Jump to content
The simFlight Network Forums

crbascott

Members
  • Content Count

    1,432
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    106

crbascott last won the day on November 5

crbascott had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

361 Excellent

About crbascott

  • Rank
    Advanced Member

Recent Profile Visitors

3,588 profile views
  1. If you looked at his GA schedule you wouldn't be asking that question. My stance is that you shouldn't be sharing RT files and calling them your own.
  2. Why would people be unable to download them? The bigger question is why would they want to? You've given "us" no reason to try out your schedules. Is it any better than RT? What are the flights per hour? Why do you include non-customized files (GA, airports, airplanes) and call them your own? Not sure why @FeelThere, @nyergesdesign , or @scoobflight don't put a stop to your piracy.
  3. I believe that tool is no longer available due to customer dissatisfaction with the developers. Nevertheless, I'd recommend to @ATC AlaskaGuy and any other custom schedule making newbie to self serve and learn to build your own graphs. Top notch schedule makers like @hexzed and @battlehawk77 always include graphs for their schedules - it helps "sell" the schedule and is obviously helpful when using the schedule.
  4. Of course you can remove them, they just won't show up if they happen to be in a schedule.
  5. Was not questioning him, just joking about the "been told" part of the comment.
  6. Gotta inside source, do ya? 😀
  7. Below is a conceptual "redesign' of the some of traffic files to address some items in my previous post. I'm not advocating/pushing for its use but just feel like "a picture is worth a thousand words". I'm basically trying to visually demonstrate how we could implement cargo/regional carriers, special liveries, and other features without having to compromise ICAO/IATA codes. Again, the purpose its to share a concept and not a solution. I'm sure there's a scenario or two that this doesn't address. Airlines file Added an AIRLINE_ID column to allow for multiple liveries for the same airline, be it passenger, cargo or regional carriers. This would be used in the schedule and terminal file. Added a LIVERY column mainly for documentation/clarification. It should synch up with "real color". //AIRLINE_ID, ICAO, IATA, callsign, LIVERY, airline, country KAL0001, KAL, KE, KOREAN AIR, KAL, Korean Air Lines, Republic of Korea KAL0002, KAL, KE, KOREAN AIR, CARGO, Korean Air Lines, Republic of Korea AMX0001, AMX, AM, AEROMEXICO, AMX, AeroMéxico, Mexico DAL0001, DAL, DL, DELTA, DAL, Delta Air Lines, United States SKW0001, SKW, OO, SKY WEST, AAL, SkyWest Airlines, United States SKW0002, SKW, OO, SKY WEST, ASA, SkyWest Airlines, United States SKW0003, SKW, OO, SKY WEST, DAL, SkyWest Airlines, United States SKW0004, SKW, OO, SKY WEST, UAL, SkyWest Airlines, United States ASA0001, ASA, AS, ALASKA, ASA, Alaska Airlines, United States ASA0002, ASA, AS, ALASKA, N559AS, Alaska Airlines, United States QFA0001, QFA, QF, QANTAS, QFA, Qantas Airways, Australia FDX0001, FDX, FX, FEDEX, FDX, Federal Express, United States UPS0001, UPS, 5X, UPS, UPS, United Parcel Service, United States Schedule file Changed the airports to use the ICAO code. Where we formerly had the airline IATA code, I've replaced it with new AIRLINE_ID. Again, this allows for cargo/passenger differentiation, regional/operator use, and the incorporation of special liveries. For now I am using the ICAO code for the aircraft type. Not sure yet if ICAO or IATA would be better. Added seconds to the times. Currently we can't get arrivals with the same time even with multiple runways. Not sure if this a solution, but more indicative that the issue needs to be addressed. Some people have asked to incorporate delays, etc. Personally, I'd actually like to see the schedule executed as designed instead of no free terminal, dropped flights, etc. Got rid of the last two columns because they are not of use. //Depart,Arrive,Type,Airline,Flight,Arrival,Departure RKSI,KLAX,B77L,KAL0001,86,00:01:15,12:00:00 PANC,KLAX,B77L,KAL0002,249,08:39:30,12:00:00 KLAX,MMMX,B738,AMX0001,401,12:00:00,02:21:00 KLAX,KSLC,CRJ7,SKW0004,5704,12:00:00,19:49:29 KDAL,KLAX,E75L,SKW0002,3325,18:59:00,12:00:00 KSJC,KLAX,A320,ASA0001,1466,11:48:48,12:00:00 KLAX,PHOG,B738,ASA0002,813,12:00:00,11:15:47 Liveries Internally this could be how the livery files could be named. KAL0001_B77L default livery KAL0002_B77L cargo (no passenger windows) AMX0001_B738 default livery SKW0004_CRJ7 DAL livery SKW0002_E75L ASA livery ASA0001_A320 default livery ASA0001_B738 default livery ASA0002_B738 N559AS (salmon) Terminal For added realism, I would definitely like to see the airport and terminal assignments at a gate level. In the fictitious example below, all AMX (an asterisk indicates all varieties) planes would use terminal 2, gate 1. KAL passenger planes would park at terminal B, gate 1. While KAL cargo planes would park in the cargo 2 area, gate 1. ASA would use all the gates in terminal 6 while the SKW regional planes operating for ASA would use gates 3 and 4. On the other hand, the SKW regional planes operating for UAL would park at gates 3 and 4 in terminal 8. The scenario I haven't addressed is airlines arriving in one terminal and departing from another. This could involve towing and other features. Would like to see this incorporated somehow. A specific example of the above is airlines providing both international and domestic service and how certain terminals/gates are designated for that. In real life we see this from SWA at KLAX. They depart all flights from terminal 1 but international arrivals use terminal B. //Fictitious Terminal File T2_01: AMX* TB_01: KAL0001 TB_02: QFA0001 T6_01: ASA* T6_02: ASA* T6_03: ASA*,SKW0002 T6_04: ASA*,SKW0002 T6_05: ASA* T8_01: UAL* T8_02: UAL* T8_03: UAL*,SKW0004 T8_04: UAL*,SKW0004 T8_05: UAL* C1_01: FDX* C1_02: FDX* C1_03: FDX* C1_04: FDX* C2_01: KAL0002 C2_02: UPS*
  8. Here are some wishlist items specific to Real Color and Real Traffic although the game engine would need to be aware also Real Traffic and Real Color should be a single product. In reality you "can't" have one without the other so why are they bundled separately? Current separation seems a little deceiving and causes customer complaints/issues. Consider non-airport based packaging. Current process is non-beneficial to loyal customers as they repeatedly pay for the same liveries pack after pack. No matter what packaging scheme is used, when a livery is updated in one package it should be updated in all other packages (except if the old livery is considered a special livery - see below). The current loading order of the RC packs determines the livery you see - which is now causing problems since various airports now have different livery versions for the same airline/model. List the liveries included in each package. Currently it's anyone's guess what is included ... unless someone buys it and shares the contents. This is not a good user experience. Create special liveries and allow them to be used in conjunction with RT and/or custom schedules. The special liveries should be just that - special. In other words if the ASA Salmon-Thirty-Salmon II livery (N559AS) is created for the B738, every ASA B738 should not have this livery. Allow for the regional carriers to have liveries for each of the major airlines they serve. For example Skywest flies for American, Delta, United, and Alaska and we currently only have a generic livery. Compass flies for American and Delta but we only have a Delta livery. Start over with the traffic related files. After 8+ years of using the same files it is time for a fresh start - especially when it comes to airlines and airports. In the current scheme of things there is no reason for each airport DLC to have its own set of RT files. Right now it's just an out-of-sync mess. Airlines, airports, and airplanes could be "system wide" while the schedules and terminal files could be airport specific.Theoretically, the same plane model could have different takeoff/landing parameters at different airports based on weight/capacity/etc. but I'm not sure you want to go there. Differentiate cargo and commercial flights. Thus differentiate windows/non-windows, parking spots, etc. For regional carriers, designate the major airline they are serving. This will help identify liveries and parking spots. Use standard ICAO/IATA codes (nothing made up like we have today). Reduce the use of IATA code (except for maybe airplanes).
  9. There is no official correct version. Additionally, people have made call sign mods to meet their individual tastes and accents. However, assuming one has purchased RT I see no issue with sharing this file (especially those creating custom schedules). A key point for those that play multiplayer - both players must have the same airlines_txt file for it to work.
  10. You're not a pain - just proves us custom schedule makers need to do a better QA job just like Nyerges. The airport ICAO errors are not critical - they don't cause the loading to freeze. However, these flights will be dropped. @hexzed may want to consider adding these to the airport file and provide a custom kmem_airports.txt. The 72% loading issue in this case is caused by an incorrect plane type in the GA schedule. There are two flights with a plane type of C182 and they need to be changed to CN1. I'm sure Ben will provide an update soon to fix these issues, but you can do the edits yourself to get up and running until then.
  11. I appreciate all of @pete_agreatguy’s attempted help but looking at the log file it appears the problem plane is an LJ3. If this is not in your airplanes file you’ll need to add it. More than likely it’s in a airplane file for a newer airport - you should be able to copy it to the KMEM file. Again, a reason against having airport specific airplane files in RT.
  12. You mean we can't reenact Top Gun with this game? What a bummer!!!! 😂
  13. And then reinstall the custom schedule. If you still have an issue, provide the output_log.txt file from folder ...\Tower!3D Pro\tower3d_Data and someone will pinpoint the issue. More than likely it is an airplane type issue.
  14. I think @DULEPA is speaking of KLAX instead of KLAS. Looking at the current D-ATIS (1756Z) at KLAS it appears to be a somewhat blustery (35023G32KT) day. Visual approaches at KLAS are in use with 26L and 1L as the landing runways. Departing runways are 1R (full) and 1L (at B). KLAS is probably one of my favorite airports although it does feature one of my pet peeves with the T!3D engine - arrival runway assignments. I mentioned this in wishlist item #12 of the Discord wishlist. https://forum.simflight.com/topic/87534-tower-xx-wishlist/?do=findComment&comment=531771
  15. Oh well, it was worth a try. 😂
×
×
  • 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.