This forum is in read-only mode for archive purposes, please use our new forum at https://community.justflight.com
Forum Home Forum Home > Just Flight Products > Traffic X / Traffic / Traffic 2005
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Circuit Until
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Circuit Until

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <123>
Author
Message
freddy View Drop Down
Chief Pilot
Chief Pilot
Avatar

Joined: 29 Nov 2008
Location: Melbourne, Aust
Points: 1339
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote freddy Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05 Dec 2014 at 11:20pm
Ray,

Busy today, but a quick check of my TCC files shows that everything I have matches yours. So the plot thickens. I'm going to be running some experiments when I get some time. Watch this space.
Back to Top
freddy View Drop Down
Chief Pilot
Chief Pilot
Avatar

Joined: 29 Nov 2008
Location: Melbourne, Aust
Points: 1339
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote freddy Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05 Dec 2014 at 11:22pm
Pathfinder,

It sounds like you have circuit flights working.

Talking about two lines of schedules (ie, flight plans) ...

Here are two screenshots from my Traffic X.

The top one shows a plane flying from YMMB to YMAY and back again. It repeats that journey flying back and forth between the same two airports, over and over, as the day progresses.

The bottom one shows a plane flying to multiple (different) airports (from YARG to YPWR, then from YPWR to YMEK, then from YMEK to YBRY, then from YBRY to YFTZ, then from YFTZ to YTEF, then from YTEF to YDBY, before finally returning home from YDBY to YARG).

Both of these are NOT "circuit" flights (you can see there is no "Circuits until" time showing). These are "flight plans". Because these are not circuit flights, these planes will not do touch-and-goes. This is what we mean when we talk about flight plans and more than two lines of schedules.


Back to Top
Pathfinder1` View Drop Down
P/UT
P/UT
Avatar

Joined: 09 Dec 2013
Location: Luton
Points: 104
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Pathfinder1` Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06 Dec 2014 at 6:23am
yes at last I have managed to get a circuit and touch and go working, but not the way the manual tells me to do it, If RayM had not said about having to have the 2 lines, I would never have tried that,
I do have some flight plans with multable flights, one that goes to 7 airfields then returns.
I must be learning a bit by reading all your reply`s
Back to Top
freddy View Drop Down
Chief Pilot
Chief Pilot
Avatar

Joined: 29 Nov 2008
Location: Melbourne, Aust
Points: 1339
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote freddy Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06 Dec 2014 at 8:12am
Woohoo! I have CIRCUITS working now.

After much experimentation, and getting absolutely nowhere, with no circuit planes ever appearing in my sim ... even after reading and re-reading Ray's posts ... I returned to the manual for the FSX SDK (Microsoft ESP SDK - Traffic Toolbox).

Careful reading of the information about circuit flights and then more careful reading about how the compiler works, eventually lead to a discovery. I discovered that the aircraft configuration/definition file (that's used in the compile process) has a parameter in it which can be set for each individual aircraft and determines whether or not the aircraft in question can perform touch-and-goes. Traffic X's aircraft configuration/definition file is called "AircraftTypes.csv". I looked in that file and to my dismay discovered, for all aircraft, this parameter is set to NO. In other words, with this parameter set as NO, you will never get a single Traffic X aircraft to ever do touch-and-goes at any of your airports, regardless of what you enter or configure in the Traffic Control Centre.

===================================================

From the FSX SDK manual:

The format of aircraft type file is as follows:

typeKey,Title,Cruise,minAlt,maxAlt,minRange,maxRange,minRwyLen,runwayTypes,radius,parkingTypes,IFR%,AutoRoute?,TouchAndGo?

# Examples

BE58-1,Beech Baron 58,200,40,120,50,661,4000,HARD,7,RAMP,50,yes,no

B350-1,Beech King Air 350,315,150,250,100,1298,4000,HARD,11,RAMP,75,yes,no

B734-2,Boeing 737-400,477,250,350,200,2248,6426,HARD,22,GATE,100,yes,no

===================================================

The last parameter (TouchAndGo?) must be set to "yes" for an aircraft to be allowed to do touch-and-goes.

Here is an aircraft from Traffic X's "AircraftTypes.csv" file:

AC0,JFAI_TX_FA18_RAAF,348,240,450,172,1727,681,HARD,8,MIL_COMBAT,100,no,no

Note how the last parameter is set as "no"? This aircraft is not allowed to perform touch-and-goes. And, thus if you set a circuit flight for it in Traffic X, it will not appear in the sim.

So I changed that parameter for this aircraft from "no" to "yes", set a touch-and-go circuit flight for it in Traffic X, followed by a recompile, and ...

... VOILA! It worked!

I will guess that Ray was having success because he was using AIFPC, which, obviously sets the touch-and-go parameter as YES.

I am now going to go through the Traffic X "AircraftTypes.csv" file and change that parameter accordingly. Circuit flights should now appear in my FSX skies.

Woohoo!


A word of WARNING: If you're reading this post and planning to edit your files, remember to ALWAYS make backups of the files BEFORE you make the changes. This way, if something doesn't work as planned, you can revert back to your backed up files.


Back to Top
RayM View Drop Down
First Officer
First Officer
Avatar

Joined: 15 Nov 2012
Location: Luton, England
Points: 384
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote RayM Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06 Dec 2014 at 12:12pm
I suspect that the runway at EGHD may not be long enough for a Gulfstream and that may be why it will only do go-rounds?

As I said, scheduling normally is for flight A to B and B back to A - so must be 2 lines MINIMUM. This also holds for TNG's from A to A - you must have a second line from A to A. There is nothing to stop you doing A to B, B to C, C to D, D and so on but the last one must end up back at A. This is often done for 'Weekly' schedules which allow you to fly, say, and A321 from London to Singapore, in short steps suitable for its range, and back again - but it Must end back at London.

Otherwise you seem to be getting the knack od scheduling now?
A long time FSXA and Traffic X user
Back to Top
RayM View Drop Down
First Officer
First Officer
Avatar

Joined: 15 Nov 2012
Location: Luton, England
Points: 384
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote RayM Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06 Dec 2014 at 12:57pm
Freddy,

I am glad that you seem to have solved your TNG problem but I am not sure that we have got right to the bottom of this situation.

I have made TNG schedules in my Traffic X TCC system and they work fine BUT when I look at my "AircraftTypes.csv" file ALL of the last entries are set to "no", so this file may not be the final arbiter of whether TNG's can be compiled by Traffic X ! It could be that this file changes something elsewhere that, in my system, is already set for TNG's but I cannot see where this might be at the present time.

I am now intrigued by the "AutoRoute?" value. Your SDK samples show a value of "yes" whereas all of mine are set to "no" (like yours also seem to be).

I think I have another headache coming on!
A long time FSXA and Traffic X user
Back to Top
RayM View Drop Down
First Officer
First Officer
Avatar

Joined: 15 Nov 2012
Location: Luton, England
Points: 384
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote RayM Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06 Dec 2014 at 2:26pm
Freddy,
just been looking in the SDK files, particularly "fs10.AircraftTypes.csv" where it says
"#AutoRoute? = automatically generate route for this aircraft (yes/no)
#TouchAndGo? = allow touch and goes when automatically generating routes (yes/no)"
Note that the 'TouchAndGo' value is dependent upon the 'AutoRoute' value i.e. TouchAndGo 'yes' only valid if AutoRoute is 'yes'. It is the SDK "TrafficDatabaseBuilder" function that uses this file when you are using the SDK to add AI to your FSX in lieu of using Traffic X, My Traffic, etc. I cannot be sure how Traffic X uses any of these files when it performs any 'Compiles' so I am still unsure how or even why your changing the value to 'yes' has had the desired effect.
The Traffic X "AircraftTypes.csv" file has "no,no" as the last 2 entries so I am now wondering if the compiler that Traffic X uses (TrafficDatabaseBuilder.exe) is a modified version of the SDK compiler that uses the "AircraftTypes.csv" file in a different way?
A long time FSXA and Traffic X user
Back to Top
Pathfinder1` View Drop Down
P/UT
P/UT
Avatar

Joined: 09 Dec 2013
Location: Luton
Points: 104
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Pathfinder1` Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06 Dec 2014 at 5:28pm
the Gulfstream will land and park at EGHO on a normal flight between 2 airfields, so runway seems to be long enough, I have just tried it on a touch and go flight, EGHO to EGHO with 2 entryies and with the 50 min, separation, it gets cleared to Plymouth, does a circuit and over shoots with the message ( is going missed)
I the other flight to EGHO to EGHO, with a Ultra Light instead of the Tiger Moth, 2 entryies with the 50 min, separation, the ultra light gets cleared for touch an go, it is all beginning to look too complicated for me, and I am beginning to think I was right at the start not wanting any thing to do with the manual.
Back to Top
freddy View Drop Down
Chief Pilot
Chief Pilot
Avatar

Joined: 29 Nov 2008
Location: Melbourne, Aust
Points: 1339
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote freddy Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06 Dec 2014 at 11:30pm
Originally posted by RayM RayM wrote:

I am glad that you seem to have solved your TNG problem but I am not sure that we have got right to the bottom of this situation ...
...
...
just been looking in the SDK files ...
...
...

You and I are thinking on the same page and appear to be doing the exact same research.

Like you I did think it had something to do with the "AutoRoute?" value. The SDK samples do indeed show a value of "yes", and in Traffic X mine is set to "no" (and you say yours is too).

I also checked the Traffic X "_compile.bat" file which has the parameter AutoSchedule=no and I went along reading about that thinking it may have something to do with it in one way or another.

But, despite my reading and all my current knowledge built up over time from experimentation with AI flight plans etc, I admit to still being a little bit lost about the workings of the compiler and its plethora of parameters. And that's a big statement for me to make considering I work in IT and stuff like this is usually bread and butter.

In the end I decided that I really have no idea why it works, or doesn't work ... and that if changing the TouchAndGo? parameter in the Traffic X "AircraftTypes.csv" file has now resulted in touch-and-go circuit aircraft appearing in my sim, when they did not before, then I would just accept that as now "working".

And, you know what they say, "if it aint broke, don't stuff with it". Well, in this case, I've already stuffed with it ... but that actually got it working ... so NOW it is technically in the "aint broke" state, so I am not stuffing with it any more.

I am not sure if making the change to the TouchAndGo? parameter will cause any other unforeseen issues some time in the future. Time will tell. But, it would be a simple matter to correct those by changing the parameter back (and sadly accepting the loss of touch-and-go traffic as a result).

I also cannot recall if any of my very early work on this AI stuff, when I first purchased Traffic X and began to learn how AI works and that the Traffic X files could be manually manipulated, edited and tweaked, resulted in me making an early manual edit/change to any of these parameter values that we are talking about now. In other words, if I was to do a complete fresh reinstallation of Traffic X, I wonder it the default values for these parameters after that installation would be exactly the same as what they are currently set to on my PC right now? But I'm not about to wipe Traffic X off my PC to do a fresh installation of it, not even for a test, so I suppose we may never know.

It's working for me at this point. I'll leave it at that. And I'll put this down to yet another "learning experience". Interestingly, as appears to have always been the case with AI, what I think I know today, always seems to turn out to be incorrect some time in the future as something else reveals itself. This circuit traffic work seems to be just another example of that.

Is Traffic X using a modified version of the SDK compiler. No, the files check out to be the same.

Now, finally, remembering that Just Flight did tell me once that FSX places a higher priority on AI traffic where flight plans fly the planes to and from airports, whereas circuit traffic is given a lower priority. Did they say that because they too could not get circuit traffic to work and also didn't fully understand the SDK manual and it was there way of washing over the fact? Or, is there still something to that? Does FSX really place higher priority on AI traffic where flight plans fly the planes to and from airports? It probably does. But that doesn't explain why you and I have working circuit traffic at our "busy" airports. And it also doesn't explain why I have never heard anyone else mention any kind of "priority" thing in any forum I've ever read. Who knows? Again, I'm just going to put all of this down to "it aint broke" now, and a "learning experience", and leave it at that.

Always learning. (Though not necessarily always understanding.)

All I need to do now is work out why my touch-and-go aircraft are actually performing GO AROUNDS as opposed to doing LANDING touch-and-goes. That appears to have something to do with VFR versus IFR. Well, mine are indeed set to VFR. And, according to everything I've read, that means they should be doing landing touch-and-goes. They aren't. It's no biggie, but it would be nice to get everything working in the way one expects.


Back to Top
freddy View Drop Down
Chief Pilot
Chief Pilot
Avatar

Joined: 29 Nov 2008
Location: Melbourne, Aust
Points: 1339
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote freddy Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07 Dec 2014 at 12:32am
Originally posted by Pathfinder1` Pathfinder1` wrote:

... it is all beginning to look too complicated for me, and I am beginning to think I was right at the start not wanting any thing to do with the manual.

Hehe. If you read my (rather long) post above you will see that once upon a time, I started off at the exact same position you are now at. When it came to AI, I could kind of get things work, but not always in a way I'd expect, meaning there were always more questions. If you've got the time and an appetite to want to learn and know why, then puzzle pieces will reveal themselves to you as you try different things. Heck, I am still learning and discovering new things. This very thread about circuit flights has even taught me some new things ...

The desire to want AI to do what you want, making changes using the tools you have at your disposal, and then getting and seeing the results in the sim, can be very addictive and fun. At least that is how it is for me.

Keep at it.

Back to Top
Pathfinder1` View Drop Down
P/UT
P/UT
Avatar

Joined: 09 Dec 2013
Location: Luton
Points: 104
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Pathfinder1` Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07 Dec 2014 at 6:46am
I now have 2 circuit flights set up at EGHO, the ultra light will do touch and go on both, also a Messerschmitt 109E will do touch add go,
other aircraft I have tried do over shoots (is going missed)
As for your bit (if you`ve got the time) I have been around since 1932 so may have less time than you and RayM,
But I am still learning and trying.
Back to Top
RayM View Drop Down
First Officer
First Officer
Avatar

Joined: 15 Nov 2012
Location: Luton, England
Points: 384
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote RayM Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07 Dec 2014 at 10:57am
Freddy (and Pathfinder please note but perhaps not worry about) -

it is a 'well-known' fact (as discussed on the ADE forum) that if a 'circuit/TNG' schedule is put into action, then if it is a VFR plan, the aircraft should do a touch-and-go-around and fly a quite small circuit (best watched on the SDK Flight Map) whereas, if it is an IFR plan, the aircraft will do 'missed approaches' whilst doing a much 'wider' circuit (presumably looking for ILS/glideslope if available). So, if you are getting 'missed approaches' then it seems that your aircraft are set to IFR and not VFR?

"if it aint broke, don't stuff with it". Hear, Hear - couldn't agree more.

As a matter of interest, when I set up TNG's in Traffic X and compile, and then look at the de-compiled version of the BGL produced by AIFPC, the percentage figures range from, as seen on yesterday's test, from 2% to 85%, so I am not sure that Traffic X (or the compiler) applies a 'weighted value' of any sort.
I wonder if, in the early days of MS Flight Simulator, the programmers thought it might be an idea to 'limit' the amount of 'TNG-type' traffic as opposed to normal traffic as computers in those days probably would not handle it. So they made the compiler rules (e.g. no more than 3 TNG flights per airfield) a bit tighter to prevent problems. Traffic X and 360 will be following these rules of course. I can set up masses of TNG's using AIFPC but not suffer any problems except that adding too many and making the TNG schedule more than 15-20 minutes causes other arrivals to have problems fitting in.

Now, I find Traffic X very strange on this point.
I set up schedules in Traffic X and ask for VFR, then I compile to BGL. If I now de-compile this file using AIFPC, whilst the IFR/VFR item is correct (in AIFPC terms) ALL flights are set to "F" (as opposed to "R")which means that FSX ATC will use a Flight No. instead of the aircraft registration! In the following example, the Flight No. is '0000' which FSX ATC calls "zero" by the way.

AC#1430,VH-AAC,69%,24h,VFR,02:30:00,TNG03:00:00,100,F,0000,YAYE,07:30:00,TNG08:00:00,100,F,0000,YAYE

This is another reason why I use AIFPC for various types of flight that Traffic X doesn't handle too well.

I have always found it curious why in Traffic X, in the schedules pre-programmed by Traffic X, VFR flights are given Flight Nos. which is not the logical thing to do. When I do VFR schedules, I use 0 as the Flight Number unless the aircraft I am using has an entry in the aircraft.cfg "atc_airline=xxxxx" which means it needs a Flight no.!
This is an old gripe of mine so I had better stop now!

This is one hell of a hobby isn't it?


A long time FSXA and Traffic X user
Back to Top
RayM View Drop Down
First Officer
First Officer
Avatar

Joined: 15 Nov 2012
Location: Luton, England
Points: 384
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote RayM Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07 Dec 2014 at 11:02am
Freddy and Pathfinder,

it has just occurred to me that your so-called TNG aircraft are doing 'missed approaches' because they do indeed have the an entry in their aircraft.cfg file - "atc_airline=xxxxx".
I might do a test on this myself later today.
If you schedule a Cessna 172 (none of which should have such an entry) does it do a TNG?
A long time FSXA and Traffic X user
Back to Top
RayM View Drop Down
First Officer
First Officer
Avatar

Joined: 15 Nov 2012
Location: Luton, England
Points: 384
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote RayM Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07 Dec 2014 at 11:05am
Pathfinder,
I am not too far behind you in years but I have been using Traffic X for a LONG time - perhaps too long! I ought to get out more.
A long time FSXA and Traffic X user
Back to Top
freddy View Drop Down
Chief Pilot
Chief Pilot
Avatar

Joined: 29 Nov 2008
Location: Melbourne, Aust
Points: 1339
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote freddy Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08 Dec 2014 at 12:00am
Originally posted by RayM RayM wrote:

It has just occurred to me that your so-called TNG aircraft are doing 'missed approaches' because they do indeed have the an entry in their aircraft.cfg file - "atc_airline=xxxxx".

Ahh! I think you may be on to something there. It may well be that one of the parameters in the aircraft.cfg file is defining the aircraft as an IFR aircraft, despite me setting it as a VFR flight plan.

Yes, either the "atc_airline" parameter, or the fact it has a flight number assigned, or something like that. I seem to recall reading something about this before. A VFR flight is not always considered to be a VFR flight by the sim if it has other certain parameters set for it. I can't remember the specifics. I might even have a note about it somewhere in my files. Hmmm.

Here is one of the flights in question, quite clearly set as VFR in the flight plan schedule.

AC1112,483,27,ONE_DAY,VFR
{
0700,YAMB,360,483,0715
0815,YAMB,360,483,0830
}

AC1112 is an F18 figher jet, and therefore may have an "atc_airline" entry in its aircraft.cfg file (so ATC can say the word "Air Force"). I am at work today, and my evenings are quite busy, so I may not get time to check that plane's aircraft.cfg file or look at (test) this theory for a few days or so. For the same reason, I won't have time just yet to test with a C172.

I'll be interested in your own results.

That said, I am not all that concerned if fighter jets do missed approaches as opposed to touch-and-goes. Cessnas maybe, but fighter jets? I doubt I'll stress too much about those. Fighter jets doing go arounds as part of pilot training kind of makes sense; seems realistic.


===================================================

Edit ...

Here is a post written by Jim Vile on another forum (Jim has a well-earned reputation as being an expert in this kind of stuff) ...

Just for clarification the atc_airline= is not just for an ATC airline call sign. The line entry atc_airline= places that type of plane in the FSX Airline slider. Remove that line and the plane will now be part of the GA slider. atc_airline= can be blank; it does not require a name.

atc_id=N737T
atc_airline=
atc_flight_number=

For the example above, ATC will call the plane by the tail number N737T. But if we add a flight_number ATC uses that. Add the airline name, and ATC will use that instead (if available in the FSX lists) to call the name. Its all based on a building system of what lines exist and then what is placed in those lines.

===================================================

Jim's post was talking about how to ATC to say certain things ... but in relation to our discussion here, what interested me is the fact that Jim said "The line entry atc_airline= places that type of plane in the FSX Airline slider. Remove that line and the plane will now be part of the GA slider. atc_airline= can be blank; it does not require a name."

Back to Top
Pathfinder1` View Drop Down
P/UT
P/UT
Avatar

Joined: 09 Dec 2013
Location: Luton
Points: 104
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Pathfinder1` Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08 Dec 2014 at 6:52am
Yes, a Cessna 172 will do touch and go at EGHO, also a P38,( a bit jumpy)and a P51 was cleared for touch and go but as it went on a walk about I did not wait to see if it got to take off.
I do not go looking into cgf files, but one T&G flight I tried to set up it would not set up, it told me a T&G flight had to be VHF not IFR,
I had set it up VHF.
Back to Top
RayM View Drop Down
First Officer
First Officer
Avatar

Joined: 15 Nov 2012
Location: Luton, England
Points: 384
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote RayM Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08 Dec 2014 at 7:15am
Pathfinder,

"one T&G flight I tried to set up it would not set up, it told me a T&G flight had to be VHF not IFR"

how and where did you get this message? I have never come across this. (I am assuming you mean VFR not VHF).
A long time FSXA and Traffic X user
Back to Top
RayM View Drop Down
First Officer
First Officer
Avatar

Joined: 15 Nov 2012
Location: Luton, England
Points: 384
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote RayM Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08 Dec 2014 at 9:36am
Originally posted by freddy freddy wrote:


Ahh! I think you may be on to something there. ........


Firstly, I nearly always agree with what Jim posts in forums elsewhere and I certainly agree with what he said there.

I tried a test with the default C208 Global Freightways aircraft. This has entries in the aircraft .cfg for atc_id, atc_airline and atc_flight_number.
In Traffic X, test 1 -
set to N100GF (registration), 100 (flight number), IFR and TNG's at a single airport (SBRB). Before start up, it requests "Global Freeways 100, IFR to SBRB". ATC confirm with a flight level. The aircraft taxis out, takes off and flies away on a steady heading for about 10 minutes, but only reaching 3000'. It returns to the airport and does an 'ILS' style approach but at about 500' does a missed approach and climbs away. It repeats this process.
In Traffic X, test 2 same aircraft -
set to N102GF (registration), 0 (flight number), VFR and TNG's at a single airport (SBRB). After start up, it requests "Global Freeways 0, for touch and go". ATC confirms touch and goes. The aircraft taxis out, takes off and flies a close circuit at about 1900' and does a series of TNG's before landing, after the arrival time scheduled.
So my possible theory is not proven - ah well keep looking!
Your F-18 does have "Air Force" in the cfg file so will do 'missed approaches'.
A long time FSXA and Traffic X user
Back to Top
Pathfinder1` View Drop Down
P/UT
P/UT
Avatar

Joined: 09 Dec 2013
Location: Luton
Points: 104
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Pathfinder1` Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08 Dec 2014 at 11:15am
Yes RayM, I should have put VTR, not VHF, can not remember where the message came up.
Back to Top
Pathfinder1` View Drop Down
P/UT
P/UT
Avatar

Joined: 09 Dec 2013
Location: Luton
Points: 104
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Pathfinder1` Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08 Dec 2014 at 3:16pm
I have tried a few more touch and go,
EGNB - DH Mosquito (one aircraft I have worked on) it did T&G,
EGTE - Vickers Wellington - it just flew strait out in to the distance,
EGBG - BA Hawk T1, RED ARROW, missed,
EGOW - Tornado GR4 - going missed,
EGDC - Cessna C127 - touch and go,
EGBW - Cessna - C127 - touch and go,
as with help I had previously got Prestwick operating I tried,
EGPK - A380 -- and it did a circuit and overshoot.
Thank you RayM and Freddy for your help, I will keep watching.
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <123>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down