix A320 will be a thing? If GSX will be called from MCDU / FMC like in Aerosoft A320 in P3D? :)
That depends on those developers, of course, and if their users would ask for such features, which will only add extra value to their product, like Simbrief or Navigraph integration. It's surely not depending on us, since GSX already expose lots of variables developers can use to integrate, and the MSFS version has even more of them.
In addition to that, the way the GSX menu works in MSFS, it's even easier to integrate it from an external product, because we had to replace a Simconnect call that is still missing from FSX ( menu creation ) and Asobo confirmed they have no plans to add it back, so we had to emulate that with a combination of HTML/JS/WASM, which was a bit annoying, but the side effect is that now it's easier for other products to know what GSX menu is being displayed, and possibly control it as well.
-
That's great! Thank you for your hard work ^_^
-
Well, I would love to know, if the closer cooperation with new aircrafts like PMDG 737 or Fenix A320 will be a thing? If GSX will be called from MCDU / FMC like in Aerosoft A320 in P3D? :)
That depends on those developers, of course, and if their users would ask for such features, which will only add extra value to their product, like Simbrief or Navigraph integration. It's surely not depending on us, since GSX already expose lots of variables developers can use to integrate, and the MSFS version has even more of them.
In addition to that, the way the GSX menu works in MSFS, it's even easier to integrate it from an external product, because we had to replace a Simconnect call that is still missing from FSX ( menu creation ) and Asobo confirmed they have no plans to add it back, so we had to emulate that with a combination of HTML/JS/WASM, which was a bit annoying, but the side effect is that now it's easier for other products to know what GSX menu is being displayed, and possibly control it as well.
This intergration is good to know about and something I wish more aircraft developers would utilise. The FSLabs Airbus series did a good job of integration back in P3D, but it would be so much better if the aircraft and GSX could interact with all ground services.
Still, any chance of a new preview? :)
-
Well, I would love to know, if the closer cooperation with new aircrafts like PMDG 737 or Fenix A320 will be a thing? If GSX will be called from MCDU / FMC like in Aerosoft A320 in P3D? :)
That depends on those developers, of course, and if their users would ask for such features, which will only add extra value to their product, like Simbrief or Navigraph integration. It's surely not depending on us, since GSX already expose lots of variables developers can use to integrate, and the MSFS version has even more of them.
In addition to that, the way the GSX menu works in MSFS, it's even easier to integrate it from an external product, because we had to replace a Simconnect call that is still missing from FSX ( menu creation ) and Asobo confirmed they have no plans to add it back, so we had to emulate that with a combination of HTML/JS/WASM, which was a bit annoying, but the side effect is that now it's easier for other products to know what GSX menu is being displayed, and possibly control it as well.
As I'm slowly migrating to MSFS, GSX is what I'm looking forward to the most. Thanks for your continuous effort in advancing the flight simulator experience.
-
still, any chance of a new preview? :)
Recording a video and editing it, takes some time. Time we'd rather spend on completing GSX.
-
still, any chance of a new preview? :)
Recording a video and editing it, takes some time. Time we'd rather spend on completing GSX.
Hi Umberto! Is there any chance you could release a GSX in its current form as some kind of an early access? For example to the current FSX/P3D customers? Lack of GSX features in the MSFS is sometimes really painful, for example, the marshaller, and I would give my soul to be able to use the GSX, even with the old FSX/P3D models, if that is the only thing which is blocking the release (that you pledged to remodel everything).
-
GSX is still not in a state that can be released right now, because the things that makes a product releasable, like putting in on sale as a product, being recognized by the activation servers, making an installer, integrating it with the updater, are all being done as the very end, only a few days before release.
-
Come on, Umberto
Then just a few pictures and descriptions what we can await with MSFS GSX as appetizer ;)
Mille grazie!
-
Can someone please tell me the forecasted date for release of this product.
-
Can someone please tell me the forecasted date for release of this product.
It's not very far, it's weeks now, rather than months...
-
Umberto
You mention the msfs gsx menus are using html/js. Any possibility that interface be retrofit to p3d
to allow external integration?
-
You mention the msfs gsx menus are using html/js. Any possibility that interface be retrofit to p3d to allow external integration?
It's possible, but integration is not just "controlling the menu", it's way more than that, because to do something useful an integrated app would have to know more about the GSX status and, at the same time, we must be sure 3rd party apps won't cause problems, which would require us adding lots of extra code that wouldn't be otherwise required if there was no integration to begin with. And, the proper way of doing integration is through Simconnect, like the integration with GSX and SODE, so we would need to add that as well.
So we'll look into it, but nothing will be made until the MSFS version will be out, it will be thoroughly patched and updated as required and AFTER all of this is done, we might consider having a look at 3rd party integration, on the obvious condition the same method could be used to support both MSFS and P3D at the same time.
-
Can someone please tell me the forecasted date for release of this product.
It's not very far, it's weeks now, rather than months...
Glad to hear this Umberto! Been anxiously awaiting more life in the sim… GSX is a huge missing feature currently!
-
Can someone please tell me the forecasted date for release of this product.
It's not very far, it's weeks now, rather than months...
So glad to hear this! GSX is sorely needed in MSFS!
-
Agreed - Cant wait and the new version is looking fantastic!
-
Biting my finger tips waiting for GSX release. I'm missing it a lot since I've changed from P3D to MSFS.
-
Is GSX level 2 included in the upcoming fs2020 version?
-
Is GSX level 2 included in the upcoming fs2020 version?
It's more or less included.
Animated Passengers and Fuel Hydrants, which were previously exclusives of GSX L2, will be included.
Jetways replacement will be included as well, but jetways will use the default system, since there's no SODE for MSFS yet, so you'll have more model variety, hundreds of different airport/operators logos around the world, but no support for the advanced features possible with SODE like parking spots with multiple jetways or the ease of user customization we had in GSX L2. On the other hand, all GSX vehicles will serve AI planes as well, behaving like default ground vehicles, but with GSX graphic and ample choice of operators.
So, what you'll get in GSX for MSFS it's more or less like a GSX + GSX L1.5, but with a single purchase.
-
Thank you very much, I can't wait!!
-
since there's no SODE for MSFS yet
So, what you'll get in GSX for MSFS it's more or less like a GSX + GSX L1.5, but with a single purchase.
You're saying yet, do you know if SODE is even in the works? I really hope to see some version of SODE coming to the sim soon as well
-
You're saying yet, do you know if SODE is even in the works? I really hope to see some version of SODE coming to the sim soon as well
It should be, just the author main job is not software development, so it will arrive...when it will arrive.