Jump to content
The simFlight Network Forums

Post 5.1 fix requests


Recommended Posts

If you want to propose fixes of single files, that you consider necessary, please post them here.

I know of the A333_PW central gear, will publish that one soon, and the EDLP parking in misplaced building.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 64
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

If you want to propose fixes of single files, that you consider necessary, please post them here.

KMIA seems to have "ghost" runways, presumably part of some AI trafficing fiddle, but which are rather extremely placed and also appear, to some processing, to be overriding real ones. Here's the output of my own analysis:

Runway 9 /27 centre: N25:47:12.8878 W080:17:42.2146 8ft

Start 9 : N25:47:10.0371 W080:18:50.9312 8ft Hdg: 87.4 true

Computed start 9 : Lat 25.786095 Long -80.314830

Offset Threshold primary: 1350 feet

Start 27 : N25:47:15.7385 W080:16:33.4962 8ft Hdg: 267.4 true

Computed start 27 : Lat 25.787731 Long -80.275288

Offset Threshold secondary: 1270 feet

Hdg: 87.370 true (MagVar -5.000), ASPHALT, 12994 x 150 ft

Primary ILS: IBUL 110.90 , Flags: GS BC

Secondary ILS: IMIA 109.50 , Flags: GS BC

*** Runway *** KMIA0090 Lat 25.786095 Long -80.314827 Alt 8 Hdg 92 Len 12994 Wid 150 ILS 110.90, Flags: GS BC

*** Runway *** KMIA0270 Lat 25.787731 Long -80.275291 Alt 8 Hdg 272 Len 12994 Wid 150 ILS 109.50, Flags: GS BC

Runway 9R/27L centre: S89:47:34.8332 W079:17:24.1419 8ft

Runway 9R closed for landing and take-off

Runway 27L closed for landing and take-off

Hdg: 95.000 true (MagVar -5.000), GRASS, 33 x 33 ft

Runway 9 /27 centre: S89:47:34.8332 W079:17:24.1419 8ft

Runway 9 closed for landing and take-off

Runway 27 closed for landing and take-off

Start 9 : N25:47:10.0371 W080:18:50.9312 8ft Hdg: 87.4 true

Computed start 9 : Lat -89.792999 Long -79.302270

Start 27 : N25:47:15.7385 W080:16:33.4962 8ft Hdg: 267.4 true

Computed start 27 : Lat -89.793015 Long -79.277808

Hdg: 102.500 true (MagVar -5.000), GRASS, 33 x 33 ft

*** Runway *** KMIA0090 Lat -89.792999 Long -79.302269 Alt 8 Hdg 108 Len 33 Wid 33

*** Runway *** KMIA0270 Lat -89.793015 Long -79.277809 Alt 8 Hdg 288 Len 33 Wid 33

Ghost runway 9R/27L is ignored as it is too short and closed both ways, and doesn't amend an existing one, but the same details for 9/27 were amending the details for the real one, with nasty consequences for my data bases resulting from the extreme displacement to Lat 89S!

I've since amended my MakeRunways database builder to ignore altogether short runways closed both ways, but perhaps you could re-examine this particular file to see why it is so odd? Is it doing whatever was intended?

Thanks

Best Regards

Pete

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Pete,

there is nothing odd, these ghost runways are the well known Star technology known since early FS9 times. They are necessary to allow simultaneous usage of non-parallel runways, so you will find them on most large airports that do not have the all parallel layout of KATL or KLAX - about 100 should have them by now, and thousands will follow. You do not have a problem with them at KSFO, KJFK, KORD, EGLL, EDDF, EBBR, LEMD,...?

Putting them all to the South Pole was a good recommendation by Reggie if I remember correctly.

Best Burkhard

Link to post
Share on other sites

there is nothing odd, these ghost runways are the well known Star technology known since early FS9 times. They are necessary to allow simultaneous usage of non-parallel runways, so you will find them on most large airports that do not have the all parallel layout of KATL or KLAX - about 100 should have them by now, and thousands will follow.

I understand that, and this was taken care of. This one is different.

You do not have a problem with them at KSFO, KJFK, KORD, EGLL, EDDF, EBBR, LEMD,...?

Not that I know of. Let me check ...

KSFO is okay -- lots of ghosts but none ghosting a real runway designator

KJFK ditto

KORD ditto

EGLL ditto

EDDF ditto

EBBR ditto

LEMD ditto

So far KMIA is unique in having a ghost runway designated the same as a real one.

According to scenery "experts" I talked to these ghosts are usually (a) given a different runway designator that a real one -- as in the 9R/27L case, and (b) only displaced by a few hundred metres or so.

The second thing wouldn't have mattered if the first thing was okay.

They found your KMIA rather, er, odd, and suspect it could be a problem for others as well -- I've fixed my program now by taking more drastic measures than before.

Regards

Pete

Link to post
Share on other sites

Is there a pair used twice, so a 9/27 real and a 9/27 ghost? That indeed should be changed.

The usual distance for ghosts was about 100 miles in FS9, if they are nearer FS9/FSX tend to use them despite they are closed and too short.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Is there a pair used twice, so a 9/27 real and a 9/27 ghost? That indeed should be changed.

Yes, that certainly seems to be the difference making this specific one a problem. I did include the information for both the real and ghhost ones in my original post. They are as extracted direct from the file. Here's the "real" 9/27 again:

Runway 9 /27 centre: N25:47:12.8878 W080:17:42.2146 8ft

Start 9 : N25:47:10.0371 W080:18:50.9312 8ft Hdg: 87.4 true

Computed start 9 : Lat 25.786095 Long -80.314830

Offset Threshold primary: 1350 feet

Start 27 : N25:47:15.7385 W080:16:33.4962 8ft Hdg: 267.4 true

Computed start 27 : Lat 25.787731 Long -80.275288

Offset Threshold secondary: 1270 feet

Hdg: 87.370 true (MagVar -5.000), ASPHALT, 12994 x 150 ft

Primary ILS: IBUL 110.90 , Flags: GS BC

Secondary ILS: IMIA 109.50 , Flags: GS BC

*** Runway *** KMIA0090 Lat 25.786095 Long -80.314827 Alt 8 Hdg 92 Len 12994 Wid 150 ILS 110.90, Flags: GS BC

*** Runway *** KMIA0270 Lat 25.787731 Long -80.275291 Alt 8 Hdg 272 Len 12994 Wid 150 ILS 109.50, Flags: GS BC

Regards

Pete

Link to post
Share on other sites

@ThePilotAce: I should just tell you that the 777s won't be repainted until a new model comes along. The jetways in the improper position and the parking in the wrong location (front wheel not on the line) is because of the old model. If you observe the new models, you'll see they surpass the old in every possible way - worth waiting for in my opinion - until then watch how the models and paints of MyTraffic grow.

@Burkhard: I noticed a section of parkings inside the terminal building at Dallas Love.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Burkhard,

I was invited to the beta and downloaded it but I just wasn't able to find time to test. Anyway, today I purchased the 5.1 upgrade and it all seems fine apart from the fact that when I open FSX I get the following message

"There are multiple objects with the same tiltle...."

It then mentions the A330. Clicking "close" eventually brings me to the FSX free flight screen. I've checked the fsx.cfg file and I only have one instance of

SimObjectPaths.6=MyTraffic\aircraft

I suppose I could always reinstall but I was wondering if anybody else had seen this.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The instructions of the update indicate that I advice to delete the MyTraffic folder ( or rename it to MyTraffic50 case you have 4 GB spare ) and to run the install than - currently you have a lot of unused files and, still worse, some mixture of FS9 and FSX files.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh yes, you're right Burkhard. I just read the auto install info and didn't get as far as update info - which is only 3 lines further down! :oops:

As the saying goes, if all else fails, read the instructions!

Presumably to get out of the mess of my own creation (!) I can just follow the instructions as if I hadn't installed 5.1 - ie remove the MyTraffic folder and reinstall 5.1?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Exactly. The other one will work too with a little work on the A330MX folder and cleaning up here and there - but since this is a rather safe operation...

Of course, if you have created anything yourself inside the MyTraffic structure, you may consider to backup before deleting...

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've noted planes parked in Buildings at the following locations (Scenery Very Dense):

KOKC

N35°23.88' W97°36.16' (4 Gates)

KBFI

N47°32.31' W122°18.30' (3-5 Gates)

KPIT

N40°30,24' W80°14.20 (2 Gates)

KPVD

N41°43,92' W71°15.42' (2 Gates)

ELLX

N49°38.21' E6°13.71' (4 Gates)

PANC

N61°11.35' W149°59.94' (1 Gate)

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...

Hello,

I would like to tell you about the Airline Hapag Lloyd in My Traffic.

This Airline doesn´t exsist any longer. Together with Hapag Lloyd Express they formed the new Airline called Tuifly.com. So as well as Hapag-Lloyd, the Airline HLX doesn´t exsists any longer.

The Airplanes of that Airline based in Hanover, Germany are Yellow with Red Letters on the Fuselage. (You can find Pictures at Airliners.net)

The Callsign of this new Airline is Yellow Cab.

They fly with B737-300, -500, -700 and B737-800.

The A310 of Hapag Lloyd was sold to Sibirian Airlines.

I hope you will improve My Traffic X with this new Airline very soon.

(I hope I put my request in the correct Forum Topic)

Thank You

Best Regards Markus

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, yes, I'm aware that bad management repeats the severe mistakes the Condor management made a few years ago to dump a very good brand together with many millions of good cash.

They applied for a new license in January, but in July this still wasn't given to them, and also the silly "Yellow Cab" callsign was only in the status of an alternative callsign. Nevertheless this adaption to the sad truth is foreseen for version 5.1a, if the shareholders don't wake up and fire such a stupid managers.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • 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.