New ATC and Airport Operations Application Testing

[fs1 295]

Thanks @Balint Szarka, @bill62. @Nemo I will take your advice as well. 

Edited December 26, 2020 by fs1

[Wolkenschreck 270]

Can fully agree with Nemo regarding the feature focus. Also, separation would be another feature that is more important than intersections.

Of course would intersection take offs be nice but hard to do. Randomizing it would be one way, but the best way in addition to randomizing would be a list based on taxiway designators according to the AFCAD. Such a feature should also take the empty weight of the aircraft.cfg into account, as not all aircraft can use every intersection. 

With so much work would I like to see your focus on separation and runway vacating first. But it's a freeware for what I am very grateful. So by all means, just code what you enjoy most and what you think should be added first.

Edited December 26, 2020 by Wolkenschreck

[atco 166]

Completely agree that the number one thing that drives me nuts with AI is the runway vacating. If there was a way to stop AI turning 180 degrees to vacate on a high speed taxiway that is behind them or doing huge circles on the grass to take an exit that is deigned to be used from the other end only I would be so happy. For me that would be a massive development. Also separation has been an issue for many years, anything that improves that is going to be hugely welcomed by the community.

My suggestion would be a fixed speed for approach - For example most major airports impose speed control on final, usually 160 or 170kts to 4 miles. This keeps all aircraft at the same speed so that gaps don't increase or decrease. With AI FDE's being all over the place sometimes I see aircraft at 6 miles out doing 230kts and then others doing 85kts. I was watching one of the OSP ATR series a couple of days ago, 8 miles out and it was already at 83kts!!
I'd suggest making all AI aircraft fly at 160kts to 4 miles before touchdown and then have them land at a speed between 110-140kts depending on weight - if that's even possible. That would certainly be one way to improve the landing spacing and would take the AI FDE out of the equation somewhat.

Thanks so much for all you are doing. These improvements are huge for AI enthusiasts and have been long awaited by many of us!

[Balint Szarka 123]

15 minutes ago, atco said:

Completely agree that the number one thing that drives me nuts with AI is the runway vacating. If there was a way to stop AI turning 180 degrees to vacate on a high speed taxiway that is behind them or doing huge circles on the grass to take an exit that is deigned to be used from the other end only I would be so happy. For me that would be a massive development. Also separation has been an issue for many years, anything that improves that is going to be hugely welcomed by the community.

My suggestion would be a fixed speed for approach - For example most major airports impose speed control on final, usually 160 or 170kts to 4 miles. This keeps all aircraft at the same speed so that gaps don't increase or decrease. With AI FDE's being all over the place sometimes I see aircraft at 6 miles out doing 230kts and then others doing 85kts. I was watching one of the OSP ATR series a couple of days ago, 8 miles out and it was already at 83kts!!
I'd suggest making all AI aircraft fly at 160kts to 4 miles before touchdown and then have them land at a speed between 110-140kts depending on weight - if that's even possible. That would certainly be one way to improve the landing spacing and would take the AI FDE out of the equation somewhat.

Thanks so much for all you are doing. These improvements are huge for AI enthusiasts and have been long awaited by many of us!

I agree, these are more of the ever-existing issues that would deserve a priority over the intersection departures.

[fs1 295]

Thanks for the feedback.

Is there any default airport I can test and take a look at the U turns or the exits at > 90 degrees?

I will be happy to work on a fix. Thanks!

Edited December 26, 2020 by fs1

[Wolkenschreck 270]

Every airport with high speed exits would be good ones. Look for newer layouts like VHHH, EDDM, RKSI, EHAM or EDDF. Smaller aircraft like the A320 will vacate on the wrong faced exits, as they stopp rather quick.

And very important: Test it with AIG OCI, as it also depends on the flight dynamics and AIG is the most commonly used AI software.
 

[McDaniel 53]

Hey Frederico, thank you so much for your work!

I totally agree with the posts above, I do understand, that intersection stuff would be icing , but its not important to me.

Happy new year!

McDan out

[Petermuc3 8]

Hi guys, I am experiencing CTDs showing ATCAPI.dll as the fault module. This was with the FSLabs A320 in Athens.

I have seen some comments concerning problems when you change the time, which I didn't. Of course Athens is 1 hour ahead of us

here in Germany.

Happy new year.

Peter

[fs1 295]

2 hours ago, Petermuc3 said:

Hi guys, I am experiencing CTDs showing ATCAPI.dll as the fault module. This was with the FSLabs A320 in Athens.

I have seen some comments concerning problems when you change the time, which I didn't. Of course Athens is 1 hour ahead of us

here in Germany.

Happy new year.

Peter

Hi Pete, thanks for the report.

Please find attached a new build 1.0.03 which irons out some of the CTDs.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/4qe2ym9h410qvq9/ATCAPI v1.0.0.3.zip?dl=0

Also:

- Taxi speed now applies to all AI taxi.

- You can now configure the AI void time with the following line in the XML <voidTimer>1000</voidTimer>

- deployEarlyFlaps is deprecated.

Let me know if fixed if not please PM me @Petermuc3

Thanks!

 

 

 

[Nemo 1,314]

25 minutes ago, fs1 said:

- Taxi speed now applies to all AI taxi.

- You can now configure the AI void time with the following line in the XML <voidTimer>1000</voidTimer>

- deployEarlyFlaps is deprecated.

 

Federico, could you please enclose a new example config.xml with all possible <airport> entries and all general settings which are currently adjustable. Thanks.

Edited December 29, 2020 by Nemo

[fs1 295]

12 minutes ago, Nemo said:

Federico, could you please enclose a new example config.xml with all possible <airport> entries and all general settings which are currently adjustable. Thanks.

Harry, this is a complete XML setup with examples of all parameters you can include at the moment. There is also a Debug tag, which I have excluded as it is only valid when debugging

I will work on a Manual/Docs soon.

 

<?xml version='1.0' encoding='utf-8' ?>
<Parameters>
	<Airport>
	<ICAO>KJFK</ICAO>
	<ActiveTakeOffRunway>
		<Runway>R13R</Runway>
		<Probability>0.1</Probability>
	</ActiveTakeOffRunway>
	<ActiveTakeOffRunway>
		<Runway>R04R</Runway>
		<Probability>0.7</Probability>
	</ActiveTakeOffRunway>
	<ActiveTakeOffRunway>
		<Runway>R04L</Runway>
		<Probability>0.2</Probability>
	</ActiveTakeOffRunway>
	<ActiveLandingRunway>
		<Runway>R04L</Runway>
		<Probability>1</Probability>
       <ApproachName>KRSTL</ApproachName>
	</ActiveLandingRunway>
	</Airport>
	<Airport>
	<ICAO>KLGA</ICAO>
	<ActiveTakeOffRunway>
		<Runway>R13</Runway>
	</ActiveTakeOffRunway>
	<ActiveLandingRunway>
		<Runway>R22</Runway>
	</ActiveLandingRunway>
	</Airport>
	<enableFastTakeOffs>1</EnableFastTakeOffs>
	<allowTakeOffDistance>6000</AllowTakeOffDistance>
	<taxiSpeedLimiter>30</TaxiSpeedLimiter>
	<enableRollthenTakeOff>1</enableRollthenTakeOff>
	<minCrossingRny>2000</minCrossingRny>
	<voidTimer>1000</voidTimer>
	<isGUIVisible>1</isGUIVisible>

</Parameters>

 

 

Edited December 29, 2020 by fs1

[Nemo 1,314]

<voidTimer>1000</voidTimer>

stands for "non reacting" ai traffic disappears after 1000 seconds = 16.66 minutes?

[fs1 295]

Correct. Default is 300

[Petermuc3 8]

Frederico, I didn't have a single CTD since, still using 1.0.0.2.

Thank you very much

Peter

[SN737 146]

17 minutes ago, Petermuc3 said:

Frederico, I didn't have a single CTD since, still using 1.0.0.2.

Thank you very much

Peter

Me neither, thanks a lot Federico