Jump to content
The simFlight Network Forums

crbascott

Members
  • Content count

    384
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    11

crbascott last won the day on September 30

crbascott had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

14 Good

1 Follower

About crbascott

  • Rank
    Advanced Member

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    United States

Recent Profile Visitors

937 profile views
  1. SOME KBOS TEASERS

    With the crossing runways and various runway configurations, I think KBOS will become a favorite very soon (i.e., tomorrow). http://www.massport.com/logan-airport/about-logan/noise-abatement/how-logan-operates/
  2. Nyerges' Real Traffic

    I just told you exactly how to figure it out for yourself. Open airplanes_texpack3.manifest in notepad. You'll see every airplane/airline combination with a livery at LAX. FYI - If you turn Word Wrap on, it is much easier to work with.
  3. Nyerges' Real Traffic

    Please enlighten us bcooley66. Model/Design/Series? Anyway, I believe what you are looking for is contained in the manifest files in the Airplanes and Texturepacks folder. You can open these files in notepad to view the contents. airplanes_pack1.manifest is created/updated by Real Traffic and contains all the airplane prefabs that have been built. For example, the E175 model has not been built yet. That is why when included in a schedule, the E175 looks and acts like a default Regional Jet. airplanes_texpack?.manifest is created/updated by the airport specific Real Color. It contains all the liveries included with that airport. Example: B737_ua.jpg From a schedule creation perspective, the first requirement is the airplane model must exist in airplanes.txt fie. If a schedule includes a model that doesn't exist in the airplanes file, I don't thing Pro will load. Then, of course, it needs a prefab and then it needs liveries. With the roll out of the 737 Max we'll need it added (or add it ourselves) to the airplanes files (FlightAware is using 7M8) at some point. Craig
  4. I'll follow up via direct message - I don't take want to hijack the topic trying to understand. We have a new schedule to enjoy folks!
  5. I'm curious, why does that matter?
  6. Do you think you (and a partner) can do as good or better than the real controllers at KLAX? Join us on Tower_MP for the first multiplayer Pro Challenge. The objective of this challenge is to handle the same flights, using the same runways, and getting the plane in the air and on the ground as well or better than the real life controllers. The schedule for this contest is based on actual traffic at KLAX on September 19, 2017 around 10:00 local time. Come and join the fun! You may use the following link to gain access to Tower_MP: https://discord.gg/Q9dvrWg
  7. KLAS Intersecting Runways?

    Yep, definitely easier but in RL based on prevailing winds this configuration is only used about 13% of the time. https://www.faa.gov/airports/planning_capacity/profiles/media/LAS-Airport-Capacity-Profile-2015.pdf
  8. KLAS Intersecting Runways?

    You're a funny guy!
  9. Few questions before buying Tower!3D Pro

    If you have male and female voices that are supported by Pro installed as part of your OS, within the Pro settings you can choose whether you prefer male voice, prefer female , or random (i.e., both).
  10. Tower!3D Pro - Arrival Volume Question

    VIC, I conducted a couple of tests at LAX in order to provide data regarding arrival capacity. TEST INFO Test 1 - I created a schedule file that had 60 scheduled arrivals at 1 minute intervals beginning at 10:00. Theoretically, each arrival should alternate between 25L and 24R. Test 2 - The schedule file had the same amount of flights and in the same order as Test 1. But for this test there were 2 arrivals every other minute (two at 10:00, two at 10:02, etc.). Both tests included a departure at 09:59 to "prime" the sim engine. RESULTS (details are in the attached spreadsheet): Test 1 - All 60 arrivals appeared as scheduled and used the expected landing runway. This demonstrates that simultaneous arrivals runways are definitely used. However, the schedule must be built strategically in order to experience the maximum hourly arrivals of 60. At 11:10 all planes were parked, the strip was empty, and the session was ended. Test 2 - At no point did any of the flights with the same scheduled arrival time appear simultaneously on the DBRITE. The pattern of flights was not nearly as consistent as the first test - including flights arriving in a different sequence and using different runways. Some flights appeared on the DBRITE over an hour after they were scheduled. At 11:51 58 planes had landed and parked successfully, the strip was empty, and the session was ended. 2 flights had not appeared yet but I hope/assume they would eventually show up. CONCLUSION The sim engine has employed simulaneous arrivals, which is an upgrade from Tower!2011. However, the maximum number of arrivals in an hour is 60 apparently due to the way the sim handles the schedule - specifically flights with the same arrival time. Thus, we are unable to take full advance of real traffic and other realistic schedule volumes due to the arrival limitation. Let me know if you have any questions. I've sent schedules and logs via message. Thanks, Craig LAX_Arrival_Test.xlsx
  11. KLAS Intersecting Runways?

    There's a few versions out there but I found one that will be going into effect on Oct 12, 2017 -https://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/media/Order/JO_7110.65X_Air_Traffic_Control.pdf - the wording for this section hasn't changed. The AOPA may show some things from a pilot's perspective, but I would think controllers not using/following their policy wouldn't go over too well.
  12. Continuing Flights

    To actually attempt to answer your question I created a very simple schedule file to see what would happen. LAX,EWR,320,VX,1162,12:00,09:59,1,VX BWI,LAX,738,AS,739,10:00,12:00,1,AS LAX,SEA,738,AS,739,12:00,10:30,1,AS The first flight in the schedule is just to get the sim started. For this test ASA739 landed as scheduled and the same plane requested pushback a little later. All is well! However, I've noticed where continuing flights don't always use the same equipment. For example AAL108 from HNL to LAX is an A321 and the outgoing flight to LHR is a 772. There are many other flights like this at LAX. So, that meant I needed to run another test. LAX,EWR,320,VX,1162,12:00,09:59,1,VX BWI,LAX,738,AS,739,10:00,12:00,1,AS LAX,SEA,739,AS,739,12:00,10:30,1,AS I changed the departing flight from a 738 to 739. For this test, ASA739 arrived as scheduled but the departure never occurred. There was no B739 at the gate all. In summary, in most cases continuing flights shouldn't be an issue unless there is an equipment change within the six hour window of flights the sim loads. I'll probably continue to renumber the flights as part of my schedule making to avoid any chance of duplicates or dropped flights. But then I've automated this process so time is not a factor. Craig PS - This was a small test. I'm inclined to think that a full schedule file would potentially have more issues. But that's another test, for another day, by another person. :)
  13. KLAS Intersecting Runways?

    An excerpt from the FAA's Air Traffic Organization Policy (JO 7110.65W) 3−9−8. INTERSECTING RUNWAY/INTERSECTING FLIGHT PATH OPERATIONS a. Issue traffic information to each aircraft operating on intersecting runways. b. Separate departing aircraft from another aircraft using an intersecting runway by ensuring that the departure does not begin takeoff roll until one of the following exists: REFERENCE−FAAO JO 7110.65, Para 2−1−21, Traffic Advisories. 1. The preceding aircraft has departed and passed the intersection or is turning to avert any conflict. 2. A preceding arriving aircraft is clear of the landing runway, completed the landing roll and will hold short of the intersection, or has passed the intersection. Looking at the log - please don't get mad at me Vic ;) - the departing airplane was SWA1684 and landing airplane was DAL1479. The runway alert occurred while both airplanes were on their perspective intersecting runways but before both planes had officially taken off and landed. I believe to avoid the runway incursion, DAL1479 would need to have successfully landed (DAL1479 Successful landing +10 pts message is displayed) prior to SWA1684 rolling for departure. So, based on the policy it looks like the incursion and point reduction was warranted.
  14. Tower!3D Pro - Arrival Volume Question

    Parallel approaches are definitely used - which is a nice upgrade from 2011. This has increased the hourly max arrivals from 42ish to 60. I'll follow up with some schedules and logs from KLAX that should help confirm the arrival/schedule capacity limitation. Thanks, Craig
  15. Vic, I am finding that the Tower!3D Pro engine does not handle two arrivals at the same time. In other words, if the schedule has two arrivals at 10:00 one of the two arrivals will be delayed. This occurs even if multiple (simultaneous) arrival runways are selected. As a result, I believe the maximum number of arrivals we can possibly see in an hour at any airport is 60. Can you confirm if this is in fact the case? With a minimum separation of 5nm (which Pro has inherited from 2011), we determined the maximum arrivals for a single runway was around 42. As a result, I was hoping we could see as many as 80+ arrivals on airports with two active arrival runways and something in the range of 120+ at KATL and other airports where three arrival runways could be active. For a refresher , the following is a link to a topic we discussed arrival capacity in Tower!2011 and how this part of the system would be rewritten from scratch for Pro. http://forum.simflight.com/topic/81525-tower-2011-arrival-spacing-decrease/ As people use Real Traffic with real traffic volumes, continue to make realistic custom schedules, and use the schedule creator to "max out" the number of flights; it would be helpful to know what hourly arrival volume parameters we have with Pro. Thanks, Craig
×