Using GSX and AES together

[Ray Proudfoot]

Hi Umberto,

I love both AES and GSX and having invested quite heavily in AES before GSX came along I'm keen to use the best features of both.

For aircraft preparation before pushback I like to use GSX but for the actual pushback I prefer AES as I've paid for the airport taxiway layout. It also automatically withdraws the jetway as I often forget with GSX. 

The problem is when I request pushback via AES. GSX complains and tells me to apply the parking brake immediately.

AES has the option to request pushback clearance but not to perform the actual pushback.

Is there any chance you could add that option to the GSX pushback menu so it doesn't complain when AES starts the pushback?

Thanks.

[virtuali]

For aircraft preparation before pushback I like to use GSX but for the actual pushback I prefer AES as I've paid for the airport taxiway layout.

GSX knows about the taxiway layout automatically and, if you need special pushback, you can customize them in GSX, to sort out specific cases.

It also automatically withdraws the jetway as I often forget with GSX. 

That's a feature that might be added, it never occurred that someone would not use the GSX Pushback (which most users consider its best feature) *just* for that...

AES has the option to request pushback clearance but not to perform the actual pushback.

Is there any chance you could add that option to the GSX pushback menu so it doesn't complain when AES starts the pushback ?

I can't see what's the point of having such feature. Can't you simply NOT call GSX Pushback ? Assuming you used GSX for Boarding, any GSX vehicle still attached to the airplane from the Deboarding/Boarding phase, like stairs and loaders, will go away in any case when you close the doors.

The only case where I can see this might be useful, is if you asked for Deboarding WITHOUT doing a subsequent Boarding. In that case (which is a bit of an operational mistake, since it would mean you are departing with no passengers), asking for the Departure clearance to GSX would be the only way to have the vehicles remaining from the initial Deboarding going away, but it's a bit of a borderline case.

If normal usage, if you always end with "Boarding" (as you should), you don't have any reason to call GSX Pushback, if you don't want to.

[Ray Proudfoot]

GSX knows about the taxiway layout automatically and, if you need special pushback, you can customize them in GSX, to sort out specific cases.

It knows it as well as AES?  That surprises me as Oliver supplied specially constructed BGLs. If that's the case why is AES so expensive? I appreciate that's of no concern to you but you'll understand that having invested over 100UKP in AES credits it's not an easy decision to dump it.

That's a feature that might be added, it never occurred that someone would not use the GSX Pushback (which most users consider its best feature) *just* for that...

I've not been able to see a difference between the two if I'm honest.

I can't see what's the point of having such feature. Can't you simply NOT call GSX Pushback ? Assuming you used GSX for Boarding, any GSX vehicle still attached to the airplane from the Deboarding/Boarding phase, like stairs and loaders, will go away in any case when you close the doors.

I could just use GSX Pushback but then what am I using in AES? Hardly anything with a lot of money effectively wasted.

The only case where I can see this might be useful, is if you asked for Deboarding WITHOUT doing a subsequent Boarding. In that case (which is a bit of an operational mistake, since it would mean you are departing with no passengers), asking for the Departure clearance to GSX would be the only way to have the vehicles remaining from the initial Deboarding going away, but it's a bit of a borderline case.

I don't start another flight immediately after a previous one so that doesn't apply.

I know asking for a feature to make GSX more compatible with a rival product seems odd but it's simply down to the amount of money I've thrown at AES over the years. I wish GSX had come out first. It would have saved me (and others) a fortune.

[virtuali]

It knows it as well as AES?  That surprises me as Oliver supplied specially constructed BGLs.

That's because AES works on top of a technology that was made many years ago ( I think the basics predates FS9 ) by mr. Maurizio Gavioli (who made the Vistamare module ) and it uses the .BGL as a container of custom commands, outside the .BGL SDK, to allow interactivity, in a time when there was no Simobjects, no Simconnect, and no official SDK even. The original .BGL language even had some instructions that allowed to embed x86 ASM language inside a scenery...go figure...in the '90s, you really needed an ASM hacker to peek inside MSFS.

If that's the case why is AES so expensive? I appreciate that's of no concern to you but you'll understand that having invested over 100UKP in AES credits it's not an easy decision to dump it.

AES is expensive because it requires quite a bit of work to support an airport. We preferred the approach of trying to make GSX smart enough to work anywhere, without charging for it. Which means, every improvement in GSX, will any FSX airport, past, present and future.

I've not been able to see a difference between the two if I'm honest.

That's the biggest compliment you could have made to GSX: having the "generic" method to stand on his own against the customized approach you pay dearly for it. Yes, there IS a difference, and it's price...

I could just use GSX Pushback but then what am I using in AES? Hardly anything with a lot of money effectively wasted.

I said: "can't you simply NOT call GSX Pushback ?". If you really want to use AES Pushback "because you paid for it", just NOT call the GSX Pushback. The only thing that would do a "Pushback without Pushback" option would be, as I've said, the recall of the attached IF you called Deboarding and then didn't do Boarding for some reason.

I don't start another flight immediately after a previous one so that doesn't apply.

That's precisely my point. It means you don't even have to worry of having vehicles attached from a previous Boarding, which would be the only case in which such feature might be useful.

Which means you don't need the feature and, if you want to use the AES Pushback instead of the GSX one, just don't select the "Prepare for departure and pushback" menu option in GSX.

[Ray Proudfoot]

That's because AES works on top of a technology that was made many years ago ( I think the basics predates FS9 ) by mr. Maurizio Gavioli (who made the Vistamare module ) and it uses the .BGL as a container of custom commands, outside the .BGL SDK, to allow interactivity, in a time when there was no Simobjects, no Simconnect, and no official SDK even. The original .BGL language even had some instructions that allowed to embed x86 ASM language inside a scenery...go figure...in the '90s, you really needed an ASM hacker to peek inside MSFS.

And you're probably aware that M Gavioli has departed the FS scene and Oliver is struggling to make AES compatible with FSX:Steam. That means GSX has a monopoly until such time as a replacement can be produced which may be never. It does suggest though why AES is relatively expensive as each airport has to be configured by hand as opposed to the simpler route taken by GSX. But the biggest difference in the two products is AES does come with jetways whereas GSX doesn't.

AES is expensive because it requires quite a bit of work to support an airport. We preferred the approach of trying to make GSX smart enough to work anywhere, without charging for it. Which means, every improvement in GSX, will any FSX airport, past, present and future.

And you're been very successful in the design. Simpler really is better. But the fact remains that I still have credits for AES which I may as well use because they're doing nothing just sitting there in the credit bank.

That's the biggest compliment you could have made to GSX: having the "generic" method to stand on his own against the customized approach you pay dearly for it. Yes, there IS a difference, and it's price...

An enormous difference in price. I paid 25UKP for GSX and it covers every airport in the world. Of course there is the issue of jetways that we haven't discussed yet. AES does provide those whereas GSX doesn't except for the DreamTeam airports. So that is another reason I don't want to dump AES.

I said: "can't you simply NOT call GSX Pushback ?". If you really want to use AES Pushback "because you paid for it", just NOT call the GSX Pushback. The only thing that would do a "Pushback without Pushback" option would be, as I've said, the recall of the attached IF you called Deboarding and then didn't do Boarding for some reason.

Did you miss the point I made about ignoring GSX pushback? If I choose AES for pushback GSX immediately orders me to apply the parking brake. I have chosen to ignore that. But that's why I asked for an option in GSX for pushback clearance only. That way I could select it, then use the AES pushback without the warning and gong.

So to sum up...

I want to continue to use AES as I have jetways available. Those are generally not available with GSX.
I want to use GSX for servicing the aircraft and loading the pax.
I want to use AES for the pushback.

After landing I will use GSX for the 'follow-me', parking guidance and deboarding. At AES airports the jetway will move to the aircraft automatically once engines are shutdown.

... if you want to use the AES Pushback instead of the GSX one, just don't select the "Prepare for departure and pushback" menu option in GSX.

See above. GSX nags me for releasing the parking brake even if I don't select "prepare for departure and pushback". It's that I want to eliminate.

[virtuali]

Of course there is the issue of jetways that we haven't discussed yet. AES does provide those whereas GSX doesn't except for the DreamTeam airports. So that is another reason I don't want to dump AES.

Well, this might have been true a while ago, when we were the only weirdos doing proper animated jetways as a standard feature since we made Zurich in 2007. But times have changed, and several other developers, like Flightbeam, UK2000 and recently even FlyTampa, have animated jetways now. This will only increase in the future, that's for sure.

And, there's an interesting alternative with SODE, which offers better flexibility and quality compared to the default animation system and, in addition to being free for developers, is also free for users.

Did you miss the point I made about ignoring GSX pushback? If I choose AES for pushback GSX immediately orders me to apply the parking brake. I have chosen to ignore that.

Ok, but it will do it only once, and I believe the message can be also suppressed in the GSX Settings, with the Verbosity slider.

But that's why I asked for an option in GSX for pushback clearance only. That way I could select it, then use the AES pushback without the warning and gong.

An easier option, instead of adding a new menu option, might be simply having GSX momentarily stop checking for parking brakes as soon the Boarding ends, and start checking again if you select the GSX Pushback so, if you don't use the GSX Pushback, you will be free to go with no messages, and if you use the GSX Pushback, it will work as it always did.

[Ray Proudfoot]

Well, this might have been true a while ago, when we were the only weirdos doing proper animated jetways as a standard feature since we made Zurich in 2007. But times have changed, and several other developers, like Flightbeam, UK2000 and recently even FlyTampa, have animated jetways now. This will only increase in the future, that's for sure.

I'm very grateful to you 'weirdos' for the innovative work you do to make FSX more realistic. I wasn't aware UK2000 airports had animated jetways but I can't check because I have AES credits for all I have.

And, there's an interesting alternative with SODE, which offers better flexibility and quality compared to the default animation system and, in addition to being free for developers, is also free for users.

I have the new Warsaw which uses SODE and it's definitely a step in the right direction. It is annoying when you buy an airport only to find the jetways aren't animated and you have to shelve out more to get them working. Munich being an example.

Ok, but it will do it only once, and I believe the message can be also suppressed in the GSX Settings, with the Verbosity slider.

It's no great deal ignoring that warning and I can live with it. No need for any changes to GSX menu. If I change the verbosity slider I don't get the distance readout from the gate which I do like even though I still often fail to get the controller to dance for me. 

An easier option, instead of adding a new menu option, might be simply having GSX momentarily stop checking for parking brakes as soon the Boarding ends, and start checking again if you select the GSX Pushback so, if you don't use the GSX Pushback, you will be free to go with no messages, and if you use the GSX Pushback, it will work as it always did.

Certainly an option for me. Thanks for the discussion Umberto.