Jump to content
The simFlight Network Forums

DeltaVII

Members
  • Posts

    353
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    16

Everything posted by DeltaVII

  1. I can, tbh. If it's EDDM quality - and bugfixed in the same way...
  2. Well, at JFK the real ATCs do it immediately after take-off, leaving the airport's boundaries respectively. At around 500 ft. My best practice, however, is when they reach a safe wake turbulence mark for the next aircraft to get departure clearance: 1000 ft. for medium jets, 1500 ft. for heavies, 2000 ft. for supers.
  3. I guess the project name during development was "Whose plane is it anyway?". 😉
  4. With the custom schedule, yes. However, I found a way with the default RT schedule for two - slow - hours where I was able to use gaps in the 28s approaches to get traffic out on the 1s. It only works with doing what actually should be prohibited as far as I understand, but has been used in KSFO: parallel take-offs on 1L and 1R (as can be seen here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ENe89j89tBA&t=6m57s). A realistic schedule is indeed unworkable at any time.
  5. Do you have high contrast setting on for your windows or anything like that (color scheme etc.)?
  6. Well, there are little nuisances. Yesterday, I had an LAX session with Hawthorne and Santa Monica open, but departing aircraft from either airport would just remain sitting at the end of the runway rather than flying - despite gaining height on the spot, which I also experienced with an SAS flight in my self-created EDDH sector. And I don't know why, but when I exit from a sector to select a different time or change the sector after a few minutes, speech recognition doesn't work anymore, and I have to restart the whole game.
  7. Ariel, to be honest: If the sim engine accepts an instruction to vacate left onto a specific taxiway, but then decides to totally ignore it and vacates the aircraft onto another exit and even in another direction, said sim engine is pretty droppings-like, and it doesn't leave much ground to build trust on when you want us to buy the next version. I'm not talking about deliberate shortcomings that you condoned to getting the product out and refinancing the temporal (= monetary) investment you took to create it. Nobody expects you as an indy company to beat the big guys in the game market. But when your product accepts user input then it has to follow said input. (Except "pilot error" in this case is explicitly wanted, but then it has to be random, programmed that way - and you have to communicate that these errors occur intentional like the technical issues for planes in Tracon.) What do you think would players say about Microsoft's Flight Sim, if turning the dial for the altitude resulted in making a 180° turn? You already have done many things to improve the game, and I really appreciate that. Compared to the original one I bought a year ago, many things have been improved. But leaving flaws like these exiting bugs in doesn't leave a good impression when you want us to buy the next version that you're already investing time (and money) in. If aircraft touch down and creep to the next exit, I can live with that. If aircraft creep to their assigned exit at taxiing speed, I can live with that. That's the way you've constructed it to make it work. I can live with the pushbacks not being realistic (within a minute? oh, come on...). I can live with limited freedom at giving instructions. You found a solution to make it work, in general. That's okay. But NOT taking the exit that it was assigned is sloppy programming. The year-old issue with the spinning Deltas that fail at finding the leading link at Kennedy's M and MA ramps after pushback is sloppy programming. Sorry to be that harsh. But functionality has to ... well, function. It's okay, if you don't find the error without asking for more input from users and need more time. I'd totally accept an update that would only extend logging functions for those specific issues, and I'd gladly try to help by submitting more logfiles, if you need them. But accepting "defeat" by saying "we can't do it any better" is something that I'll definitely remember before buying the new version.
  8. Well, FT would not necessarily need to implement those water runways, but they're still a nice feature to look at, and I like the layout. (Yeah, okay, I admit it: I've been there on vacation twice, and I miss it... same goes for Miami. But as long as paranoia wins over friendship, I'm staying out of the country.)
  9. How about KMIA (busy, many international flights, interesting layout, penalty box, one holding bar for either 12 and 8R, seven cargo areas, the tower sitting above terminal D) and PHNL (many new airlines, island hoppers, optional military flights via Pearl Harbor/Hickam AFB, two "runways" for water planes - 4W/26W and 8W/22W -, the tower being mid-field with a nice view overlooking a pretty small terminal, runway 8R/26L being built into the Pacific ocean) ?
  10. I even remember switching an aircraft type in an earlier version of RT, because the aircraft (I think it was an A340) wouldn't find any runway long enough to take off from.
  11. I tried that yesterday, because I have the same problem - no response by now. 🙁
  12. It does. See: https://www.flightradar24.com/data/aircraft/n845mh
  13. @scoobflight is right. In Tracon, all times are UTC. KSAN is in the UTC-7 time zone.
  14. Is it just my system, or do the intersecting taxiway markings (a. k. a. the yellow lines with black borders) flicker?
  15. I don't have it, yet (well, yesterday was a bank holiday), but judging by the screenshot, it's not the only mistake with this end of the runway as it seems. If they haven't changed it within the last two years, Runway 07 has a displaced threshold beginning at Taxiway I instead of K. As you can see here: https://goo.gl/maps/MH5D5jdP8x12
  16. Here's a screenshot from a second session where it occurred again with SAS652.
  17. I'm currently testing a sector I'm creating. It's my home sector at EDDH (and I'm willing to share it including the necessary changes/additions to the database files with the community as soon as I'm positive it's working correctly). I recently ran into a problem with two SAS flights. They stalled at their respective spawning points, one (SAS651, STAR "MIC 2K") far out at the beginning of the STAR route, the other (SAS 652, SID "EKERN 8G") at the beginning of it's SID on the edge of the runway (but I was able to assign flight levels and hand it over to Bremen Center!). I used both SID/STAR routes on other flights where this didn't occur. Both ID tags showed an airspeed of 0 while SAS651's airspeed decreased from an inital 8.5 knots (!) to zero and SAS652's airspeed grew from 7.9 to 10.2 knots (!). Game log attached. Any ideas why that happened? By the way, there's another issue with the speech recognition. The waypoints for EDDH (most are named with "DH" and a three-digit number following, "DH658" for example) work just fine. I can address them by simply saying "D H 6 5 8" or "D H six fifty-eight" (the "DH" part not being "Delta Hotel" in NATO alphabet). But the waypoints for EDHL are problematic, because whatever I do, the system won't recognize me saying "H L 1 4 5" (again, "HL" not being "Hotel Lima" in NATO alphabet). Is there any way to work around this? Tracon_SAS_game.log.zip
  18. @FeelThere / @FeelThere Ariel / @FeelThere_AJ When I try to put the Real Color EDDS into the cart the BMT page shows Real Color KMEM instead! (Only on feelthere.com - on atcsuite.com it's correct.)
  19. It's a real struggle, but I guess it's an endeavor that we virtual ATCs are united in...
  20. Doesn't seem to be a standard procedure. Could be controller preference, could be depending on whether the crew got the departure frequency from clearance delivery, but could also be anticipation whether the pilot is familiar with the airport and airspace and coming in regularly (especially those with KLAS as base - pilots from Southwest and Allegiant seem a safe bet - might be able to tell the frequency while sleeping). I mean, when a pilot or F/O calls time and time again, you surely start to recognize him/her by voice and tone...
  21. It's the moment in Tracon when the departing aircraft calls departure ("departure, argentina one three zero three with information delta at 9 hundreds climbing to 5 thousands"). Is it coincidential that the aircraft in Tower freezes when in Tracon - using similar logic in the process of a flight, I guess - it would call departure? Probably. But being a programmer myself, I would not be surprised, if that was not a coincidence. It has always been my guess that there's some timed internal calculation or trigger for a process related to the aircraft's movement that's stalling the animation for a moment - especially when that happens repeatedly, then there must be a rule why that happens.
  22. @Pdubya That might be a really good explanation, since this is the moment for the handover in Tracon. I don't know whether Tower and Tracon interact with each other (or were intended to), maybe the developers trigger something at that point.
  23. I think it's the exact same moment that sometimes aircraft make an airborne 360, like I've experienced at Kennedy, LaGuardia, San Diego, San Francisco.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use. Guidelines Privacy Policy We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.