Why you force me to use SU12 Navdata API

[maxhades]

At the end changing the INI file results in non operating jetways on some 3th part airports. Not a deal for me.

[kingnorris]

At the end changing the INI file results in non operating jetways on some 3th part airports. Not a deal for me.

Then you’d need to find a custom profile. It’s what I had to do on my lone 3rd party airport.

[virtuali]

Same here. Without Navdata it works. Now we have no more option to deactivate this useless feature.

You obviously have, haven't read my last post ?

This is also a bug in GSX

Do you realized you just said when GSX reads all the airport data ON ITS OWN, it works better than asking the SIMULATOR to provide the same data. How this could be a "GSX bug", when it clearly works better when it does more work ?

and has nothing to do with User settings or whatever. All workarounds doesn't help at all.

Maybe you wanted to say "all workarounds don't work for ME", clearly proving it has *everything* to do with user settings. If it wasn't, we would have the forum flooded by hundreds, if not thousands of similar reports, not just an handful.

At the end, AGAIN GSX doesn't came up after landing without shutting the programm down an start it again.

In fact, it was designed precisely to be restarted at any time, under the assumption most users would use it like that anyway, since you surely don't require GSX during a flight, if only to pre-select a gate before arrival, something you can only do when fairly close to the destination.

[virtuali]

Made a couple of flights now without the SU 12 API and everything works like a charm.

I wouldn't expect anything different, considering how GSX is normally reliable, when it doesn't have to contend with things that can go wrong where it has no control over it, like bad data coming from elsewhere, being other sceneries, or just the Navdata.

Now it's up to Umberto to find a solution.

You don't even take into account the slim chance the Navdata ITSELF might have bugs ? How many other add-ons you know of use it ? Let's see:

https://devsupport.flightsimulator.com/questions/14922/simconnect-nav-data-api-sim-freeze-with-default-ms.html

https://devsupport.flightsimulator.com/questions/11112/bug-waypoint-city-information-weird-in-su10.html

https://devsupport.flightsimulator.com/questions/15345/su12b-simconnect-exception-99-when-a-scenery-has-a.html

So, maybe, what you wanted to say was:

"Let's hope FSDT finds a workaround to prevent issues that seems to be still outstanding in the Navdata API, which seems to happen in flight, in the same way they found a workaround for a confirmed bug when reading Jetways with sceneries that have a bug"

[FerrevmVnion]

I want to disable it, too because some airports with wrong parking information coming from the navdata api worked fine by putting just the bgl inside the gsx folder beside the .ini worked fine for those airports.

Delete the checkbox, or give us the option to decide what the user want's to use.
It is presumptuous to tell the user what is "better" from your point of view.

[virtuali]

Delete the checkbox, or give us the option to decide what the user want's to use.It is presumptuous to tell the user what is "better" from your point of view.

Using the official provision in the SDK to retrieve airport data IS the BETTER solution, is not something opened to discussion or negotiation so no, by DEFAULT, it will stay as it is, which is the correct choice for most users.

If you think using airports you know have bad parking information is only useful for GSX, and won't have other issues to the simulation at large (which is not the case, since they WILL affect other things like AI or Living World/Airport services vehicles), it's your own responsibility, but we shouldn't be tasked with additional support burden caused ONLY because there are such bad airports out there.

Supposed we made only airports, and GSX was made by somebody else. Suppose you found KORD to have "bad parking information" that would make it unusable with GSX: I'm quite sure you would come HERE (rightly so), as a customer of the scenery to complain about it, and demand the bad airport to be fixed.

But that's besides the point.

The point is, there IS a way to enable the old airport cache method, which I explained before, and the obvious reason we left it available, was precisely to allow somebody to use the dedicated-BGL trick to fix bad airports so, it's not as if we robbed you of a feature.

It's just the behavior of the Updater that is like that, because it how is supposed to be for the vast majority of users, and we need to be absolutely sure that, if somebody is still using the airport cache method, it's because he knows what he's doing.