Umberto: Please fix this

[crauds]

       Please do not take this the wrong way.  I have been an avid user of your GSX program from the beginning and up til recently it added pleasantly to the virtual reality and I was fascinated by the depth of variation that the new upgrade addon version provided.  But then everything went amiss.  I am retired from the aviation industry having spent 25 years with two major carriers.  I was waiting for someone else on this forum to discuss this but apparently no one else has yet come forward.  The real facts:
 
1.  Fueling trucks approach from the rear for large aircraft parked at jetways not the front and then back away when they have finished.  You had it right the first time.  The rare occasion when I have observed them position from the front was when aircraft were parked parallel to the terminal and access was easier from the front.

2.  Regarding simultaneous operations:  There are particular safety rules that apply.  You DO NOT load passengers or baggage while refueling!  Two main reasons:  Jet fuel is extremely flamable and a small spark could explode the plane.  And the other reason is to avoid fumes entering the aircraft.  Baggage carts and loaders should not be in motion in close proximity to the truck while it is fueling.

3.  I know that a couple of posters on this forum were concerned about turn-around time.   Regional carriers have to keep the aircraft in the air but since your simulation is not using intelligent AI you cannot exactly simulate this without having each vehicle be aware of every other one and you have explained that such a system would bog down the simulation and kill the frame rates (let alone the VAS  for FSX users) so I would like to suggest a much less cumbersome approach to achieve the same end.   I have included 3 JPG images showing the mess that latest update of GSX is creating.  These are today's weather at default FSX KGSO gate 7 and the aircraft is the PMDG 737-800wl.  When deboarding is selected in the GSX menu, the first image shows the loaders moving from their default position ( I have not edited or customized the position) first circling back behind the aircraft and then turning again toward the right and passing through the aircraft and then snapping 180 degrees into position.  But you had it working perfectly in previous versions!  The second image shows the loaders leaving the aircraft after deboarding.  This time they drove forward straight through the aircraft and then turned left to go behind the aircraft, circling back to the right and then back to the right side again by passing through the aircraft.  The final image shows the ending position (one on top of the other) which is not the position that they originally spawned from.

My suggestion is first fix the fuel tanker so that it correctly approaches the wing from the rear as in reality.  Next allow me to explain what really happens:

All turn-arounds do not necessary require fuel.  If it is anticipated that fuel will be required, the first officer notifies dispatch before arrival so that the fuel truck is ready to begin the refueling as soon as deboarding has completed.  NOTE:  deboarding first!  Then if catering is required it is also requisitioned ahead of time so it will be timed to be already approaching position as the aircraft parks.  The trucks are sent to the aircraft but remain at a safe distance until any required fueling has completed and the fuel tanker has moved away.  They then begin their operation.  Please note that the crew are already on board to supervise the catering process, while the first officer is completing preflight checks.  He waits til fueling has been completed before walkaround.   Baggage loading usually begins at the same time as passenger boarding for small airliners.  BUT, in the case of heavy aircraft loading of containers can take much time and is usually begun well in advance of passenger boarding.  (For freighters it can be hours long process).  This is almost the way you had it set up before.  The timing issue was caused by you delaying the spawning of the vehicles for each phase.

Why not keep the automatic option, but if it is selected then allow the vehicles to spawn simultaneously but only move to a waiting position back from the aircraft Each process will then avoid getting tangled up.  Each process can then follow one another immediately without delay.  After deboarding, fuel truck first, then catering, then passengers begin boarding and baggage carts immediately move to position.  BTW, the loaders do not have to move away after deboarding unless the aircraft is shutting down for the day.  On quick turnarounds they should stay in position.  Simulating it this way for a fast turnaround is more realistically the way it is done.  It may appear on videos that every thing is simultaneously mingling together but in reality it is a well choreographed and coordinated procedure for safety reasons.

Again these are just some suggestions and not intended in anyway to detract from the amazing work that you continue to do for us, Umberto.  I am a greatful admirer of everything that you have done so far.  I would have never thought such detail was even possible.  You are truly a genius.   

Craig

[virtuali]

1.  Fueling trucks approach from the rear for large aircraft parked at jetways not the front and then back away when they have finished.  You had it right the first time.  The rare occasion when I have observed them position from the front was when aircraft were parked parallel to the terminal and access was easier from the front.

First, the current fuel position is realistic:



I can find similar diagrams showing both positions being used so, it cannot be said one is more realistic than the other. They are both equally valid and used.

But this one fixes lots of problems of the fuel truck conflicting with other vehicles when used simultaneously, which is now possible. And, as I've said several times, soon enough you won't see the large Fuel Truck anymore on gates, because WE ARE modeling an hydrant so, the whole issue would be moot anyway shortly enough.

2.  Regarding simultaneous operations:  There are particular safety rules that apply.  You DO NOT load passengers or baggage while refueling!  Two main reasons:  Jet fuel is extremely flamable and a small spark could explode the plane.  And the other reason is to avoid fumes entering the aircraft.  Baggage carts and loaders should not be in motion in close proximity to the truck while it is fueling.

I think you are confusing simultaneous operations with auto mode. Simultaneous operations allows you DECIDE if you want to have multiple services running at the same time, but it will still be YOUR responsibility to call services in a realistic way. It's an option.

Auto mode, instead, is GSX calling services one after the other. I don't think this option makes much sense, but users asked for it, so we made it. Again, it's an *option* and it's not even enabled by default.

If you think it's not realistic to board passengers while refueling, just don't do it. Before, GSX didn't allowed this, and of course users felt restricted and complained about we not listening to their suggestions, so we added it.

I always knew there would be repercussion in allowing users to freely do what they want and call everything in every order and at the same time. That's why we had such limitations before.

But lots of users was complaining GSX boarding was too slow (they wanted realistic passenger, but are not prepared to wait for them, apparently), even if boarding times for passengers are absolutely realistic now. There WAS a reason why GSX loads so few bags (instead of their actual number), because we KNOW that if we modeled each bag, people will complain even more that is "too slow" or "boring". They ask for realism, but they are not prepared to take what it comes with it...

I have included 3 JPG images showing the mess that latest update of GSX is creating.  These are today's weather at default FSX KGSO gate 7 and the aircraft is the PMDG 737-800wl. 

I cannot find any Gate 7 at default KGSO, so you are probably using a modified AFCAD.

Going to the same coordinates in your screenshot, result to be almost perfectly centered to what is the "real" default KGSO scenery is Gate 49.

When deboarding is selected in the GSX menu, the first image shows the loaders moving from their default position ( I have not edited or customized the position) first circling back behind the aircraft and then turning again toward the right and passing through the aircraft and then snapping 180 degrees into position.  But you had it working perfectly in previous versions!  The second image shows the loaders leaving the aircraft after deboarding.  This time they drove forward straight through the aircraft and then turned left to go behind the aircraft, circling back to the right and then back to the right side again by passing through the aircraft.  The final image shows the ending position (one on top of the other) which is not the position that they originally spawned from.

I just tried they, with the default AFCAD at Gate 49, which looks exactly like your Gate 7, and they don't do anything of that sort. I don't have the PMDG 737, but I tried with the default 737, using two different parking positions (the default one using the Go To airport menu, and a different one, with the front gear on top of the parking T), and in both cases all loaders worked perfectly fine, see this video I just made:

So, your problem seems to be just another normal issue of a modified AFCAD that might do something unusual, which we might just add some additional code to defend from. Unfortunately, there are a lot of AFCADs out there made in strange ways, and GSX already has lots of code inside to defends against them so, if you could send me your non-default AFCAD, we might have a look at it, and try to see what's causing this.

Baggage loading usually begins at the same time as passenger boarding for small airliners.  BUT, in the case of heavy aircraft loading of containers can take much time and is usually begun well in advance of passenger boarding.  (For freighters it can be hours long process).  This is almost the way you had it set up before.  The timing issue was caused by you delaying the spawning of the vehicles for each phase.

That's just when using Auto mode, and there's just no way to make auto mode realistic without spamming the user of so many questions, that it would be just easier to let him just call the service. What would be the point of having an auto mode, if we had to ask questions like if you need fuel, if your airline allows refueling with passengers on board (some do, if passengers doors are open and seatbelt signs are off).

But that's just auto mode. If you want more control, you just call the services yourself, in the order you decide to be more realistic, and it won't be any different than before. You don't *have* to use simultaneous services, that's just an option. We changed some vehicles to wait for each other to prevent the most obvious clashes when used at the same time, but if they are not used at the same time, it won't be much different than before.

[blaunarwal]

When deboarding is selected in the GSX menu, the first image shows the loaders moving from their default position ( I have not edited or customized the position) first circling back behind the aircraft and then turning again toward the right and passing through the aircraft and then snapping 180 degrees into position.

I can confirm this problem and that earlier versions of GSX didn't have it.

[virtuali]

I can confirm this problem and that earlier versions of GSX didn't have it.

That's why I posted a video showing it doesn't do any of that, and that's why I asked to provide with more informations about the modified AFCAD which surely must have been used, in order to understand what the problem might be.

As explained so many times already, the vehicle approach path to the airplane can be influenced by the vehicles starting position (which can be user-customized) so, this might be a combination of the AFCAD in use and the fact we changed the *default* starting position of the baggage loaders, to PREVENT clashes with other vehicles that might be used at the same time (now that IT IS possible to use more than a service at at time).

But again, without looking at the AFCAD, there's not much we can do, other than trying to reproduce the issue, which doesn't happen with a default AFCAD.

[crauds]

   My point exactly, Umberto.  It's that you have changed the paths to accommodate this simultaneous service idea which is causing your vehicles to apparently get confused.  The issue is not dependent on the AFCAD which is standard FSX default small footprint gate with CTL-J jetway.  The illustration is happening at every AFCAD I have used since the update and with Q400, B727, PMDG B737 so far.  Why is this "simultaneous" service necessary for the one or two who asked for it at the expense of causing problems for the rest of us?  Obviously you had perfected the paths the vehicles took before and they consistently moved from the default positions you had set up to the aircraft without issue.  There were certain anomalies at times where vehicles did not follow the vehicle paths but they certainly did not pass through the aircraft as they are doing now.  I don't understand why it works for you and not for me.  Of course I have FSX SP2 and not P3D!

As I mentioned, the solution to those who think servicing takes too long is to look at the way it was set up.  It is the long paths that the vehicles take to get to the plane that is the time consuming issue.  Either have them spawn near the aircraft as PMDG B747 v3 does or have them move to position closer to plane earlier in the initial process so that they can activate in the user chosen sequence without the long delays.  It is this attempt for simultaneous services that has caused you to make this change.

And as to your diagram for the B747.  That is not the tanker truck, it is the hydrant truck.  They are smaller and can maneuver from front or back depending on the room they have at the stand.  But the tanker trucks do not realistically have room to come between the aircraft and then turn to face the rear.  And they don't drive "through" the wing when they depart!   This whole change which I call a mixup is to accommodate a request to lessen turnaround time by one or two forum posters.  It is ironic that the short turn around time they are trying to simulate applies only to small regional carriers that most often land and takeoff at smaller  airports that seldom have underground fuel tanking and thus hydrant fueling would not be possible.

I am including my AFCADs for that airport.  I have ORBX base and vector but nothing specific for that airport except the two files I have uploaded. But let me also mention that the paths I illustrated in the images in my OP are not consistent.  Sometimes the loaders work fine and the next time they wander around as I illustrated.  In other words, if I leave the aircraft in the exact same position at the gate and call for boarding, for example, the loaders will move in some manner and end up at the plane.  If I reset COUATL and call the same service again, they will take a different path.  Sometimes it is direct to the plane but most time it is a confused mess.  As I mentioned I have not nor should I have to customize the spawn positions of the vehicles.  I leave that up to you.  I use whatever you have preset in the program.

[virtuali]

 My point exactly, Umberto.  It's that you have changed the paths to accommodate this simultaneous service idea which is causing your vehicles to apparently get confused.

We haven't changed any paths. We changed the *default* startup position of the baggage loaders, to prevent the fuel truck crashing into them, now that is possible to call it at the same time. But that's just the default position, which can of course be customized.

Why is this "simultaneous" service necessary for the one or two who asked for it at the expense of causing problems for the rest of us?  

The issue is, those that wanted the simultaneous services are way more than you think (reading the forum, you only get a very partial idea of the user base, since forum users are the minority, you don't have any idea the crazy requests I'm getting by email...), and they consider themselves to be "the rest of us"...

I'll check your AFCAD now.

And as to your diagram for the B747.  That is not the tanker truck, it is the hydrant truck.  They are smaller and can maneuver from front or back depending on the room they have at the stand.

Which is why, I said this issue will be gone once we'll have the hydrant, since the tanker will only appear in larger parking spots (not gates) when maneuvering is not a problem but, since right now, the tanker is the only fuel truck we have, in order to prevent it from clashing with the loaders, in case users will call fuel first, we had no choice than to change its working position.

[crauds]

I don't mean to bust your chops.  I know you do your best to accommodate all of us with our sometimes outlandish requests.  Unlike most developers, I believe you really care about us and your attentiveness shows this.

     My AFCAD's are my own modifications of the default FSX updating runways, PAPI positions, GS crossing heights and occasionally adjusting the terminal environments to accommodate the aircraft I use.  I use the standard small, medium, and heavy footprints provided by FSX but I adjust the parking position so that the CTRL-J gate function will properly activate.  I also had an earlier problem with the marshaller appearing on a ladder for smaller aircraft and per your advice I adjusted the marshaller distance to 16.5 m for small and medium aircraft using jetway parking and that problem has been eliminated.

     I wonder if the exact position of parking is affecting the strange actions of the loaders.  I did not place the aircraft in the position at GSO.  I drove it there using the marshaller's directions.  It may not be parked perfectly therefore.  But it was almost exactly but not at 0-0.  This never was a factor on previous versions of your program, however.  From what you have said, I don't understand why the loaders wouldn't just move directly to the plane.  They spawn in positions pointing in the direction of the plane.  And when they retreat, why wouldn't they just move backwards into position?  What would prompt them to move forward through the plane?  It never was an issue before.

    On the other matter of the fuel truck positioning, most regional airports will still require tanker fueling since they do not have underground tanks. But again, Umberto, safety regs (at least in the US) do not allow simultaneous boarding and baggage loading while fuel trucks are in position.  I can't imagine they do so in Italy either.  There is a specific minimum distance that they must remain away from the tanker (I forgot the exact number).  Any activity that could possibly cause a static electric spark could cause a fuel fire.  As far as catering and simultaneous boarding, not an issue, but not really done in the RW.  Reason is  that the catering carts would cause a traffic jam in the aisles if passengers were boarding at the same time, so catering is completed first.


Craig

[virtuali]

I wonder if the exact position of parking is affecting the strange actions of the loaders. 

It could, if you parked *very* wrong, like ten meters away from the position, or much rotated. BTW, I tried your AFCAD and, no problems whatsoever, using the position as calculated by GSX, see another video I just made, using your AFCAD this time:

I don't understand why the loaders wouldn't just move directly to the plane.  They spawn in positions pointing in the direction of the plane.  And when they retreat, why wouldn't they just move backwards into position?

That's exactly what they do. I don't understand what could be causing this on your system. You said you use the PMDG 737, I used the default one but, a 737-800 is a 737-800, and the default one shouldn't have its cargo doors placed in a dramatically different position than the PMDG one.

Have you customized the airplane configuration ?

But again, Umberto, safety regs (at least in the US) do not allow simultaneous boarding and baggage loading while fuel trucks are in position. 

Then just don't it! Do you realize that, apart for the Auto mode, is still you that are in control of when calling the services ? Are you asking to put back the old limitation (that users hated), just to prevent them from doing something not realistic ?

[srcooke]

ier from the front.

2.  Regarding simultaneous operations:  There are particular safety rules that apply.  You DO NOT load passengers or baggage while refueling!  Two main reasons:  Jet fuel is extremely flamable and a small spark could explode the plane.  And the other reason is to avoid fumes entering the aircraft.  Baggage carts and loaders should not be in motion in close proximity to the truck while it is fueling.
 

Craig

That is incorrect and depends upon the fuel and certain criteria been met.

https://www.skybrary.aero/index.php/Refuelling_with_Passengers_on_Board

[virtuali]

That is incorrect and depends upon the fuel and certain criteria been met.

I think he referred to baggage loading while refueling but yes, GSX was always aware that refueling with passengers on board is allowed, under certain conditions, and it even has a specific message prompt for it. Basically, it is allowed to refuel with passengers on board, provided they can be quickly evacuated.

However, refueling with passengers *already* on board, might not be exactly the same thing as refueling while passengers *are boarding*

[srcooke]

Not wanting to flog the point

From CAP748:

Apron Safety Management
2.1
In  general,  passengers  should  be  disembarked  prior  to  the  commencement  of fuelling,   however   circumstances   might   prevail   where   this   is   deemed   to   be
impractical.  In  such  cases,  licensees should determine the risks  associated  with passengers  embarking,  disembarking or remaining  on  board  the  aircraft  during
fuelling, and should establish procedures to mitigate those risks.

These procedures should:
 
a)  be designed to enable the most rapid evacuation of passengers from the aircraft should the need arise;

b)  ensure  the  ground  area  into  which  passengers  would  evacuate  is  kept  clear  of equipment and obstacles;

c)  ensure vehicles attending the aircraft do not impede access to the site by Rescue and  Fire  Fighting  Service  (RFFS)  vehicles  and  personnel,  or  the  egress  of
passengers evacuating the aircraft;

d)  include appropriate attendance of RFFS;

e)  in the case of medical flights, take into account the ability, or inability, of the patient and attendant staff to effect a rapid evacuation from the aircraft;

f)  take into account the ability of those whose mobility is impaired to effect a rapid evacuation from the aircraft; and

g)  comply with the requirements of the Joint Aviation Authorities and the European Aviation Safety Agency

[crauds]

   The one factor we may not be addressing on this is that I am using FSX whereas you are using P3D.  Perhaps there is some difference in the way the programs use GSX(?)

    Whatever it is, something has changed because the crazy movement of the loaders that I (and several others who have posted) experience never occurred before the change to accommodate this "automatic" mode.  But from our discussions then, am I to assume that only the spawning position of the loaders has been changed?  How could that cause what I am experiencing?  But again you won't be able to answer that unless you are able to replicate it, will you?  So, I guess GSX has become a nonstarter for me, at least temporarily.

    And BTW, my point about fueling with passengers was not about fueling "with passengers aboard" which has always been allowed with safety precautions in place, but rather addressing the simultaneous "boarding of passengers" but most specifically loading baggage while fueling which would place this activity (which could cause a static spark) very close to the fueling which is not allowed.  But my whole point was to disagree that changing GSX to accommodate services and fueling at the same time was unnecessary and unrealistic.  But that was based on my assumption that the loader paths had been altered to accommodate this change and in hopes that you would change it back to what it was when it was working for me.  I have never used the "automatic" mode so that is not my issue.  But if only a few of us are experiencing this behavior then it is our burden, not yours.


Cheers!

Craig

[crauds]

Hi Umberto!

   I use FSX and your test was with P3D4.4 so at first I was convinced that may be a factor in our different results, but then I read a recent post by a user of P3D4.4 who was having exactly the same issue and posted images.

   Today I tried again but this time I "placed" the aircraft directly on the parking spot using the FSX menu and everything worked perfectly for me as it did for you.  But the problem occurs when I manually drive the aircraft to the stand.  I use the marshaller for parking assist and in all cases make sure I am stopped within .03 m of the exact position.  That exactness of accuracy (within reason, of course) was never a big factor before.  So now I am thinking that for some reason the loaders can't find the aircraft cargo doors so they circle around until the finally hone in and then snap into place.  Just my latest theory.  I will keep experimenting on my end.  But, again, I am using FSX SP2 and I have de-activated the upgrade GSX v2 and gone back to original GSX (for VAS reasons). 

Craig

[virtuali]

But, again, I am using FSX SP2 and I have de-activated the upgrade GSX v2 and gone back to original GSX (for VAS reasons).  

I hope with "gone back to original GSX", you don't mean reinstalling with an old installer. You cannot do that, and it's something we cannot test or support.

If you don't want to use GSX Level 2, the only correct way to disable it is:

- Deactivate it in the Addon Manager, if you bought it.

- Use the GSX Control Panel to restore default jetways.

If you reinstalled it using an old installer, reinstall using the current installer and disable Level 2 as above.

[chumley]

Umberto said "Then just don't it! Do you realize that, apart for the Auto mode, is still you that are in control of when calling the services ? Are you asking to put back the old limitation (that users hated), just to prevent them from doing something not realistic ?"

I think Crauds may be suggesting a two stage boarding process whereby the first call would simultaneously bring all service vehicles (Catering, Baggage and Fuel) from the 'spawn point' to a user defined assembly point near the departure gate. This would be followed by the user manually making a second call for each specific function to be performed from the assembly point thus cutting down some time.

Just a thought.