Taxi2Gate LFPG AFCAD issue

[kityatyi]

Hello!

I load up my aircraft at Taxi2Gate's LFPG scenery on the runway. Call the GSX menu, that lists all the available starting positions including runways, gates and parking spots. I select J18 which is one of the positions Luxair use at Charles De Gaulle. I choose the "Just Warp Me There" option. I am taken to the parking position. All good so far. However...

...When calling for the actual services, an error message pops up:

"Could not find valid AFCAD data at this position, services are not available"

I tried also by actually taxiing to this position (without using the GSX menu and the "Warp me" function) but obviously the same error message pops up. Also, when I am at this position (by either taxiing there or moving the aircraft there via the GSX "Just Warp Me There" function (or via the P3D "Go to Airport" option for that matter), and looking at the P3D Addons/GSX menu, there is no Customize Airport Positions sub-menu available. However, at other stands/gates/runways at of the same airport, everything is fine.

I have a feeling it has to do with the fact it's a kind of remote stand in the far bottom right corner of the airport and maybe it's somehow ignored or misread.

When I am parked at one of the recognized stands/gates/runways of the airport, and look at the "Customize Airport Position" GSX sub-menu, interestingly the J18 stand is there and even the airlines are properly assigned to it so it's not that GSX cannot read the AFCAD.

Is there any way of getting GSX to recognize this stand (and this parking area in general)? It's the remote Terminal 2G at Paris Charles de Gaulle.

If you could help finding the exact issue, I might be able to get Taxi2Gate look into a possible AFCAD problem. What I find weird  is that GSX lists the parking position while I am still at one of the "okay" positions (be it a stand, a gate or a runway) but as soon as I actually ask GSX to take me there, although it does take me there precisely, but once there, no further interaction is possible.

For your information, I have MyTraffic Professional installed but I have (certainly) turned off the .bgl for LFPG in its own /Scenery folder.

Thank you for your help. Attached are some relevant screenshots.

[kityatyi]

After further testing, I found that in this particular stand area, the so called Terminal 2G - GSX actually does recognize TWO positions properly (J10 and J12). But not the rest - although it says there are 15 positions available in the "J" gates. Attached is the close up image of the AFCAD with the two "recognized" positions highlighted in red, within the problematic area, the "J" gates (Terminal 2G).

[virtuali]

If you run the ADE Fault finder over that AFCAD, it will find several errors, not all might be relevant to GSX, but it might explain the problem.

[kityatyi]

Just ran the Fault Finder. it has indeed found some faults, and I went through all of them one by one, also checking their actual location on the "map" itself. However none of them is even close to this ramp area. Most issues are "Link Off Runway" type issues, there some "Open Link" ones and "Overlapping Node" and "Orphan Node" types too but all in completely different parts of the airport. So it does not seem to explain why two positions are fine here and the rest are not recognized. I am gonna go through the faults once more though. I am very desperate to get this fixed. Already e-mailed Taxi2Gate and will keep them updated by whatever is suggested here.

[virtuali]

However none of them is even close to this ramp area.

Even a far away node might have effect elsewhere. The internal data format is not sequential or related to position, it's more like a graph of linked pointers.

The Link off runway errors were something I never seen before.

[kityatyi]

It is still unclear why two stands in the area are fine, but not the rest. If those remote "faults" that the Fault Finder listed do affect this area then the two working position should have also been affected. Went through all the faults again, and it is not logical that any of them is causing the issue I pointed out. It must be something else.

Do you think it is exclusively related to this particular AFCAD or can be caused by something else too? Maybe elevation?

[kityatyi]

The "Link off Rwy" faults are raised when [obvious] taxiways are for some reason designated Runway tags. Well, my zero AFCAD skills suggest this at least. Because The segments faulted as "Link Off Rwy" are clearly taxiways, yet, when clicked on them they are "Runway" type. But maybe it's normal to call a Taxipath "Runway" - I don't know anything about AFCAD files so I can't comment on this.

[virtuali]

If those remote "faults" that the Fault Finder listed do affect this area then the two working position should have also been affected.

As I've said, the geographical position of the faults doesn't necessarily need to be close to the gates not serviceable.

Went through all the faults again, and it is not logical that any of them is causing the issue I pointed out. It must be something else

Which means you have fixed them all ?

Do you think it is exclusively related to this particular AFCAD

Have you had this issue with another airport ?

[virtuali]

But maybe it's normal to call a Taxipath "Runway" - I don't know anything about AFCAD files so I can't comment on this.

No, it's not, otherwise I wouldn't said it was the first time I ever seen something like that but, there's no end of the unusual things we saw in AFCADs. And, since ADE flags them as fault *maybe* they found issues with this method, and you can be sure the ADE people knows about AFCADs...

[kityatyi]

As I've said, the geographical position of the faults doesn't necessarily need to be close to the gates not serviceable.
It does not make any sense. How can an issue with a certain taxipath segment, far, far away, break a parking stand on the other side of the airport, loads of taxipath segments away, meanwhile not causing any issues to the other parking stand next to the previously mentioned parking stand. I try to fathom but can't, it is simply illogical.

I am not going to comment on the rest of your quotations because it occurs to me they serve no other purpose than to talk me off instead of actually trying to help. If you can't or don't want to help, fine, but no need to give the attitude.

[kityatyi]

Also, how is that possible that the GSX menu properly lists the stands in question, with all their details when the aircraft is elsewhere at the airport? If those ADE-found faults were to blame, GSX should completely dismiss them. But it's not the case. GSX recognized them when not actually parking in one of them but as soon as placing the aircraft there (by whatever method) then GSX says "Could not find valid AFCAD data.

This is confusing. GSX lists the positions, GSX also takes me there but once I am there, GSX cannot find valid AFCAD data.

Also what I find interesting, as mentioned earlier, two positions in the same terminal area are, for some reason, properly recognized. Why those two? Why not the other thirteen next to them? Checked them one by one, checked the paths near them, everything seems to be identical. The only thing I found different is that the two stands that are recognized are closer to the centrum of the airport, in other words, not "that" far. While the ones not recognized are further out, further away to the right side.

Is there perhaps a range limit in GSX? Maybe these positions are somehow out of range?

[virtuali]

Also, how is that possible that the GSX menu properly lists the stands in question, with all their details when the aircraft is elsewhere at the airport?

As I've said, several times by now, the geographical position of the faults doesn't necessarily need to be close to the gates not serviceable. It's possible they have used an unusual structure, which is *confusing* GSX so, ANYTHING could happen.

We'll obviously have a look at this, even if the AFCAD has faults (no 3rd party AFCAD has ever be found 100% clean), GSX should still use it in some way.

[kityatyi]

Thank you, I appreciate you looking into the matter. I am also awaiting some sort of response from Taxi2Gate - if they reply I will post here whatever they have to say about it, in order to find a solution to this.

[kityatyi]

Wondering if there is any news about this.

[virtuali]

Wondering if there is any news about this.

?? You said you were awaiting a reply from Taxi2Gate and you would have posted it here. It's difficult to do anything without the actual AFCAD to test but, before working on that, it would be nice to know if they are *sure* their AFCAD is entirely flawless.