crbascott

The text files you mention are part of real traffic. You'll need to download the latest version of RT to get those files for KBOS.

I think I'm starting to understand the close cross incoming range error. It's all about the Tower engine enforcing 5nm separation. As a result from a scheduling standpoint, that means arrivals need 2 minute spacing to ensure adequate separation. What this means from a capacity standpoint in Tower is that the maximum number of arrivals in an hour for single runway airports and crossing runway airports is 30. For airports with parallel runways, we can have a maximum of 60 arrivals if the schedule is built so that the arrivals spawn on alternating runway every two minutes. If anyone sees the arrival capacity being different, I'd love to hear it.

In a KBOS session, DAL127 an A333 was spawned on Runway 32. When I attempted to clear it to land I received and error: "Unable to land. The Runway is to short!" I thought the engine wouldn't put a plane on a runway that was too short. Attached is a screenshot and log. Craig output_log.txt

Vic, I am providing more details of our KBOS MP session in the attached spreadsheet. Overall totals: 87 arrivals in the Real Traffic schedule, 39 arrived (only 12 arrived as scheduled), 48 were held. The session was 132 minutes. The following stats focus on the first half of the session which theoretically would allow all planes to land assuming a max delay of 60 minutes. 31 of 51 arrivals were activated. Only 8 flights arrived as scheduled (26% of the arrivals activated/spawned, only 16% of the overall total). Of the 23 arrivals that were delayed and eventually landed, over half of them were delayed over an hour. 20 arrivals were never spawned and, obviously, were delayed at least an hour. In the spreadsheet, I categorized the held flights/delays. They are categorized by the initial cause of the delay. At later points, the sim usually tries to re-spawn the flight. The flight can be delayed by the same or different reason at those later points. Due to the delays there were 3 gaps of 8 minutes or more where there were no arrivals, the longest gap being 22+ minutes. I see several issues causing arrival delays: Problem: No free terminal - the sim has complex logic to determine how gates are occupied and since it loads 6 hours of flights gate availability can be sparse. Solution: If you only plan to run an hour or two, slim down the schedule file to include only the time period you need (plus maybe some padding to if you want/need to make the airport look more full). In the case of KAP however, gates are very limited. These and other terminals/gates other may need to be looked at by FeelThere. Problem: Close cross incoming range - With multiple 20 nm finals that are shared by aircraft of all types, the sim has implemented complex logic to avoid collisions on crossing runways. Solution: TBD. Without knowing what the basic rules are, I don't know what the user community can do. However, it is apparent that this is an issue at all airports that have crossing runways. For now, I'd suggest we keep submitting logs assuming the developers are open to tweaking their logic. Problem: Duplicate arrival time - This is a limitation when the sim engine processes the schedule. A duplicate arrival time will at a minimum cause one of the flights to be delayed. As a result, the maximum number of arrivals in an hour is 60 assuming the schedule is built strategically with this issue in mind. Solution: For larger airports like KATL, there is not a solution to get realistic arrival volumes. For other airports, it is best to edit the arrivals times to avoid duplicates. Additionally with the sim enforcing 5nm separation, 2 minute spacing between arrivals on the same runway is recommended. Problem: Unknown reason - The log doesn't indicate an error or message but the flight is delayed. Solution: I personally think these are related to separation. See, the above for recommendations. In all the above cases, the sim engine holds flights until it determines they can arrive. Optimal solution? Maybe, maybe not. Hopefully alternatives can be brainstormed/discussed, but more than than likely this is a next version conversation.. So, what about this version? I'm not giving up on the close cross incoming range issue yet. I plan to run this session and only include 15:00-18:59 in the schedule to see how much of the free terminal issue is eliminated. Eliminating some of the noise might help us better understand the close cross incoming range issue better. The close cross incoming range error occurs in different scenarios, I've even seen it when only one arriving runway is active. So, I will keep trying to figure this darn thing out because I am very concerned how it is impacting what should be some very fun airports. Craig KBOS_1600_Summary.xlsx

It doesn't have to be on C:

The default install folder for Steam is actually C:\Program Files (x86)\Steam\steamapps\common\Tower 3D Pro\Extensions\Airplanes\Texturepacks The real color files for LAX are airplanes_texpack3 and airplanes_texpack3.manifest.

In 2011, the A321 has a takeoff length of 7150 feet (assuming I didn't edit it). Looks like Pro may be using a similar value.

Here's my original KMCO terminal file from a couple of years ago. Hopefully it will work for you. Craig Orlando_Airport_terminal.txt

Yes, both the A359 and B789 are now included in RT/RC.

Vic, I will respond via direct message. Thanks!

Following up on this issue. I played a multiplayer session today at KBOS and we experienced very low arrival traffic. We started the session at 16:00 and operated in NW flow (Arrivals - 33L, 32, & 27; Departures - 33L & 27). Very fun scenario when there was traffic. At the end of the two hourish session we had completed 52 departures and only 35 arrivals. The real traffic file has 66 departures and 70 arrivals scheduled for this time period. There are many reasons for arrivals not to spawn, but the close cross incoming range message seems to be a new ?issue? that has only really been noticed at KBOS. In our session, this issue caused 21 arrivals to be delayed and 29 arrivals to never show up. Are the crossing runways at KBOS causing this issue? Is there something we can do from a scheduling/configuration standpoint to experience the expected traffic volumes? I've attached the log file from our session if it helps. Thanks for looking into this. Craig output_log.zip

Excuse me Your Holiness, there is only a 6 minute difference in our responses. Your reply wasn't there when I began my post. Furthermore I'm not sure what kind of power trip you are on, but you are not the forum moderator nor the only one that can submit issues despite having "direct contact with the developers". Thanks.

In real life - west flow is more prevalent at KPHL, with 27R used for arrivals and 27L used for departures. https://www.faa.gov/airports/planning_capacity/profiles/media/PHL-Airport-Capacity-Profile-2014.pdf

If Pro is like 2011, each airplane type has a defined takeoff length, landing length, and several other attributes. Looking at the 77W in 2011, the takeoff length is 10500 feet1. The longest runway at KBOS is 15R/33L at 10083 feet. Clearly in Pro the takeoff length of the 77W exceeds 10083. Takeoff distance is determined by a lot of factors but the 77Ws that serve KBOS are obviously configured to takeoff under 10083 feet. 10500 is not necessarily an incorrect attribute value for a 77W, but it is at KBOS. We'll probably need to ask Nyerges to tweak the 77W in Real Traffic (assuming it is a prefab level attribute). Craig 1 We could edit the attributes in 2011, I do not recall if I did or not for the 77W.

A few more than a couple others ... there are 18 new liveries in RC for KBOS.

Vic, How does the sim handle turnaround flights with the same flight number? For example there is a flight 1984 from PHL-ORD and then ORD-PHL a few hours later (within the six hour window). Same flight number, same equipment. I assume if we want both flights to show up one of the flight numbers will need to be different. I'm 100% sure I've seen this scenario happen in both RT and custom schedules and the departing flight is dropped. You know me ... I could test this to make sure, but thought I'd ask first. I'm lazy tonight. :) Thanks, Craig PS - In the above scenario ORD would have the continuing flight. Just thought I'd make it clear and that I'm not hijacking the thread. :)

I'm sensing a pattern in these posts. As a result I'll steal a line from blipadouzi -- Jim D., this is "not worth the time to respond to".

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/

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.

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

I'll follow up via direct message - I don't want to hijack the topic trying to understand. We have a new schedule to enjoy folks!

I'm curious, why does that matter?

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

You're a funny guy!

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).