A proposition about luggage train objects

[ACSoft]

Umberto, may I propose that the 2 luggage trains in GSX, behave like catering trucks or fuel truck ?

Actually, they are present, when you start and will leave to the spawn point and disappear there (de-spawn), when you start boarding your passengers. In the same time two new luggage trains, which spawn successively on the same spawn point, come to the aircraft with the luggage and take place for the loading in the aircraft.

When de-boarding passenger, these trains have just to go on their position,  but it would be perfectly possible they come empty from the spawn point and, at the end, return there !

I see only positive aspects to this modification. First, it's much simpler and more realistic to my view. There are also fewer objects simulated at the same time, which must be favorable for the objects count. This should also reduces the number of horrible collisions, which are inevitable in MSFS (no dynamic mutual detection of objects implemented).

Thanks to take this proposition in consideration.

[virtuali]

When de-boarding passenger, these trains have just to go on their position,  but it would be perfectly possible they come empty from the spawn point and, at the end, return there ! I see only positive aspects to this modification. First, it's much simpler and more realistic to my view. There are also fewer objects simulated at the same time, which must be favorable for the objects count.

Surely people will complain deboarding will take longer. Object count won't change, because the  extra set of carts that starts on the spawn point far away, are only created on Boarding, not Deboarding.

[IMatAMS]

Deboard would indeed take a bit longer, but as the OP says there is no real realistic reason for some empty baggage carts sitting on the ramp when departing, only for then to drive off and others to return with the bags. And not having the empty ones sitting there would help with issues of clipping/ space between the loaders and the carts.

[virtuali]

Deboard would indeed take a bit longer

With the airports out there being made as they usually are ( badly, with not much care for ground services ), it might take more than just "a bit" to arrive.

as the OP says there is no real realistic reason for some empty baggage carts sitting on the ramp when departing

This has been discussed so many times: GSX cannot possibly assume you will start it with Boarding and there might cases where the first thing you do is Deboarding, for example after restarting GSX for any reason, that's why the carts used for Deboarding are already there, so you won't have to wait for them.

And not having the empty ones sitting there would help with issues of clipping/ space between the loaders and the carts.

The correct solution to this is to act on their initial starting position in the airport profile, to adapt their position to the airport details and other vehicles.

[ACSoft]

This has been discussed so many times: GSX cannot possibly assume you will start it with Boarding and there might cases where the first thing you do is Deboarding, for example after restarting GSX for any reason, that's why the carts used for Deboarding are already there, so you won't have to wait for them.

Ah ! Ah ! ... "There might be cases" ... I would be very curious to know them ! Anyway... so, for hypothetical reasons, you think it is clever to have these carts being there and then, that they go away, while 2 other trains come from somewhere, when you decide to start boarding ! Very realistic !

Why not, in this case, to also put there, 2 catering truck, one fuel truck and maybe later, also the water truck... etc...  And so, if for "any reason" you have to restart, peoples won't complain about the necessity to wait long for these vehicles to come back !

For de-boarding, you can even avoid them to travel like during boarding, you could perfectly spawn them on their positions, when the user select the arrival gate. In fact, exactly like it is now with the marshaller (you don't have it initially, but only in case of arrival gate selection)!

Sorry, but it is difficult to agree with such an argumentation.

The correct solution to this is to act on their initial starting position in the airport profile, to adapt their position to the airport details and other vehicles.

Solution ?!? What solution, to what problem ? Interferences with static object ? I didn't complain about that ! As you say, this can be avoided with the GSX editor and I know it since long.

I just do a proposition which I though was a good one, to improve the realism, to also reduce the number of objects, to reduce the probability of these carts passing though aircrafts, trucks, etc... Even my passengers boarding from the floor and walking on the tarmac !

Do-you realize, that during PAX boarding, you have FOUR of these trains, travelling on the airport, most of the time, performing silly trajectories ? Yes, interference with static objects can be avoided by editing the position of these objects, but almost nothing can be done about all the objects travelling problems. So less we have travelling objects, better it is, to my humble point of view !

Please, next time, just say you are not interested by my proportion, instead of trying to dismount it, and please, do not continue to argue ! I give up ! Like I already gave up to have, one day, the crew boarding separately from passenger and other stuff's.

[virtuali]

Ah ! Ah ! ... "There might be cases" ... I would be very curious to know them !

If you just care to read my message more carefully, I already provided one: if you restart GSX for any reason after having performed part of the service, you might well start with Deboarding.

Anyway... so, for hypothetical reasons, you think it is clever to have these carts being there and then, that they go away, while 2 other trains come from somewhere, when you decide to start boarding ! Very realistic !

I don't know what you are trying to say here. I've seen empty carts on gates in real airports so many times when, instead, full carts are always supposed to come from some kind of luggage sorting facility, that's why they come from afar, but the empty don't.

Why not, in this case, to also put there, 2 catering truck, one fuel truck and maybe later, also the water truck... etc...  And so, if for "any reason" you have to restart, peoples won't complain about the necessity to wait long for these vehicles to come back !

Again I don't know what you are trying to say here: luggage/cargo cart are completely different by the other vehicles, because they have an empty/full status, so this reasoning doesn't make any sense.

Solution ?!? What solution, to what problem ? Interferences with static object ? I didn't complain about that ! As you say, this can be avoided with the GSX editor and I know it since long.

It wasn't very clear what you were really complaining about and no, editing their starting positions is NOT only useful to prevent conflict with static things ( that's just the most easily understood effect ), but they also can improve possible conflicts between GSX vehicles themselves.

I just do a proposition which I though was a good one, to improve the realism, to also reduce the number of objects, to reduce the probability of these carts passing though aircrafts, trucks, etc... Even my passengers boarding from the floor and walking on the tarmac !

Please stop saying this would reduce the overall number of objects, because I already explained why it wouldn't.  Not during Deboarding.

Do-you realize, that during PAX boarding, you have FOUR of these trains, travelling on the airport, most of the time, performing silly trajectories ? Yes, interference with static objects can be avoided by editing the position of these objects, but almost nothing can be done about all the objects travelling problems. So less we have travelling objects, better it is, to my humble point of view !

As already explained, your suggestion was a change to Deboarding, now you are saying during boarding we have four carts, sure we have but, again, your suggested change to Deboarding won't reduce the number of objects during Deboarding because, during Debording we DO NOT have four carts!

The "silly trajectories" are obviously a result of airports badly designed with "silly" or altogether missing vehicle paths. There is a a reasons why vehicle paths are made in real airports, and is to give ground vehicles dedicated safe paths around the airports without running into things they are not supposed to, like other airplanes for example. If those are missing, badly made or not well connected to give an adequate flow, GSX MUST try to reach you in some way, which will result in "silly" trajectories.

Please, next time, just say you are not interested by my proportion, instead of trying to dismount it, and please, do not continue to argue ! I give up ! Like I already gave up to have, one day, the crew boarding separately from passenger and other stuff's.

I'm not arguing, I'm explaining why I don't think your suggestion would give much value.

The only real change, that everybody will notice, and everybody will likely complain about, will be having to WAIT LONGER for Deboarding and, with airports as badly designed as they usually are with regard to ground services flow, it might be several minutes added.

[ACSoft]

I'm not arguing, I'm explaining why I don't think your suggestion would give much value.

So next time, just limit your answer to "I don't think your suggestion would give much value" and do not ARGUE AGAINST a proposition, in a way with let me think, that my idea is just totally invalid to not say stupid !!!

Yes argue, my friend, consult a dictionary definition please and by the way, also consult the definition of word "proposition".

Apparently, you also do not understand what irony is !

The only real change, that everybody will notice, and everybody will likely complain about, will be having to WAIT LONGER for Deboarding and, with airports as badly designed as they usually are with regard to ground services flow, it might be several minutes added.

NO they WON'T have to way longer. You didn't read my last message properly:

For de-boarding, you can even avoid them to travel like during boarding, you could perfectly spawn them on their positions, when the user select the arrival gate. In fact, exactly like it is now with the marshaller (you don't have it initially, but only in case of arrival gate selection)!

but I stop here. I already told you that I "give up".

[virtuali]

So next time, just limit your answer to "I don't think your suggestion would give much value" and do not ARGUE AGAINST a proposition, in a way with let me think, that my idea is just totally invalid to not say stupid !!!

If a thorough and exhaustive reply makes YOU think I'm calling your idea invalid or stupid, and you'd rather prefer single line instead, it's your problem.

I would be way more annoyed by the latter, but that's just me: thinking somebody spending its time to make a multiple proper argumentative answers is offering me a better support than a corporatesque-onliner-drone.

NO they WON'T have to way longer. You didn't read my last message properly:

For de-boarding, you can even avoid them to travel like during boarding, you could perfectly spawn them on their positions, when the user select the arrival gate. In fact, exactly like it is now with the marshaller (you don't have it initially, but only in case of arrival gate selection)!

I skipped this part, because it was in contradiction with your initial suggestion of:

When de-boarding passenger, these trains have just to go on their position,  but it would be perfectly possible they come empty from the spawn point and, at the end, return there!

So now, I really don't understand what would even be the "change", since you said it should affect deboarding, but first you wanted to have the empty ones coming from afar, then you are saying no, maybe they can already start on the gate, which is what they already do so, what's to change then ?

[ACSoft]

So now, I really don't understand what would even be the "change", since you said it should affect deboarding, but first you wanted to have the empty ones coming from afar, then you are saying no, maybe they can already start on the gate, which is what they already do so, what's to change then ?

It is very simple:

You just DO NOT SPAWN these carts on initial loading, like you do with the Mashaller, when the user choose to use jetway or stairs, but you spawn them, when the user choose a gate after landing. So, during boarding, you don't have the empty cart trains traveling, while the two others carts train coming with the baggage, which make 4 trains in the same time, the reason why I said that, you will have less active objects, at that time almost and that it reduce by a factor 2, the probability of these trains making silly travel through airport objects. For example, I spend hours to find a solution, that in Ajaccio (LFKJ), when boarding my passengers from the terminal door, walking on the tarmac, that these damned trains do not kill every time some of my passengers !

Yes, initially, I didn't thought to this solution, but after reading your and IMatAMS comments, I have imagined this better solution, which solve the timing problem and is probably even more easy to implement.

I hope that this time you really understand my proposition.

[virtuali]

You just DO NOT SPAWN these carts on initial loading, like you do with the Mashaller, when the user choose to use jetway or stairs, but you spawn them, when the user choose a gate after landing.

Everything created by GSX is always spawned AFTER the user a selected a gate, but GSX cannot possibly know if you started a flight or landed.

The main issue is, GSX doesn't keep track of a flight or have the concept of a mission, with a departure and a landing and none of this is saved as a persistent state between sessions.

So, as I've tried to explain so many times, since GSX can be RESET at any time, it cannot possibly know, when you select a gate, if you are starting a new flight or you just completed one, since it has no memory of what happened before it was restarted.

That doesn't mean something like this might not be useful in the future but, it must be something of real value to some major new feature, not just that minor saving of having only 2 carts during boarding instead of 4 which, could be handled way more easily by immediately removing the empty ones on Boarding instead of make them go back to the starting place, which of course won't look very nice.

[Pirateinparadise]

But Umberto, GSK now has our flight plan via Simbrief. When the menu loads, it could check to see if we are sitting at the departure airport or at the arrival airport and present us with boarding first if we are at the departure airport and de boarding first if we are at the arrival airport.

I'd like to see GSX just have a "Start" button. Simbrief has the departure time, pax load, cargo load, and fuel load. If we're sitting at the departure airport, and there's less fuel on the plane than the Simbrief plan, send the fuel truck. Then, send the catering and call boarding (if there's less weight on the plane than Simbrief says). It should be timed to complete everything by the out time (0 on the VGDS).

If we have a good Simbrief plan and enough time to complete the services, why does the pilot need to control anything going on on the ground? Don't need to change anything on arrival, except maybe dock jetway and start deboarding when the engines shut down.

Don't get me wrong. I've used GSX for years and I love it. This is not a complaint, just a suggestion. GSX never had all of that information to work with before. Now it does. I'd like to have less interaction with the menus wherever possible. To paraphrase Elon Musk, the best menu interaction is no menu interaction. 

[virtuali]

But Umberto, GSK now has our flight plan via Simbrief. When the menu loads, it could check to see if we are sitting at the departure airport or at the arrival airport and present us with boarding first if we are at the departure airport and de boarding first if we are at the arrival airport.

If you mean switching the order of the entries in the the menu then no, for two different reasons: changing the order won't really make the menu any easier or quicker to use, and there are 3rd party integrations, like Streamdeck profiles or other addons like airplane integration, that might be confused by entries not always being in the same orde.

I guess we might use this information to not create the empty vehicles on boarding but again, I still missing what kind of value it will really add or how many will notice like wow: if you file a plan on Simbrief, we can spare a couple of objects, which won't really "fix" the real issue, which is hundreds of AI + their auxiliary ground objects counting for 80% of the overall simobjects number, which is something that must be fixed properly, by Asobo.

I'd like to see GSX just have a "Start" button. Simbrief has the departure time, pax load, cargo load, and fuel load. If we're sitting at the departure airport, and there's less fuel on the plane than the Simbrief plan, send the fuel truck. Then, send the catering and call boarding (if there's less weight on the plane than Simbrief says). It should be timed to complete everything by the out time (0 on the VGDS).

This will hardly work and will be basically impossible to respect the timing, since due to how (badly or not that badly) the airport is designed, the time vehicles take to arrive can change drastically.

If we have a good Simbrief plan and enough time to complete the services, why does the pilot need to control anything going on on the ground? Don't need to change anything on arrival, except maybe dock jetway and start deboarding when the engines shut down.

Are you aware that, the more automation you have in GSX, the more likely you'll have bugs ?

It's like the automatic servicing option: I never wanted to add it, because I knew the issues, but users kept asking for it, so we added in the end and, the result is, you save some clicks, but you'll get more issues of vehicle clashing into each other and, with anything related to AI vehicle movement, it takes an unsustainable and unjustified amount of effort even to get SMALL improvements.

Just look how many issues and years is taking to have autonomous cars "somewhat" working, and the best they can do ( and yes, I DO own a Tesla... ), is to drive reasonably well in the easiest possible conditions, that is on highways. They are still not really safe for city driving and they won't be for years, and driving articulated vehicles on a cramped apron if WAY more complex than driving a small car in a city, and we don't have the infinite resources the car industry has.

And yes, people expect flawless movement by GSX...

[ACSoft]

I this case, how do you know that you must or must not spawn the Marshaller ?

The Marshaller is not a vehicle that is tied to the services, it's a Parking System like a VGDS, so they are always created and they position doesn't have to change depending on the service or the airplane, so it's not relevant to this discussion.

It is just to apply the same Marshaller logic to these cart trains, like I have explained now several time, but obviously, you don't want to understand, SO AGAIN I GIVE UP !!!

It's not obviously me that I don't "want to" understand, it's just that, as I've repeated so many times, I still fail to see the value if your proposal, which won't really add anything to the product, other than possibly a very minor saving in the number of Simobjects, which won't really "solve" anything, since the issue won't be solved by 4-6 less simobjects created by GSX, when the overall limit has already being surpassed by hundreds of objects (ai and services) created by AI planes so, clearly, it must be fixed at a completely different level.

[Captain Kevin]

I this case, how do you know that you must or must not spawn the Marshaller ?

From what I see when playing, it is simply when you are not at a gate and call GSX menu, then your logic decide to display the menu where you can choose an arrival gate, and if you use it, then the logic assume you arrive and therefore put the marshaller in place, Therefore, it would be perfectly possible to spawn these carts trains at that time only. The only logical time where these empty carts should be in place, near the aircraft.

It is just to apply the same Marshaller logic to these cart trains, like I have explained now several time, but obviously, you don't want to understand, SO AGAIN I GIVE UP !!!

If you're already at the gate, chances are you don't need the marshaller to guide you into the spot, so that's easy to deal with. As far as the luggage carts, if you're already at the gate, how would GSX know if you're going to start with boarding or deboarding. If I get to the gate and the jetways don't show up, forcing me to restart GSX to get them to show up then, I would want to start with deboarding first since I obviously just got there, but GSX has no way of knowing what I want to do.

[ACSoft]

If you're already at the gate, chances are you don't need the marshaller to guide you into the spot, so that's easy to deal with. As far as the luggage carts, if you're already at the gate, how would GSX know if you're going to start with boarding or deboarding. If I get to the gate and the jetways don't show up, forcing me to restart GSX to get them to show up then, I would want to start with deboarding first since I obviously just got there, but GSX has no way of knowing what I want to do.

Personnaly, I NEVER want deboard my passenger when I am at the gate, just after having started a flight, which is the only case where you would not being able to call the arrival menu. But even in this strange case (I positively don't se why you would "start" a flight with a deboarding !!!) or with your jetway problem, which is an abnormal exceptional situation, it would be perfectly possible to load the carts, when you select the deboarding option, if they were not loaded already before, in the same time of the Marshaller. Even if you don't wan't them to popup in a unrealistic manner, just in this case, you may spawn them at the spawn point an let them come like I proposed first.

OK, you prefer a permanent unrealistic design, full of bad side effect, like these carts trains stupidly returning empty to the spawn point, to solve hypothetical rare cases which, moreover can be solved in a much clever way, that your right, but please, stop trying to convince my that the actual logic design is justified, this will simply NEVER happen.