DeltaVII

The landings, takeoffs, penalties and total score are stored in the registry under "HKCU\Software\FeelThere\Tower! 3D Pro".

It should not be used for landing. Because the approach path crosses the active runways, and in case of a go-around ... well... (The same applies to runway 8 at KPHL, by the way.) In reality, runway 14 can technically be used for arrivals - it's not allowed, but it's there ... But I'm sure the programmed runway model includes that it has to be theoretically able to be used for departures and arrivals (and I assume programming the runway model otherwise might have complicated a lot for airport development).

I have EDDS and KMEM. So my suggestion is KRDU... 😏

You're right, thanks. I corrected it.

If US Airways, I'd prefer another model - for ... approximately 1549 reasons... A320, 320, AWE, US, CACTUS, US Airways, USA https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/9331229 https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/7938609 And I'm surprised that nobody yet thought of this: B742, 742, AF1, ##, AIR FORCE, US Air Force, USA https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/9331053 https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/9247292

According to Wikipedia, A30B/AB4 are the codes for the A300C4, and the A306/AB6 (A300-600) already exists in the game with UPS livery, so I thought it would be the B2/B4/C4 that will be modeled for Northeastern International Airways. (But I don't think anyone will notice, if the LH livery is not on a C4, but on whatever Northeastern was operating...)

L101, L10, LTU, LT, LTU, LTU International Airways, Germany (My first flight ever was on this type, DUS/EDDL -> MIA/KMIA, in 1990.) https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/8374192 https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/8189342 A30B, AB4, HLF, HF, HAPAG LLOYD, Hapag-Lloyd Flug, Germany https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/510429 https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/8314009 DC93, D93, AEF, YP, AERO LLOYD, Aero Lloyd, Germany https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/8997736 https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/8390558 B737, 73G, HHI, 4R, HAMBURG JET, Hamburg International, Germany (They used to operate six of those, partially in ethnic transport to and from EBL/ORER, ISU/ORSU, PRN/LYPR.) https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/318575 https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/438131 B73C, 73C, HHI, 4R, HAMBURG JET, Hamburg International, Germany (This aircraft was just as doomed as HHI itself...) https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/7683721 https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/7036765

Apart from just reducing the traffic load, do you slow them down? I know it's difficult to find the right timing on the ones coming in hot at 240 kts as slowest practical speed, when you have slowed down the other traffic to around 160 to 180 kts. A useful command that I - unfortunately - hardly make use of is the CROSS XXXXX AT AND MAINTAIN XXXXX command. And you can, of course, send planes into a holding pattern and stack them up at a waypoint. I've done this primarily when it gets so busy that I might lose control over my airspace.

Actually, that should go without saying, because by clicking the datatag you announce to the center controller that you're about to hand off the flight to you. Imagine there were real controllers behind those frequencies - how would the 119.95 controller know you're transferring a flight when you announced it to the 135.9 controller? The manual says: The next controller has to be the one on the frequency of the sector the plane is in at the moment of the announcement, because it wouldn't make sense to announce an oncoming handoff to ALL center controllers in the area simultaneously, would it?

Did you read the manual in the Tracon! installation folder? 1) You have to hand off the flight to the Center controller after either it reaches a certain altitude or comes within 10 nm of the boundary of your sector. To initiate the hand-off you click left on the aircraft icon. When Center is ready to accept, the tag flashes five times, you can make the hand-off. 2) The center frequency depends on where you initiate the hand-off. The frequencies are displayed in the manual. If you initiate the hand-off in a sector different from the one you actually issue it, you still have to assign the frequency for the initial sector. When you click on the tag when the flight is in the 135.9 center sector, you have to hand it over to 135.9, even if it already entered the 119.95 center sector.

Do you have a output_log.txt file in the "tower3d_data" subfolder under your Tower!3D installation path? If so, can you please upload it? 72/81 sounds like a schedule issue.

I'm using a wireless Logitech H600 headset. I#m struggling a little with the microphone, because it picks up all kinds of noise from the street and my noisy neighbors as well as the noise from the right ear cup and messes up the voice recognition. Before that, I used a wireless Creative Labs HS-1200 headset where I could place the microphone directly in front of my mouth. The reasons I replaced it were simply a dying battery and the small ear cups that hurt my ears after a while. My perfect headset would be one to pull over my ears and lets me bend the microphone in front of my mouth (and has a pop filter).

If you ignore the holding line issues...

Oh, I have another one. GATE ENTRIES CROSSING TAXIWAYS / PUSHBACK ONTO ASSIGNED TAXIWAY Remember Dubai? At Terminal 3 below the tower you can see that the gates are accessible from either taxiway U and J as well as K and Z, respectively, and they can also be pushed back onto either taxiway - which, to me, seems like a splendid idea. (Are there any airports doing it the same way?) "EK61, pushback approved onto J, face west"

If you haven't already noticed: @ATControl -- Joe gave an early look. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IMTxM9bBtkM

This was my experience just a few minutes ago, about 50 minutes in:

So do the real world ATCs... @EliGrim It's not KLGA, it's Tower itself. It already burnt through an older graphics card in my PC, and the CPU is equally under stress. However, it might be something specific with your PC configuration, in combination with the graphics engine that FT uses. I'm running an older machine (that I'm willing to replace next year) with a seven-year-old AMD A10-5800K CPU, a two-year-old Radeon RX 560 (4 GB) graphics card, and 2x4 GB DDR3 Kingston RAM, and I don't have those problems in this severity. Just to be sure: Have you already cleaned the inside of your PC? And have you uninstalled KLGA and tried it again? There's probably something wrong with the installation? And another idea: Did you try a RAM test? Maybe one of your Nighthawks is faulty, and it's only KLGA showing it (I've already seen the wildest things...)?

Since the logfiles are primarily for the developers (and I myself am one, which means I use logfiles in debug mode very, very heavily), I'd say: they probably need to know every single livery / model has loaded. That said, it might make sense to split those up into different tasks, like an init log, a gameplay log, an unloading log, different terminal logs, or whatever might be of the biggest use AND shrink the size of the respective log files... And it might make sense to add an output window in logging mode for error messages in case something goes wrong, so that we can debug our flightplans etc.

@Braf123456 Don't get too excited. Testing in software engineering is a task that happens repeatedly in even early stages, because developers tend to fix bugs at certain milestones instead of finishing the product and then work back through millions of lines of code and probably having to re-design parts of it from scratch. Because that's how you produce new bugs.

Judging by what I've heard from JFK, it depends on the wait times. If the field is packed, there's more than enough time for them during taxi to pick up the new ATIS and feed the computer. If not, they either stay in the alleyway or Ground moves them out on a longer route with an optional holding point. Having them wait in the alleyway can be problematic when they block gate access for inbound traffic, so that the arrival aircraft has to wait and blocks the taxiway or has to be parked at a remote site. I don't think we will have the option in Tower XX to send an aircraft in the alleyway back to the stand when their route is closed or something, so we will definitely have to move that plane, and it should not be a problem to put it somewhere so it can pick up ATIS in the process. ... and I got new ideas for Tower XX standing in the shower this morning: CORRECTION The word "correction" is used when an ATC makes a mistake in the transmission and it's part of the official phraseology (this is a nice EUROCONTROL tool to look it up). This would be handy for when we or the speech engine messes up, it can either become part of the transmission or just delete the last portion of it. Examples: "Jetblue 4890 - correction: Delta 4890, hold short of taxiway K" or "Jetblue 4890" -> "Delta 4890, hold short of taxiway K". "Delta 4890, turn right onto taxiway K, cross runway 31R - correction: cross runway 31L, contact tower" or "Delta 4890, turn right onto taxiway K, cross runway 31R" -> "Delta 4890, turn right onto taxiway K, cross runway 31L, contact tower" MONITOR TOWER Instead of contacting Tower (which means that the pilot actively calls Tower after the handoff from Ground), an aircraft can switch to the tower frequency and just listen to be called. (While we're at it: this would/could require the ATIS information to be confirmed prior to switching, already on ground frequency. Failing to do so -- eventually by a simple exchange like "Delta 4890, verify you have information G" - "Affirm, Delta 4890" -- might result in a loss of points for the ATC in an advanced scoring system that resembles the one in TRACON.) LEGACY MODE Let's face it, Tower XX will be more accurate, but also more complex. So, how about an easier "legacy mode" that pretty much works like Tower 3D for beginners (this would leave out things like verifying ATIS) and the improved regular mode for aficionados like us?

Often enough it is not done. But I have also heard otherwise. Especially after ATIS changed recently. Here, for example, a Delta Connection pilot announces with his taxi request that he has X-Ray, and it's a pretty new (post-KS) audio. And I found this in section 2-9-2, letter c, in FAA Order JO 7110.65: And directed at pilots the FAA's Aeronautical Information Manual states in chapter 4, section 4-2-3, number 3:

Reasons are not necessary to be given. The biggest factor, though, is still the weather. So, the easiest thing to produce delays is closing virtual routes or stopping releases to a certain region (like the American east coast from North Carolina to Florida due to a severe hurricane or something). Which leads me to another two possible features: METARs In short: weather reports that the Tower (or virtual tower supervisor) has to react to, like performing a runway change etc., and influences the spacing of inbound and outbound flights from a certain point. INFORMATIONs When virtual pilots call Ground, they should provide which ATIS they have ("Ground, Jetblue 1415 ready for taxi at DA with information K"). If ATIS has moved on or the pilot didn't include ATIS information into his call, Ground has to tell them ("Jetblue 1415, information is L, taxi right onto A, hold short of J"). This might be something to produce a delay, so that the pilots can listen to ATIS again and punch it into the computer ("Ground, Jetblue 1415 is not ready", followed by "Ground, Jetblue 1415 ready for departure") - and only then they can be handed over to the Tower.

I have another idea that affects the schedule file: MARKERS FOR LIVERY AND CARGO Many airlines have their cargo divisions operating without a seperate IATA/ICAO code and callsign, but under their main company's code and flight number. Emirates and Cathay Pacific are two examples I can think of. I think the new schedule format needs a cargo flag (a simple 0/1 switch) to distinguish between those jets going to the cargo ramps and those transporting pax. Another extension to the schedule could be an ID to the livery used for an aircraft. One example is that Alaska Airlines still has aircraft with Virgin America livery flying around while using an Alaska Airlines flight number, and flights under American callsign in US Airways livery was for some time worth a good laugh with "in disguise" comments by ATCs. Another use could be the introduction of a new livery (or even a special livery, like this Eurowings Europa-Park livery) that not every aircraft in the company on the same model is flying with (yet). This would even allow for sub-charter scenarios. (I once worked as an IT guy for a charter airline that used to operate its own aircraft with its own company livery under the lessee's callsign and flight number, that's where my affection for aviation comes from.) I am aware we already have the disguising option using the codesharing entry, but replacing it with a livery ID would allow for more options.

I've heard it a few times, actually. Especially when they try to sequence the aircraft at MA or V before the handover to the tower they use B to get inbound aircraft to the gate and outbound aircraft to 13R/22R. Right now, they're using the 4s, so I can't reproduce it, but there are Kennedy Steve vids where he does exactly that (like telling a Delta tug at LL to go left on A behind a Norwegian to go to HB or telling a Delta to transition from A to B at H to go to HB and wait for the alleyway to clear). (In those cases, they make a "cut" - in a 13R-only scenario, all aircraft from ramp entries D to NB go counter-clockwise while all departures from F to MA go clockwise, for example. The general rule is that A goes clockwise and B goes counter-clockwise, but it's not written in the bible. It's just taxiways after all, and they utilize them like they need them.) At least, that's my take from all that I've heard and observed from Kennedy Ground.

Just three things that annoy me on my by far favorite airport which happens to be JFK. 1) I find the 4s/22s pretty unusable because of the problems with landing aircraft creeping down the runway to F/H while the next aircraft is on final (it's the game engine's fault, but landing on 4R/22L shows it even worse). I've had several go-arounds for the simple reason that a CRJ, 319, or 717 took forever to get to those exits while another jet was already on the threshold. 2) The f-ing MA ramp where aircraft from several positions are dancing tango through the other planes and the terminal after giving taxi instructions. 3) The huge cargo ramp cluster which is not divided into portions, so that all landing cargo planes go to the gates alongside taxiway C and never ever to the S or Q area. A little boring, but compared to the other two points, this is peanuts. Oh, and I hope in Tower XX's version (if there will be one) A and B will be usable in both directions (which, in reality, they are).