Customizations... do I understand this correctly?

[Kosta]

In order to get everything playing correctly, no bus when entering a parking with a jetway, no double stairs when using AES etc, I need to, every time I park the aircraft, press the customization menu, and set my preferences, otherwise there's a high chance of something going wrong?

Is there a global setting for these customizations? Like say, no stairs, ever? Always having a jetway? Always no bus? Maybe from inside FSX, so IF I want to revert to default, I can do quickly...?

Thanks
Kosta

[virtuali]

In order to get everything playing correctly, no bus when entering a parking with a jetway, no double stairs when using AES etc, I need to, every time I park the aircraft, press the customization menu, and set my preferences, otherwise there's a high chance of something going wrong?

You understood it correctly.

there a global setting for these customizations? Like say, no stairs, ever? Always having a jetway? Always no bus? Maybe from inside FSX, so IF I want to revert to default, I can do quickly...?#

The whole issue is that you are getting a bus or a stair when you think you shouldn't, because the scenery you used, instead of having standard FSX jetways, has static jetways as part of the terminal (or jetways animated in non-standard ways) so, GSX doesn't have any means to recognize there IS a jetway there, so that parking might well be a parking in the open, so, if that was a global preference, you would never a bus and stairs, even when they would be needed, without a standard FSX jetway, GSX can't decide on its own if that parking is an open parking or it's a parking with a fake jetway, so this can only work on a parking-by-parking basis, and on a scenery-by-scenery basis, because sceneries that have proper FSX jetways (like all default, all FSDT, UK2000, etc.) don't need any customization.

[Kosta]

But at least an airport filter? Not only parking filter...? Would be way easier...

And example: my LOWI, it has no gates, only normal parkings. So if I want to disable all of stairs in GSX, is there a way, would you be able maybe to make that possibility? I recon it wouldn't be too much trouble, or?

[virtuali]

But at least an airport filter? Not only parking filter...? Would be way easier...

That wouldn't work either, if an airport had some parkings with jetways and some in the open, disabling the stairs per airport would disable them even where they are needed.

[Kosta]

Of course, it wouldn't work everywhere. But it's an user's choice, isn't it? I was only thinking of additional checkbox to simply disable for the airport, just like you can do for parking.

[tf51d]

I have to agree with Kosta on this, it should be user adjustable per airport. If you are using ATC for example, an Airliner will be assigned a Gate, usually with a Jetway, if the airport is so equipped, and can be assigned a gate, based on airline, size and availability so to have to setup per gate, is problematic at best. Knowing that if you were able to identify by airport with Static Jetways. That would take care of the problem. It wouldn't matter that there are other parking spots without a jetway, since you would rarely if ever be assigned to that type of gate. Most of which in AFCADS are designated Parking or Ramps, not Gates. The only time I would generally use a parking spot without a jetway, would be if I was flying a Cargo flight.  Personally I don't like that 3rd party developers have chosen to make their airports in FSX this way, as I believe there should only be one standard. I normally don't buy these types of airports, with the exception of FlyTampa, There overall quality is equal to your own. Your company, as well as UK2000 has shown that it is possible for FSX type jetways to work well. Are they perfect, no, but then what is?

[virtuali]

We'll see if we could enable this choice for the whole airport, although the real solution would be airport designers will do the right thing, and start designing airports with FSX jetways.

Or, AT LEAST, would either use our suggested "dummy jetway" method:

http://www.fsdreamteam.com/forum/index.php?topic=5566.msg50261#msg50261

Or, provide users with an already made GSX .ini file for their airport, indicating where their fake jetways are. Both these methods don't affect fps at all so, there's really no excuse not to using them.

Or, since there ARE *good* developers, for example Flightbeam, which are working to add PROPER FSX jetways in their next sceneries, so they would well with GSX, I suggest give your purchasing preferences to their products.

[Kosta]

Umberto, not to sound negatively, but you can't expect other developers to just do what you say. Right?

Don't understand me wrong, I have a really high respect for you guys and your work, but there are many developers out there and there must be a solution on your side, not affecting what others are doing.

Providing users with already made GSX .ini file would also be like expecting every developer to make intelliscene.cfg for each aircraft. Still, nobody is doing it, although the product has been out for years.

And sticking with Flightbeam as a preferred developer: what kind of promotional drama is that? Sure, good product(s)... but until FB starts producing one awesome airport per week, in the quality of FSDT or any other known scenery developer, massively covering what others are doing, how could we give our "purchasing preferences" to their products? They have one product!!

Anyway... sticking to the original idea of somehow trying to give an user a control over what to disable is I think a preferable idea. I'm sure that an option for disabling an airport is one easy to implement, if it was so easy to implement a parking.

[Bruce Hamilton]

...but you can't expect other developers to just do what you say. Right?

Why not?  They do things the way they do to accomodate Oliver Pabst and AES, why shouldn't they be equally willing to accomodate Virtuali and GSX?

[Kosta]

Actually a good point. Still, not an accomodation of others, but an option for users. Getting everyone to play along is going to be impossible.

[virtuali]

Why not?  They do things the way they do to accomodate Oliver Pabst and AES, why shouldn't they be equally willing to accomodate Virtuali and GSX?

Not only that, one would expect a payware addon should offer *more* (not LESS) features than what a default airport has, animated jetways in this case.

Having standard FSX jetways doesn't of course prevent the scenery to still support the AES ones to have *better* animated jetways, for those willing to pay the extra credits, but it shouldn't be an excuse for not having any animated jetway at all, for those that would be satisfied with the default animation.

[Kosta]

Quite correct. I would expect sceneries to offer a lot. But there is too much out there already to make everyone change the existing products. And if company nr 1 is already offering good airport, why would company nr 2 then start making a better version... All doesn't make really much sense, nor is financially viable.

[virtuali]

And if company nr 1 is already offering good airport, why would company nr 2 then start making a better version... All doesn't make really much sense, nor is financially viable.

Without having to wait for an entirely new version made by someone else, a developer could simply update its scenery to feature FSX jetways.

If he already did the preliminary work needed for AES anyway (separating jetways from the terminal) it would be enough to just add FSX animated jetways, which would be still excludable by AES, if needed.

However, there's no need to keep arguing, we can easily add that option to exclude all stairs/bus on a whole airport, but still it's an half-backed solution, worse than customizing by parking, and of course worse than the real solution, which would be offerring proper FSX sceneries to begin with.

[Kosta]

Totally agreed. It would be awesome if everyone did that. I've never seen it on such a large scale.

Thanks for listening though.