Thank you for your explanation, I am looking forward to an easier approach to this as I am not a computer expert. But I like GSX very much, has improved the immersion significantly.
So would you say it is better for the moment not to use the SU10 API if you only have non encrypted airports? Or in other words, to only use the SU10 API if youāre dealing with marketplace airports?
On this SU10 API question, in relation to UK2000ās EGJJ as discussed in this thread;
Iām having the same problem & itās driving me nuts trying to figure it out. Iām out of ideas.
With the SU10 API box ticked I get the exact same āCould not find valid airport data at this position, services are not availableā message. If I untick the SU10 API box it works fine. This is a direct purchase, installed in the Community folder with no GSX profile loaded and itās the only airfield Iāve ever experienced this with. Thereās definitely no duplicate or secondary profile hiding anywhere.
Iāve noticed that the FSDT Updater is not picking this airport up when you run the āExclude 3rd partyā button under āConfigā. Could this be related?
Jersey airport has no jetways and so wont show up in the exclude list.
1 Like
Ah, that makes sense.
Either way GSX wonāt recognise this airport with the SU10 API enabled. Itās really odd.
Iām mostly flying the FBW a32 and I was fortunate to be gifted a GSX pro license for Christmas. I installed the FBW a32 aircraft profile (downloaded from flightsim.to) and tested the different ground services. Everything works great! However, i have a question regarding the order in which ground services should be handled. This is what I currently do:
1- refueling
2- catering
3- baggage loading
4- boarding
Should I change the order of those actions to make the process more realistic?
I would suggest you do the following, because the reality in the real world is that stuff just turns up whenever itās available most of the time! Itās not unknown to be fuelling, catering and boarding all at the same time.
I would generally request refuelling, then when itās finished its spiel regarding the fuel truck select request boarding and once that starts request pushback. GSX takes care of the rest of it for you.
Certainly in the low-cost world a lot of airlines cater once a day with an all day bar, so unless your flight is the first of the day catering is unlikely. Obviously full service & Long Haul would cater every turnaround.
1 Like
But thatās not possible everywhere, is it? A couple of months ago I was taking a flight from Amsterdam Schiphol by Easyjet and we were not allowed to board the aircraft while it was fuelling. At the gate they announced itās for safety reasons.
1 Like
Not everywhere no, but in many places itās totally normal. I havenāt been to Amsterdam for years but Iām fairly confident I have done both at the same time there. Itās totally possible though that they have changed their policy since then.
1 Like
Itās a combination of airline and airport policy and ultimately itās the captain decision.
Refueling with passengers on board is possible, but several conditions must be satisfied, like the crew being all present, passengers can be evacuated quickly, and the fire services has been alerted. In some cases, the physical presence of a fire truck nearby is requested, likely when the fire station is far from the gate. If the presence of the fire truck is required, this will involve extra fees, so the airline/pilot might decide not to do it for that reason. Additionally, you canāt have PRM ( Disabled passengers ) on board while refueling, since they will slow down a possible evacuation.
In GSX, refueling with passengers on board IS possible, youāll just see a couple of messages saying to unfasten the seat belts and turn off the no smoking signs ( sure, nobody smokes on planes today, but your airplane usually still has the switches, so if you could follow procedure, if you want ).
In future upgrade, in which we might add some Fire Truck procedures, we might update the refueling to require calling a Fire Truck before you can refuel with Passengers onboard.
And, since handling of PRM passengers is also planned ( we already modeled the vehicle ), this might be integrated as well, as an extra limitation to refueling with passengers onboard.
This answers the issue of refueling with passengers on board, which is clearly possible with GSX right now.
Refueling while passengers are boarding is a completely different matter and, while it can be done in real life, following the same above restrictions, possibly adding in some cases a requirement to board passengers is small groups, itās not currently possible in GSX, but mostly because there might not be enough space for the Fuel Truck AND the Baggage/Cargo loaders to maneuver if they are there at the same time. It might be possible on larger planes, not so much on smaller airliners which are the vast majority of the available ones, and since users donāt like vehicles clashing into each other, we tried to reduce the chance theyāll clash in the most lightweight ( towards the sim ) way possible.
5 Likes
If you donāt have any issues related to the requirement to have an airport cache that will be rebuilt each time you install/remove an airport, and all your airports are not encrypted ( note that, even the default handcrafted airports Premium/Deluxe made by Microsoft/Asobo should be considered like Marketplace airports ), then yes, Disabling the SU10 Navdata API might improve jetway detection, especially when there are gate with double jetways, which right now are basically impossible to detect reliably with the Navdata.
Of course, when the SU12 SDK will come out, and weāll release the GSX update to use the updated SU12 Navdata API, we should have way better information, even compared to the what we have by reading the .BGL ( which right now is more than what we have with the SU10 Navdata ) so, itās very likely that, with SU12, weāll remove the choice to use or not the Navdata altogether, since the SU12 version will provide all the data we need, with no side-effects.
Following the process I mentioned above it works nicely. The fuel truck arrives and gets on with it whilst the baggage loaders wait. In the meantime the passengers & crew start to board. Once the fuelling ends the baggage loaders automatically spring in to life and start loading the baggage. If you click the āprepare for pushbackā button during this process this all follows automatically as well.
Itās as close to reality as Iāve managed to get the process so far.
Is there anything that can be done with this UK2000 EGJJ? Even understanding why itās not working would be a start.
Thx
If the SU10 Navdata option is Disabled:
The most likely cause is GSX didnāt read the correct .BGL, and the most common reason for this, the airport .BGL is larger than the maximum threshold GSX considers reasonable for the airport file, which by default is 20MB now, but can be controlled with the airportCacheMaxBGLSizeBytes parameter in the Couatl.INI file. If an airport file is rejected for this reason, it will logged when the airport cache is being rebuilt.
Another common reason why an 3rd airport hasnāt been recognized by GSX, is the airport file lacking a proper DeleteAirport command, which is normally supposed to be present, when an airport replaces a default one.
This might be intentional, for example the 3rd party airport might just be an enhancement of buildings and texture but might still use the exact same parking names/positions and the same taxiway routes from default, so in this case, lacking an DeleteAirport command to remove these elements is correct, but GSX simply doesnāt support this: when a .BGL is used, itās assumed to be self-contained, if a scenery requires the underlying default airport, GSX wonāt load two .BGLs at once, so it will only use the default one, which in THIS case would be correct, since that airport needed the default data anyway.
However, most of the times the 3rd party airport DOES change parking and taxiways, and the lack of a DeleteAirport command to remove the default one is just a mistake, because it would cause conflicting parking/taxiway data. In this case, the airport developer should fix it.
This situation, of course, is ALSO logged in the GSX log file, provided logging is enabled in the GSX Troubleshooting settings page.
When the SU10 Navdata is Disabled, the GSX Scenery customization page will tell the name of the .BGL in use, and itās not the one that comes with the scenery, and itās the default one, itās likely that one of these two issues happened.
If the SU10 Navdata option is Enabled:
The only possible reason why, when the SU10 Navdata API is ENABLED, an airport is not recognized, is thereās another āfakeā airport, like a Seaplane base or an Helipad, using a fake ICAO code, which is closer to your actual position than the main airport.
GSX obviously have code to detect these cases: in order to be recognized as a proper airport, an airport must have at least 2 Parking spots, one runway and one taxiway. And, if all runways are water, the airport will also be discarded. If all of this fails, itās possible to manually exclude that fake ICAO from GSX, as explained in the GSX manual where Auxiliary airports are discussed.
An easy way to detect this case, is to check the airport name and ICAO in the GSX menu to be the one your are expecting.
Thanks for replying.
Itās a really odd one, as with the API unticked it works fine, but with it ticked GSX doesnāt recognise it.
As far as I can see (without being able to get into the .bgl file - can I even do that?) everything is as it should be. I canāt see any duplicates etc.
The only option I/we have at the minute is to untick the box, depart, then tick and rebuild the cache. Itās a bit of a pain, just wish I could figure out what the problem is. I could always send a log if itās any use?
Cheers.
Its not possible to do the check as the menu wont open. Its as if GSX doesnt think there is an airport at the location which suggests that something is not set correctly for the scenery
I tried to update to the latest version today but get an encryption error, with Live update and the offline installer. Any help appreciated. Thx.
I bought this when it was on sale a while back, I really want it to be good and use it but it is so much of a grind i just dont bother anymore. The heads sticking through the aircraft or jetway roof were odd, but passengers being launched directly skywards when they stepped off the plane was just ridiculous.
The whole thing while a nice idea is just to much of a lottery to use regularly.
I think quite opposite. I use it regularly and most of the time it works as it should. And to be honest I canāt imagine flying airliners without it anymore.
P.S.: Just boarding 737-800 in Oslo ENGM
6 Likes
Have recently been learning how to get passengers walking to aircraft. Silly having coaches when parked just outside terminal!
Instructions very poor, and some irritating ābugsā but looks so much better once mastered.