VenturaGuy101

I was noticing that similar pushbacks on other gates. This was one that caused a blockage. If I find some more odd issues I will post them. BTW great job on this airport. Generally speaking I really have not encountered any big issues so far. Just a few minor ones.

Update: A smaller ER4 was able to bush back. The issue is when the planes are pushed back they fallow the center lines which are used to guide the plane in. The push back displaces the jest too much into the other gates. The pushback should push it back perfectly on the center line. The plane was pushed back using the red dots. It should have used the yellow dots.

United jet being pushed back from Gate B_C12 the pushback truck is going in circles and the plane is not finishing the push back. The American plane right behind it is asking also for pushback. Log file COMMAND: UAL1973 PUSHBACK APPROVED, EXPECT RUNWAY 31 TAXI VIA A GG B Z 11:10:45 alt: 0 takeoff: False/False/-2 OWNER_GROUND t: B_C12 * UAL1973 => PARSE CMD: PUSHBACK APPROVED, EXPECT RUNWAY 31 TAXI VIA A GG B Z 11:10:45 alt: 0 takeoff: False/False/-1 OWNER_GROUND t: B_C12 r: 31 * UAL1973 => VIA roadcut: GROUND, 31 TAXI VIA ALFA GOLF GOLF BRAVO ZULU PUSHBACK APPROVED. 11:10:45 alt: 0 takeoff: False/False/-1 OWNER_GROUND t: B_C12 r: 31 * UAL1973 => GROUND, roadcut: GROUND, THREE ONE TAXI VIA ALFA GOLF GOLF BRAVO ZULU PUSHBACK APPROVED. 11:10:45 alt: 0 takeoff: False/False/-1 OWNER_GROUND t: B_C12 r: 31 * UAL1973 => SAY: GROUND, THREE ONE TAXI VIA ALFA GOLF GOLF BRAVO ZULU PUSHBACK APPROVED. UNITED ONE NINER SEVEN THREE 11:10:45 * UAL1973 => ADD HISTORY: UAL1973: GROUND, 31 TAXI VIA A GG B Z PUSHBACK APPROVED. UAL1973 11:10:45 alt: 0 takeoff: False/False/-1 OWNER_GROUND t: B_C12 r: 31 * UAL1973 => STATE CHANGE from STATE_WAITING to STATE_TO_RUNWAY 11:10:45 alt: 0 takeoff: False/False/-1 OWNER_GROUND r: 31 * UAL1973 => Start calc route from: B_C12 start idx: 43 11:10:45 alt: 0 takeoff: False/False/-1 OWNER_GROUND r: 31 * UAL1973 => Calc from: B_C12 UAL1973 => Route is: B_C12, ramp_4, A, GG, B, Z, (Filename: C:/buildslave/unity/build/artifacts/generated/common/runtime/UnityEngineDebugBindings.gen.cpp Line: 42) 11:10:45 alt: 0 takeoff: False/False/-1 OWNER_GROUND r: 31 * UAL1973 => Add trash Store stat: True 11:11:00 * AAL1131 => ADD HISTORY: AAL1131: Tower, AMERICAN 1131 requesting push and start. Store stat: True

Well here we go again with a major terminal shuffle: http://laguardiaairport.com/news/lgaonthemove/ On the bright side maybe moving Brickyard from Terminal A to C will help with not enough gate errors I was getting during a play last night. It also appears that NYD is missing the Alaska flights.

Thanks Craig for that test. It looks like the point where an aircraft slows to taxi speed is not tied to the upstream taxiway location but it is tied to distance from the exit taxiway. Though it seems like there is still quite a bit of distance to cover at taxi speed before it reaches taxiway N1. So I am not sure what I saw and since I have not been able to replicate it, I must have thought I saw something that I did not. I wish there was an expedite taxi that it would keep higher speeds runt until exit taxiway. Well maybe that can be added for the next version of Tower!3Dx Pro.

I have not had time to do some testing to figure out under what circumstance I was seeing the slow taxi on the runway. My question under your test, was the Taxi Speed (4) line determined by the distance of the exit and stop(5) or is it the previous taxiway. In your testing the slowing to taxi speed occurs right at taxiway B9 which is the previous taxiway to the exit at B10. This is fine at an airport and taxiways you tested at KSAN but if the exit taxiway at KBOS on 4L is N1 which makes the previous taxiway, Q. This would be a long distance to cover at 19 knots. If its distance and just happens to occurs at the same location as the previous taxiway at KSAN then I need to do further research to see if I can replicate the original issue that I saw.

My real concern is once a plane sets its exit taxiway, it cannot be changed. Sometimes is hard to to get instructions in time if voice commands don't make it in time. There is also no way to expedite the plane to a taxiway if the next available taxiway is a ways down the runway. Keeping planes on taxiways from running into each other is the job of ground controller. You can always stop planes and change the taxi route on taxiways but while a plane is on a runway you cannot change it once it has been set. I have planes exit the wrong side or skip assigned taxiway because they have not slowed enough to exit then select the next taxiway which has a plane holding there. If this occurs again I will try and attach a log file.

I know we could write a novel on the changes needed for LAX. In 2 years when we might get the next version of Tower!3Dx, we will be complaining about the missing Midfield Satellite Concourse and the lack of space for international flights with RT.

FeelThere has not announced anything about their other project other than it involves other developers and it is not simulation or air traffic control. See FeelThere response at the end of topic below. See:

It would be nice if we could select the aircraft for each runway (I.e Class I Props, Class I Jets, Class II, Class III, Class III Very Large. The AI would then assign incoming aircraft to each runway per its type. It would be a right click on the select runway at the top of the screen. You select which aircraft class/type that you want to assign to the arrival runway. That way you could assign the Class III Very Large to Runway 25L at KLAX. At KBOS class I props/class I jets assigned to runway 32, class II and class III assigned to runway 27 and Class III Very Large assigned to 33L. The default setting would be all aircraft so its no different than now. In reality TRACON would assign and move the aircraft to the proper approach runway not the tower. In a high traffic airport like LAX it may be impossible to move an airplane from 24R tp 25L due to aircraft already set to land on 25L and proper clearance would not be maintained.

Interesting that the GA aircraft still spawn but we can go a while without any airlines spawning. This was happening long before I landed 30 aircraft. There is something that the Tower engine is seeing that an aircraft cannot spawn due to the crossing runway being used. Try using ATControl-Joe's KLAS schedule and you see that GA does not appear to be affected. I also noticed that it occurs more often when the slider is at 100% and less cross errors occur if you drop the slider to 90%. This should be a reduction in 10% aircraft but it appears the cross errors drop off by more than 10%.

Well this confirms that there are still some path calculating issues at KLAS. The plane that I suspect that caused the issue was pushing back from Terminal 3 E Gates and onto C6 near the junction of C2. There is also a black hole where C3 and C5 come together on the north side of the D Gates where a plane pushes back but that is the last that you ever hear from them. They are stuck there forever. So I hope #FeelThere will also do a SP for KLAS. But this is a secondary issue to the disappearing traffic issue which I wanted to confirm for Vic since he had a suspected that it also should occur with KLAS. ATControl-Joe's schedules ramps up the GA traffic in a real airline flight schedule so the GA traffic was spawning every couple of minutes. It just really stood out to me compared to no airlines coming arriving.

Vic, I can say that it also occurs with KLAS. I was using the modified schedule from ATCControl-Joe between 1700 and 1930. I had 30+ close cross warning. The interesting thing was the GA aircraft continued to spawn but the airline filight stopped. I also had some other odd issues with the play that dropped my framerate down to 1FPS. I end up deleting the problem aircraft that caused the issue: VRD1913. Not sure why this occurred. Since this i a non-supported schedule I will have to dig in further. output_log.txt

When installing any of the NYD Real Traffic/Real Colors addons, I select the Steam option for the install but then I correct the path on the last screen of the installer just before the addons are installed. I have to correct the default 'C:\Program Files (x86)\Steam\steamapps\common\Tower 3D Pro' path since my Steam folder is located 'E:\Games\Steam'.

I had to start a game in windowed mode so I can set up the screens for the strip and ADIRS on the second screen. After I got the second monitor set up correctly, I restarted the game in full screen.

I am finding a mix of information on the web about the Airbus 321. I did see a couple of A321s take off on runway 9 from KBOS through flightradar24. So I know it is possible for some configurations to use that runway. I have seen ranges from 5,00 to 7,150.

I also would like to add the A321 to having an issue at KBOS. I am getting a "Unable to take off on runway due to the runway being too short" when I try and assign takeoff on runway 9 at KBOS. Runway 9 is 7001 feet long and the minimum takeoff distance at sea level is around 5,600 feet for the A321. So why is the A321's saying they can't take off on this runway? All medium aircraft should be able to take off on runway 9. We should only need runway 15L for planes like the 77W and A380.

@JoeControl I think that you have brought up a legitimate issue with the current game. There are a bunch of people on this forum that have been here for may years and they probably have seen people come and go with complaints and criticism and blow off some of these posts. There are many new people coming to this forum since this game was added to Steam. I am one of these people that did not hear about this game until it was out on Steam. There are a bunch of new YouTubers playing this game and more people are discovering this game. Unfortunately they are also finding out about some of the issues. People have had issues with the voice recognition, adding the Real Traffic/Real Colors addons. Other people are having issues with some of the game's bugs such as planes getting stuck, some crashes, etc. For me, I really have not had that many issues and I have to also to say that I feel that FeelThere and Nyerges Design have worked very hard to try and resolve quite a few issues and FeelThere is currently working of patches for Boston, Atlanta, and JFK. I agree that the airplane AI really needs an update. FeelThere has stated that they do not plan to update the existing Tower!3D Pro game and any new features would be added in the next version of Tower!3Dx. I hope that they would reconsider and try to add a few fixes for the airplane AI. I have also experienced planes landing and slowing to a crawl on the runway. They slow down to the taxiway speed while still on the runway. This is really unrealistic and planes usually travel a bit faster on the runway and slow down as they approach a taxiway. This becomes an issue at some airports where the spacing of taxiways are further apart and the distance spacing of arriving aircraft overruns the aircraft still on the runway. We also have no "EXPEDITE TAXI" command to speed up aircraft. I also encountered an issue where a CRJ that landed on runway 27 at KBOS. Before I had time to give instruction to exit at taxiway E, the plane AI decided to exit at taxiway C where a 757 was waiting for crossing directions. I attempted to give commands to have the plane exit ot taxi using taxiway E or K but all I got back was a "negative" response. There were an additional 5 airplanes behind the 757. No pilot would turn onto a taxiway already occupied by other aircraft. I also have seen the issues that you and AirBorneCDS reported. These airplane AI issues are frustrating and do sometimes break game play. There really should not need a "Delete Aircraft" button but in this game it necessary. So once again I would hope FeelThere would consider trying to fix some of the airplane AI issues in a patch with the current Tower!3D game. Also the only official people on these forums are Vic from FeelThere (FeelThere) and Gabor from Nyerges Design (nyergesdesign). I do not know if there are anyone from Sim Smith Design on this forum.

The correct path in red.

At KBOS when planes land on 15R and use taxiway Y and then to taxiway N and then hold short of runway 15R. This is the command given from the tower that I heard on liveATC.com. The game directs cannot find a path. When routing it should route below. It is an odd occurrence that a taxiway extends down a runway but at KBOS this happens for taxiway Y. My request for DAL808 TAXI TO RAMP VIA Y N A E should route Y to N down runway 15L. I am just thinking that when this airport was developed taxiway Y was not extended down runway 15L. I hope that this can be considered in the upcoming patch. That sharp turn is a about 160 degress and would be hard for some of the larger jets to make. Also I am seeing some planes doing 360's at the bend in taxiway B near the intersection of runway 15R AND 4L but I am unable to find anything in the output log for this issue. output_log.txt

I was playing a session last night for about 3 hours and I did not see a large drop off of incoming flights. I have the traffic set to 85% and have real traffic/color from NYD. One difference that I had was I only had 27 open for landings. I would divert props (Cape air) and some small jets to 32 (i.e. enter final runway 32). I had only 12 "Close Cross incoming range" errors in an over 3 hours of game play. There are well over 100 of these errors in cbrascott's file. I wonder if its due to the lower traffic setting or just one open runway or both of these settings? As a note it would be nice that we could specify specific aircraft sizes that would land of specific runways. We could set props and small jests for 32, super large jets (777) for 15L and all other sizes to 27. TRACON should be doing the work to put the aircraft on the appropriate runway not the airport tower. I was getting medium jets on 32, props on 33L which does not make sense. Also I was annoyed when a CRJ landed on runway 27 and immediately exited the runway onto taxiway C right into a long line of jets. No plane in real life would exit there seeing a line of jets. A plane should check to see if the next segment is clear before entering and if its not clear radio the tower/ground. Maybe these enhancements could be added to the next version of Tower!3D Pro.

It was purposely built to keep Massport (agency that runs KBOS) from extending runway 32 and to make sure there are never any flights on that runway that flow toward the northwest. It would be nice when FeelThere decides to do the next version of Tower!3Dx so that they could have operating procedures added into the game. That would list general runway configurations and allow players to receive some point deductions for landing larger jest of runway 32 (Improper aircraft landing on runway 32, violated safety procedure -100 points) and even larger deductions for having a plane land on 14 or take off on 32 (Collision Alert with obstruction near runway 14/32 -500 points). The same for someone who flied a plane over the terminal in KPHL. I will add this to the post once FeelThere starts the suggestion for the next version thread.

Some information on the web shows that the takeoff distance for the 77W (Boeing 777-300ER) is 10,000 feet at sea level where the 773 (Boeing 777-300) is 10,600 feet. The planes can be edited while we wait for a patch and use 772 (Boeing 777-200) at 8,000 feet or 77L (Boeing 777-200LR) at 9,200 feet if these minimum distances in the data files are near these values. One similar thing with aircraft and runways at KBOS similar to the 77W was in a You Tube Video (peabody1001)where a 73H landed on runway 32. I know that 737's can land on short runways but at only 100 feet wide and with buildings to the northwest, if the plane had to go around, it would be very dangerous. The landing itself would not be too pleasant either. If just a minimum distance is used for take off and landing, then it explains why the 737 can land of 32 and the 77W can't take off on 15R/33L. It seems that there needs to be a valid aircraft type applied to the specific runways at each airport so aircraft that would not use runways in the game that they do not use in real life. Airports like Denver (KDEN) have increased distances due to altitude. KBOS and KPHL have unidirectional runways. Also distances change due to weather but the weather model in this version of Tower!3D Pro is very simple.

I ran into an issue similar to the one that the OP described during a session at KPHL. I discovered that I would get a Beep-Beep that interrupts my voice commands even though the left shift was constantly pressed down. I discovered this occurs when I have the multiple monitors setup with the DBright and Stip on the 2nd monitor. I noticed it occurs when I set the focus (i.e. mouse clicked) on the DBright or strip. Somehow if the main game screen looses focus I get the constant Beep-Beep interruptions. If I click on the main game screen they stop and my voice commands work as expected.