I would say this isn’t a bug that the Dev Team can address. It’s working as intended. If a simobject specifies that VAR, then it’s going to use it.
I would submit this as a Zendesk Ticket and reference the number back here.
It’s not “as intended”. From what I talked with the FSLTL crew the “cruise alt” variable is a ceiling not a definitive “all aircraft of this type cruise at this altitude”.
Beside as I said, it worked for months until recently.
Isn’t zendesk ticket synonymous as reporting in bug forum? I think I saw somewhere when someone did both and zendesk guys reported “you don’t need to do both, we will see stuff on bug forum”.
Zendesk isn’t guaranteed to be ingested, but it will be seen sooner by the Dev Team. If you want to file a bug report on the forum, see the comments below about problem reproduction. That’s what makes it probable as a bug report. Until then, it’s unproven, which is why your post was moved here to Tech Support first. Your call.
The real problem with all this is reproduction. I couldn’t repro it, and if Dev Team can’t, then it’s not likely to be ingested as a potential defect.
1 Like
And that is exactly the problem. You keep shooting down bug reports because “you can’t reproduce it” but sometimes it’s EXACTLY because of that it is bug.
Bugs usually don’t happen to everyone. Sometimes worse yet they only happen to people with particular locality (region of playing, region of connection, system language, yes, we know flight planner only have problem with some OS languages.).
And I have stated all possible information I can get. FSLTL guys confirm cruise_alt is not supposed to be a dead cruising altitude. It is supposed to be a ceiling but currently it is not acting as such. How does this not qualify as a bug report?
I have changed cruising_alt for all common aircraft models in my region. They are still all flying at FL360 regardless of direction. Some of them even get stuck at “at FL355 climbing for 360” for the entire cruise.
I’m not the one “shooting down bugs” - I’m not part of the Dev Team.
I’m telling you what the expected threshold is for passing a defect as validated.
That’s why I said Zendesk is the better way for you - since it appears that reproducing this on a forum post is low probability, it may not ever make it to Dev Team. At least with a Zendesk, someone close to the ingestion process is going to see it, and you’re one step closer than you would be with a forum post. Again, your call.
Well I am going to need to make an updated post anyway, since I now know much more about this issue than when I first made the thread.
And I sincerely think making a new post about the same bug only with updated information sounds like asking to be banned for spamming, as it is very prone indeed to be identified as repeated post either by machine or human moderator.
So I guess Zendesk it is, as I don’t have much choice.