How to use Assistance Services Auto Mode

[Artox67]

Same here on every arrival. Doesn't matter which plane or airport and I did not customize any with the loader.

They are on the place where they should programmed by GSX. Start deboarding and the loader goes around the plane and coming from the left side, under the cargo door they turn around at 180 degrees.

[AFS]

Dear Virtuali,


I would like to give you a report here, for error analysis:

Aircraft: PMDG B737 NGX WL
Airport: FlyTampa Vienna ver. 2.9
Gate: F37

Occurred bugs during automatic boarding:

1) The passengers enter the plane, although not a single ground service has been completed yet.

2) The catering will take place AFTER the boarding of the passengers. How nice, they can choose a suitable menu right away ;-)

3) At the next step, the refueling, comes the GSX safety warning: attention, refueling with passengers. Which surprise ...

4) When the tanker approaches, the baggage loaders and the catering vehicles are in the way. Changing the position of the loader and the arriving of the catering vehicles after refueling only would solve the problem.

5) During fueling, the refueling lift passes THROUGH the wing (I also want to have such a tough head).
This is because GSX displays the wrong altitude values in the "Customize Aricraft" menu. In contrast, however, the values in the gsx.config for the aircraft are correct. Obviously these values are not read out or updated.

6) The front catering vehicle leaves its position before the tanker is done with the filling. Result: the vehicle drives THROUGH the tanker - without explosion.

Summary, these are the most essential things that i have seen. For a better understanding, I have attached the appropriate screenshots.

I hope you will forgive me my ironic comments.
In my following post I have some suggestions for improvement.


With many, best regards from Vienna

[AFS]

Dear Virtuali,

First thank you for your great product.
I also thank you for listening to us here in support and trying to fulfill as many wishes as possible.

But do not take some criticism here to your heart, it only serves to make your product free of errors and perfect.
But we also see that you use all your power to do that as well. no product is perfect, but if everyone works on it, it will be.


Basically, it should be noted that the automatic is exclusively sufficient for boarding.
For the deboarding no automatic is necessary, the refueling after the deboarding superfluous.

Maybe you can also consider whether it would not be useful to add the menu point "go around". That would cover ALL options.

1) Boarding (automatics) with all ground services at the 1st start
2) Deboarding without automatic - the unloading of passengers and luggage enough - for the last landing
3) "Go-Around" service - deboarding and boarding with all ground services including a sub-menu for "refueling" or "no refueling", as it is offered for the deicers at the pushback - for inter-landings.

Then it would certainly make sense to optimize the processes and the routes.

Suggestion for the automatic boarding process

1) check if the gate has a jetway or not - at a gate with jetways the stairs are not automatically generated or activated.
2) When docking the jetway it must be checked whether the main entrance is already open or not. Currently we always ask for opening, although the door is already open.
3a) Boarding of the crew
3b) Ordering for the tanker
3c) Ordering for the catering vehicles
3d) Departure of the baggage carts to the terminal
    Alternative: It is not necessary to see the baggage carts immediately by the plane. Normally they come ALWAYS (at the boarding process) from the terminal - the baggage loading center. That would be more realistic.
4) The tank vehicle arrives and performs refueling.
5) The catering vehicles arrive, but wait at a distance position behind the plane to leave until the tanker has left its position and they can drive without hindrance
   Since the tanker needs the most space, both for the arriving and for the departure, it makes no sense if other    vehicles (catering, baggage loader) are at the plane at the same time. This will solve several current problems.The tanker can visually better drive to and depart and there is no conflict between the vehicles, since all then have a free path. As far as I can remember, Gsx never got tanker and catering at the same time. there were always only tankers or catering on the plane.
6a) After the catering vehicles have left the plane - the doors are closed again - the passengers boarding begins
6b) take the baggage loader position
6c) the baggage carts drive to the baggage loaders and start loading. If the baggage carts have arrived before the completion of the catering, they should be able to wait some distance behind the airplanebefore the completion of this service.
7) the baggage carts either drive back to the terminal - which can take a long time and then possibly get in the way of the pushback - or they drive to a parking position next to the plane.
8 ) The baggage loader drive back to the starting position.
9) undocking the jetway.

In sum, this seems to me to be a logical process and has the added advantage that all routes for the Ground services are freely determinable, since never several vehicles are simultaneously are positioned at the plane and it can thus come to no collosion. With the right timing and the proper function sequence, no more time is needed than before.

Two things I have noticed, the (partially optically) disturb.

There is no check whether the main entrance of the aircraft is open or not. This means that after docking, the jetway will always be asked to open, regardless of whether the door is already open or not.

The great animation of the filling - the display of the digits during filling - is no longer visible due to the changed position (driving direction taxiway) of the tanker. That's too bad. Maybe you can move this indicator to the (now correct)  left side of the tanker.


Dear Virtuali, I hope you are not angry about the many text. It should, however, convey to you that we enjoy your product very much and that we are well aware of the problematic and the work that we are doing properly.
Of course we are interested in the fact that the product runs perfectly, so it is not a criticism of your work but only constructive thinking.

Thanks a lot for your understanding  

[Xiropillo]

Apart from the already discussed issue of the Estimate passenger number which is always ignored, which is in fact a bug that we'll fix soon, it seems you were expecting something different from Auto Mode.

Auto mode doesn't call the whole of GSX for you, because you might have reason for not wanting to *start* GSX automatically.

Instead, if the Auto Mode is enabled, it will be triggered by either BOARDING or DEBOARDING. Calling another service will revert to the old manual mode, and this is exactly how it's supposed to work so, if you want to have more control in one session, you can do that, without having to constantly changing the option.

And, even on Auto mode, it will still your responsibility to start Deboarding.

If you start with Boarding, Auto mode will call baggage loaders, then Refueling and Catering. You will have to call for Departure.

If you do Deboarding, Auto mode will call baggage loaders, then Refueling and Catering. You will have to call for Boarding (which will proceed in Auto mode as above), then you'll have to manually call Departure.

Hello, does this apply to asking for default jetways? I use to fly from Bilbao and I am using ORBX scenery with special jetways so I prefer not to change them. If I ask for boarding, GSX remembers me to operate jetway manually but I can't do it until other services finish so I start with asking for jetway and this seems to stop the auto mode. Could it be possible to let us asking for jetways before?

Thanks very much.

[virtuali]

Hello, does this apply to asking for default jetways? I use to fly from Bilbao and I am using ORBX scenery with special jetways so I prefer not to change them. If I ask for boarding, GSX remembers me to operate jetway manually but I can't do it until other services finish so I start with asking for jetway and this seems to stop the auto mode. Could it be possible to let us asking for jetways before?

If your scenery doesn't use SODE jetways, it's best you operate them before calling GSX.

[Xiropillo]

I don't know exactly if ORBX LEBB scenery uses sode jetways. But when I use GSX option to operate jetways, they move.

Maybe they are not Sode and I should move them using old CTRL+J command and then asking for boarding using GSX to not break the automatic sequence?

Best regards and thanks.

[sw34669]

I'm noticing that at all airports now I see GSX vehicles drive through each other and the user aircraft at times. Do GSX vehicles have awareness of each other and the player aircraft ? Can something be done to at least avoid collisions with self and player aircraft. I dont mind if they cant help hitting other stuff they dont know is there I get that. thanks

[bcars]

Umiberto:
Might it not be a nice feature to have an INI or CFG  that could be setup (with defaults) by the user to customize the sequence of the automation?  This would allow user with different ideas of how they think the boarding or deboarding should occur and what services should be included.  For example, when starting the boarding,  the sequence might be to dock the jetway, then call the catering truck, followed by the fuel truck, then baggage, then load passengers.  While others might want to dock the jetway, start boarding passengers, load the bags but NOT have the fuel truck or catering truck.   So the config file would specify the order and whether or not the specific service was desired. In fact, if the SAME sequence was specified, then concurrent services would be carried out ( example:  one might want the baggage and catering to occur simultaneously with passenger boarding,  or fuel to be started and catering at the same time, followed by passengers and bags.   The  sequence and types of services would be entirely up to the user ( by airport )   a default would be supplied so the 'current' behavior would be as it is today.

[virtuali]

Might it not be a nice feature to have an INI or CFG  that could be setup (with defaults) by the user to customize the sequence of the automation? 

We'll think about it.

[crauds]

@AFS

   You are stating exactly what I am asking for in my long post yesterday and today (UMBERTO PLEASE FIX THIS).  Having the services spawn early and simultaneously but wait their turn would eliminate the adjustment that GSX made to accommodate simultaneous activity.  I am convinced that whatever this adjustment was, it is the cause of the crazy paths the loaders are now taking.   The order that you propose is close to RW in my experience.  Usually fueling instead of catering is first service called by dispatch, then at least FO boards and begins preflight followed by cabin crew.  After fueling has completed and confirmed by dispatch and FO, fuel tanker departs and THEN catering can begin.  After catering is completed then passengers/baggage is loaded.  This is for smaller regional aircraft that attempt to do 30 minute turnarounds. Obviously heavier long-haul aircraft require longer fueling time and can carry large containers so cargo loading occurs in advance of passenger loading but that is too nitpicking for GSX and really not necessary for our simulation purposes in my opinion.

  The other matter I addressed in my post is that while hydrant pump trucks can park at various angles to the wing since they are much smaller and maneuverable, the large tankers when used for a gated aircraft approach from the rear (or at the side, for lower wing aircraft) as GSX had it originally.  There is no room for them to maneuver between stands to face the rear as GSX has it now.  I have never seen it in RW.  This is part of the accommodation that the latest updates have tried to provide and it just may be contributing to the problems.

    I also sent a copy of my AFCAD to Umberto but he could not duplicate the problem.  He posted a video of everything working correctly for him but I have FSX and he used P3D so maybe that is a factor, at least in my case.  I know there are subtle differences.   And of course, if he is using V4.4 (64 bit) then it is clearly not a true duplication of my scenario.

I just noticed that you are using P3D4.4 and I assume the upgrade v2 of GSX and still having the same issues as I am.  So I suspect there are many more of us that have yet to speak up.

Craig

[Eisbahn]

@AFS

  The other matter I addressed in my post is that while hydrant pump trucks can park at various angles to the wing since they are much smaller and maneuverable, the large tankers when used for a gated aircraft approach from the rear (or at the side, for lower wing aircraft) as GSX had it originally.  There is no room for them to maneuver between stands to face the rear as GSX has it now.  I have never seen it in RW.

Just because you have never seen it does not mean it does not happen. Perhaps it never occurs in the USA but there are other countries in the world where it does.
There are plenty of examples on the Internet.

Eisbahn

[crauds]

@Eisbahn
   
    I think you prove my point.  None of your images are large tanker trucks.  Don't confuse hydrant pumper trucks with tanker trucks.  Small trucks and hydrant pumper trucks are small and can easily park under the wing of LARGE Heavies at any angle they deem convenient.  But my issue was first of all with a B737 and tankers do not fit under the wings and with the exception of one of your images (I can't see the fueler in that one) they are not parked close in to the terminal with a jetway.  Two factors come into play here.  Firstly, the wing must be high enough for the truck to fit underneath (and that only would involve large heavies, B747,B767,A380, etc) and secondly, there must be enough room for a large tanker truck to get in front of the aircraft and then make the turn back toward the wing.  Large  tankers require a large turn radius and the width between gates is not sufficient to allow that.  That, of course, would not be factor if the aircraft were parking horizonal to the terminal, for example VHHH).  But my issue is with parking at jetways facing toward the terminal.

Craig

[virtuali]

None of your images are large tanker trucks. 

The last one is.

[crauds]

Yes the last one is but it is a small truck and seems that it is parked in the open, not at a gate facing the terminal where the space available makes such a maneuver impractical if not impossible for a "large" tanker.   And this is not a small, low-wing airplane like the B737.

[virtuali]

Yes the last one is but it is a small truck

It's still tanker, and it's basically the same of the two models that come with GSX. They are identical, except for the tanker length.

And this is not a small, low-wing airplane like the B737.

None of the two tankers that come with GSX will fit under the wing of 737 anyway, so they won't appear on such airplane.