With the latest patch, GSX can't properly pushback PMDG's 747-8

[virtuali]

My request is to make the default curve less because this is happening to me at every airport when I push back. Thanks

No, it's not happening at every airport. It's happening only at the airports you tried, at the parking you tried, with a specific airplane model which is particularly long. But nevertheless, we'll check this, as usual, and we'll try to improve it even for such limited cases, hopefully not breaking it up elsewhere.

[airbadger]

I thought I made a pretty good free mode pushback here, but it still made the curve too wide (not that it really makes a difference in this particular case). Is it possible that even if you make a perfect curve using free mode that it'll still overshoot?

https://imgur.com/a/SkBVaxP

[virtuali]

Is it possible that even if you make a perfect curve using free mode that it'll still overshoot?

No, it simply means you haven't placed the approach node in the best possible position. Of course, you cannot expect to do impossible things: if in real life a 747-8 couldn't possibly be pushed from *that* position because it's just too tight, the same will happen in GSX.

Always remember we still don't have the ability to Pull, which is what will happen in real life when trying to push a large airplane out of tight spaces.

Of course, the ability to Pull, which will be added with a later update, won't make the pushback customization any easier, because in addition to just specify two points, as it is now, you will likely have to create multiple route segments, and specify for each one to use either push or pull.

[downscc]

ONE SOLUTION:  With PMDG B748 tested at multiple locations I've also found that even in the easiest cases that the tug will always push too far resulting in a overshoot of the final parking heading.  I've found that if I set up the pushback with the Snap to AFCAD checked and exit the Parking Customization mode, but then open the Parking Customization mode and un-check the Snap option and use the three values derived from the first step that the overshoot does not occur.  Always step through the stop and bend spots first to make final adjustments (for example the AFCAD links may not line up with the scenery surface marks) making sure that the bend spot is on the parking centerline and is at least behind the tail of the aircraft when it is parked.  I've done this dance several dozen times now and am starting to find workarounds.  Hope this helps.

[karlosye]

I am having the same kind of issue here. I am using the PMDG777 the when pushing back, it over shoot the taxi line every single time. Hopefully the FSDT developing team can do something to fix it!!

[airbadger]

ONE SOLUTION:  With PMDG B748 tested at multiple locations I've also found that even in the easiest cases that the tug will always push too far resulting in a overshoot of the final parking heading.  I've found that if I set up the pushback with the Snap to AFCAD checked and exit the Parking Customization mode, but then open the Parking Customization mode and un-check the Snap option and use the three values derived from the first step that the overshoot does not occur.  Always step through the stop and bend spots first to make final adjustments (for example the AFCAD links may not line up with the scenery surface marks) making sure that the bend spot is on the parking centerline and is at least behind the tail of the aircraft when it is parked.  I've done this dance several dozen times now and am starting to find workarounds.  Hope this helps.

This was helpful, thanks.

[B777ER]

ONE SOLUTION:  With PMDG B748 tested at multiple locations I've also found that even in the easiest cases that the tug will always push too far resulting in a overshoot of the final parking heading.  I've found that if I set up the pushback with the Snap to AFCAD checked and exit the Parking Customization mode, but then open the Parking Customization mode and un-check the Snap option and use the three values derived from the first step that the overshoot does not occur.  Always step through the stop and bend spots first to make final adjustments (for example the AFCAD links may not line up with the scenery surface marks) making sure that the bend spot is on the parking centerline and is at least behind the tail of the aircraft when it is parked.  I've done this dance several dozen times now and am starting to find workarounds.  Hope this helps.

End user should not have to find workarounds for one of the most popular P3D aircraft. This is for the dev and if the response is, we have given you tools to fix (what before was not broke) than that is the wrong answer. End of story.

[downscc]

I just set up two GSX2.6 parking customizations at the Aerosoft EDDK F-ramp, one for a B748 and the other for a B77L.  The snap to AFCAD option worked well for the B77L and it had a nice turn from straight back to the taxiway at 90 deg with a nice wide radius arc and no overshoot of completed heading.  On the other hand, the B748 push back totally failed with the tug pushing the bird almost all the way to the taxiway, quite a longer than normal distance, and then trying to make the 90 deg turn on the spot, which of course overshoot significantly the taxi line and had the tug pushing at a hard right angle to the longitudinal axis of the aircraft. 

I restored the B748 to the parking stand, cleared the Snap options, stepped through the pushback customization and moved the corner or intermediate spots into the parking stand on the parking centerline such that they were behind the tail of the aircraft and now pushback works.

[virtuali]

End user should not have to find workarounds for one of the most popular P3D aircraft. This is for the dev and if the response is, we have given you tools to fix (what before was not broke) than that is the wrong answer. End of story.

I'm sorry but, we looked into this and I don't think this is the case.

The pushback I checked on Cargo Parking 2 at WSSS, which as I've said is perfectly FINE, although it wasn't "perfect" and could be made perfect by using a Free mode customization, couldn't possibly be ANY different with the previous version.

My previous reply about possibly choosing different final nodes and/or a different approach node in this version that might have fixed problems in some airports, cannot possibly happen THERE, because that's a very straightforward parking, with no possible choice of nodes other than the two left/right and just one approach node.

It's just not possible THAT parking I tried could behave any different in the previous version, because when there's no customization at all, the ONLY thing that could make a difference is the choice of nodes used, but on THAT parking there weren't any other possible choices, considering how simple the default AFCAD is on that place.

So, if a 747-8 can't do a perfect curve now *THERE*, it would have been exactly the same in the previous version. It's just the airplane is simply too big to be pushed using the default strategy and it was exactly like that in the previous version, the changes we made to fix problems in some airports could possibly be a problem only on more complex (or with errors) AFCAD, with many more nodes to choose from as equally usable alternatives.

This "problem" you are reporting here, was exactly the same in the old version so, please, stop saying we "broke" something, because that's just not the case. The 747-8 is simply too large for the GSX default pushback algorithm and it was already like that in the previous version. And no, please don't try to say it worked well before. If it did, it was just by accident because if a 3rd party airport had the approach node (the one GSX chose) CLOSER to the parking, it would made GSX works easier.

Because THIS is the REAL issue ( which has been there probably since GSX was released ), if the approach node, the one you CAN now customize in Free mode, is placed at the intersection of the final taxiway, in a position perpendicular to the final pushback position, the resulting curve will result in very LONG airplanes to make a larger curve around the approach node. GSX ALWAYS worked like this, and this is more common on default airports.

If the approach node is closer to the parking, or there is an intermediate node in between, the curve will be tighter, and this usually happens only on 3rd party airports. However, if the approach node is TOO close to the parking, the curve will be TOO tight, resulting in the very well known problem of the tow truck making a 180 around the front gear ( so no, it didn't "worked fine before" ) and THIS is something we changed, obviously for the best, since I hope everybody would agree it much better having a somewhat large curve than seeing the tow truck making a 180.

In these cases, when we detected approach nodes which are too close to the parking spot itself, we skip them ( to prevent the 180 turn problem ) and use the next one. And if the next one is too far, similar to what happens with default airports, it would result in the "too large" curve problem, because the curve wasn't tight *enough* with an airplane so long.

What we CAN do, is to change ( for the FIRST TIME after GSX was released in 2012 ), the default pushback strategy, and automatically MOVE the approach node if it's too far from the parking, which should fix the problem of pushing very long airplanes, which GSX ALWAYS HAD, but you didn't noticed, because you don't use default airports, so GSX usually found closer nodes, and it sometimes worked, but sometimes resulted in the 180 deg turn.

[downscc]

What we CAN do, is to change ( for the FIRST TIME after GSX was released in 2012 ), the default pushback strategy, and automatically MOVE the approach node if it's too far from the parking, which should fix the problem of pushing very long airplanes, which GSX ALWAYS HAD, but you didn't noticed, because you don't use default airports, so GSX usually found closer nodes, and it sometimes worked, but sometimes resulted in the 180 deg turn.

I believe this will resolve the issue.  Thanks.