Bug report for PMDG 777-F new built-in official GSX Profile and q about gsx.cfg

[Moridin]

Hi,

Flew my first 777-F flight with the new official GSX profile for the PMDG 777-F. Not everything was perfect.

Question: Do we leave the gsx.cfg file as is in the PMDG-77F community folder or are we supposed to delete it?

Bug 1: Rear cargo hold did not close after boarding and/or after requesting push and start. After manually closing it, it opened itself automatically. Had to close it a second time.

Bug 2: Stairs did not go away before tug connected. They did go away later, just before beginning pushback.

Everything was correct during deboarding.

[Captain Kevin]

I responded to your post on the PMDG forum, but you may try moving it somewhere else like your desktop to see how it works, and if it works the way it should, you can delete it.

[Moridin]

Thanks, I saw! Will test without it during the next flight in a few hours.

[Moridin]

Removed PMDG gsx.cfg file from PMDG-77F folder in Community.

Bugs and observations:

1. Large fuel truck is still used, hitting engine while refueling. Unable to attach screenshots because forum doesn't allow me to.

2. Refuelling and boarding do not automatically connect stairs.

3. GSX did enter FUEL into FMS. It DID NOT enter the weights. Had to do those manually.

4. Rear cargo hold correctly closed after boarding this time.

5. Stairs got automatically connected AFTER fuel truck finished refuelling.

6. Boarding was completed during refuelling. It finished long before refuelling did. After refuelling finished, all cargo doors were opened. They were closed earlier.

7. All cargo doors closed after pushback requested. 1L pax door still open, stairs connected. Have to manually close it. Pushback will lift aircraft even with stairs connected and door open.

At this point in time I don't know if removing the gsx.cfg file is the correct thing to do or not.

[IMatAMS]

I don't think it makes a lot of difference. The gsx.cfg file only overrides the data thats in there, which is not much more than the door and refuel positions. The behaviors appear between the internal profile and the GSX programming that PMDG seems to have built in, at least partly.. 

I only did a quick test (without the PMDG supplied cfg, for all it matters) and for me it DID load both the fuel and payload correctly.
All cargo doors opended and closed correctly.
1L door I closed and armed manually (intentional, freighter ops) but opened/closed correctly earlier.

There is a general GSX issue that, because no two services can be active at the same time on the same side, the stairs are removed when fueling is set on the left side. I think this should be looked at, to exclude the stairs from this rule.

Re: big fuel truck or small fuel hydrant: this is an (airport) profile selection. Yes when there is no undergorund refueling the big fuel truck clips to reach the refueling ports. This is more a general GFSX issue than 777 specifi I reckon, pathing of the big fuel truck could be improved.

[Captain Kevin]

There is a general GSX issue that, because no two services can be active at the same time on the same side, the stairs are removed when fueling is set on the left side. I think this should be looked at, to exclude the stairs from this rule.

The issue would be the vehicles colliding in each other given the paths that they use, so the fuel truck might run into the stairs if they were left in place since the vehicles aren't aware of the existence of the other vehicles.

Re: big fuel truck or small fuel hydrant: this is an (airport) profile selection. Yes when there is no undergorund refueling the big fuel truck clips to reach the refueling ports. This is more a general GFSX issue than 777 specifi I reckon, pathing of the big fuel truck could be improved.

I wonder if repositioning the refueling point within GSX would also solve this.

[IMatAMS]

There is a general GSX issue that, because no two services can be active at the same time on the same side, the stairs are removed when fueling is set on the left side. I think this should be looked at, to exclude the stairs from this rule.

The issue would be the vehicles colliding in each other given the paths that they use, so the fuel truck might run into the stairs if they were left in place since the vehicles aren't aware of the existence of the other vehicles.

Not really an issue on the 777. The 1L stair is no factor as the fuel truck appoaches from the rear, and the 2L stair on the 77W is no more ín the way' than the engine..

Re: big fuel truck or small fuel hydrant: this is an (airport) profile selection. Yes when there is no undergorund refueling the big fuel truck clips to reach the refueling ports. This is more a general GFSX issue than 777 specifi I reckon, pathing of the big fuel truck could be improved.

I wonder if repositioning the refueling point within GSX would also solve this.

Yes it does, easy to move. You'd just move the GSX refueling port away from where it actually is, and where it's also textured. still better option than clipping probably, but best option would be a different angle on the fuel truck, so it doesn't clip. 

[Captain Kevin]

Not really an issue on the 777. The 1L stair is no factor as the fuel truck appoaches from the rear, and the 2L stair on the 77W is no more ín the way' than the engine.

I wonder if it's a case of all or nothing. I obviously didn't program the thing, so I just have no idea, I'm just guessing.

Yes it does, easy to move. You'd just move the GSX refueling port away from where it actually is, and where it's also textured. still better option than clipping probably, but best option would be a different angle on the fuel truck, so it doesn't clip.

I wasn't sure where the GSX refueling port was relative to the aircraft. I know in the past, I've had to readjust it to the proper position.

[Moridin]

Just to point out that the 777-300ER / 77W uses the smaller fuel truck which connects to the underground tanks / ground port even at smaller airports and since it doesn't crash into the engines, I find this more immersive. :-)

[IMatAMS]

Just to point out that the 777-300ER / 77W uses the smaller fuel truck which connects to the underground tanks / ground port even at smaller airports and since it doesn't crash into the engines, I find this more immersive. :-)

No it doesn't per se, but the gate/terminal parking positions the 77W uses are much more likely to be be configured for underground refueling, and the Cargo stand the F uses more likely to be configured for a tanker truck.