I don't see how hiding the Left/Right pushback would change anything. If you want to assume the QuickEdit it's the new default, just use it...
That suggestion of hiding and the assumption of QuickEdit as new default was because the impression given from videos/posts is that all focus is on the new system despite the issues this has introduced with the older system.
While I understand that GSX is moving towards a more advanced AFCAD independent system for pushbacks, the recent updates have made the standard default left/right pushbacks, even at default airports with default aircraft, produce unsatisfactory results when using large aircraft.
As per this thread: http://www.fsdreamteam.com/forum/index.php/topic,21343.0.html I assume the 6th August 2019 update change addressed this issue
Change: Default Pushback strategy is moving the default Approach node automatically if it’s too far from the airplane, which should improve the curve radius when pushing very large airplanes.
As per this thread: http://www.fsdreamteam.com/forum/index.php/topic,21287.0.html, you mentioned that you tested a standard right pushback from default Singapore cargo parking 2. I completed this pushback using both the default A321 and B744 (Built in profile only) with the default Singapore (No Profile) and the error still occurred.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Why you think old pushback won't work ? With the today's update we reverted to the old logic, the new QuickEdit mode it's *just* a better visual interface to really see what's going on.
The reason I said that is because my test scenario (WSSS 747 and numerous others in first post) with everything stock failed. Note even with the latest update the above still failed, as shown further down.
I’ve been thinking about how to explain my view on the issue in more concise manner and came to a pretty similar view to the above post which uses the better terminology (Snapped, unsnapped).
Snapped system:• Current form does not handle large aircraft (starts turn too late)
• Thus, for large aircraft to achieve a satisfactory push:
o Simple pushes require a conversion to unsnapped
o Complicated pushes are not possible until extra nodes are added
• Ideally the preview system should show pushback path instead of just AFCAD nodes/link
Note same issue as this thread:
http://www.fsdreamteam.com/forum/index.php/topic,21994.0.htmlResult of Snapped System at WSSS Cargo Parking 2 after latest update:
^ Doesn’t show actual path
^ Still results in same undesirable path as prior to most recent update
-----------------------------------------------------
Unsnapped System:The validity testing model seems a bit off
1. Paths that seem “reasonable” all red
2. “reasonable” looking red path tested and worked
3. Green paths are often very strange
4. Tested Green strange path failed
5. Green path work but node(?) placement not expected position
1. Paths that seem “reasonable” all redOnly two paths below shown of the many tested:
2. “reasonable” looking red path tested and workedThis pushback although red works exactly as shown without issues
3. Green paths are often very strangeConsidering the above paths show as failing, the following paths should be failing before the above do
Note the position of the corner node relative to the path:
4. Tested Green strange path failedObviously from the path this will not work but was tested as green
5. Green path work but node(?) placement not expected positionI have noticed that if the final position is placed on the wrong side of the parking spot (For right push, position on left facing left) then the pushback works without major error on all aircraft types
Actual pushback using this:
Note only issue with this is as the aircraft is on the wrong side of the parking spot, the tug drives off through the aircraft.
-------------------------------------------------
Hopefully this information allows the two pushback modes logic to be refined.
