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
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 5:38pm
Originally posted by Pathfinder1` Pathfinder1` wrote:

I have tried a few more touch and go,
EGNB - ......
.......
Thank you RayM and Freddy for your help, I will keep watching.


I think we now realise that the reason some aircraft do 'missed approaches' and others do TNG is that whilst the TNG aircraft e.g. Mosquito, Cessna 172, have NO 'atc_airline=[value]' in their 'aircraft.cfg' files, whereas the others e.g. Wellington, Tornado (which will have 'atc_airline=Air Force') and A380 (which will have atc_airline=Singapore Airlines (or other name)), do have a value as shown.
Another way to tell which is which, is to listen for the aircraft call-sign. If it uses the registration (G-ABCD) then it will do circuit TNG's but if it uses "Air Force 318" or "Air France 3412" then it will do 'fly-aways and missed approaches'.
Good luck.
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: 10 Dec 2014 at 2:44am
Ray,

Your tests (your earlier post), plus Jim Vile's words (my last post), and your conclusions (your last post) are reasonably conclusive ...

If a plane has something configured in the "atc_airline" parameter of its aircraft.cfg file, then it is (effectively) an IFR plane and will do "missed approaches", DESPITE whether you configure its flight plan as VFR or IFR.

But a question remains:

It is reasonable to assume that if a plane has nothing configured in the "atc_airline" parameter of its aircraft.cfg file, AND its flight plan is configured as VFR, then it is a VFR plane and will do touch-and-goes.

But what if a plane has nothing configured in the "atc_airline" parameter of its aircraft.cfg file, YET ITS FLIGHT PLAN IS CONFIGURED AS IFR? Does it do touch-and-goes or does it do "missed approaches"? I'll guess "missed approaches". (But again I am at work and have no time to test in the coming days.)

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: 10 Dec 2014 at 7:57am
Originally posted by freddy freddy wrote:

Ray,

But what if a plane has nothing configured in the "atc_airline" parameter of its aircraft.cfg file, YET ITS FLIGHT PLAN IS CONFIGURED AS IFR? Does it do touch-and-goes or does it do "missed approaches"? I'll guess "missed approaches". (But again I am at work and have no time to test in the coming days.)



I will try this later today - will post asap.
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: 10 Dec 2014 at 4:10pm
Freddy
have tried your scenario - VFR-type plane with no atc_airline parameters but setup in TCC as an IFR flight with a Flight Number.

The aircraft calls ATC, using its registration letters (not the flight number) before startup, requests a flight to airport XXXX (in this case the same airport it is starting from) and ATC clears it with a flight level. It takes of and flies downwind for about 16nM before turning back for an 'instrument-style approach'. At a few hundred feet, it does a missed approach and repeats the process.
What I haven't worked out yet is when does a missed-approach flight end. I haven't yet seen one finally land (because I cannot be bothered to sit and watch for too long.) TNG flights finish when the 'arrival' time has passed as you would expect.
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: 10 Dec 2014 at 7:31pm
EGNB - DH Mosquito 30 min T&G - did 3 touch and go, landed on 4th approach after 30 min,
EGOW - Tornado GR4 - 30 min T&G - did 4 going missed 1n 59 mins. I gave up then, will they ever land.?.
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: 10 Dec 2014 at 11:07pm
Originally posted by Pathfinder1` Pathfinder1` wrote:

EGNB - DH Mosquito 30 min T&G - did 3 touch and go, landed on 4th approach after 30 min,
EGOW - Tornado GR4 - 30 min T&G - did 4 going missed 1n 59 mins. I gave up then, will they ever land.?.


Exactly what I am finding.   
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: 11 Dec 2014 at 9:42pm
Guys,

Interesting results. Looks like some external forum research and a bit more experimentation is needed.

Although, that said, I am not sure it is that big a deal if those planes do remain in the air and continue to do circuits and missed approaches. It still kind of feels "realistic" to me. Landing at those airports, with a plane doing circuits and missed approaches would be a challenge (to get a landing slot) and if you "pretend" that the guy flying this plane is doing flight training with an instructor on board, it seems to just add to the realism. After all, stuff like that does happen for real at real airports. Then again, an issue I do see with it is that whilst you are flying near that airport, or to that airport, it will become annoying after a time to continually hear the missed approach ATC calls repeated, repeated, repeated, over and over again ... especially if you don't realise that the plane you are hearing is set to do "touch-and-goes" but has no way of ever landing due to it being set as an IFR flight.
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: 11 Dec 2014 at 11:05pm
Originally posted by freddy freddy wrote:

Guys,

Interesting results. Looks like some external forum research and a bit more experimentation is needed.

Although, that said, ......


Yes I think that I probably won't do much more about these situations until such time it actually causes me a problem.
I will continue to program ALL of my TNG's and 'missed approaches' in AIFPC as I think I can predict what is going to happen when I do this. I will from now on only allow for 20 minute maximum for aircraft doing touch and goes because longer periods can affect other traffic to a serious effect (they can be prevented from landing.)
This has been an interesting topic to research and will be happy if anyone can come up with full explanations of how Traffic X deals with this form of scheduling.
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: 12 Dec 2014 at 9:11am
RayM,   Just to let you and Freddy know, I have just set up a T&G at
EGHH with Cessna C127 with only 10 min circuit time, it landed and parked after after 2 circuits.
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: 12 Dec 2014 at 11:27am
Ray,

Yeah, they're my thoughts as well. Thanks for your insights and testing on this one. I've learnt a lot.


Pathfinder,

Yep, your C172 test does make sense (it would have been a VFR flight). It's the IFR flights that tend to want to not land and park. But, I think I can live with that. And it sounds like Ray is happy with what we've learned too.
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: 12 Dec 2014 at 12:47pm
RayM and Freddy, I could not just leave it at that, so first this morning I set a T&G flight at EGHH all set up according to the manual,
it did not work, I then set it up by RayMs method with 2 lines entered,
and as expected it worked, I sent the the details of the first flight
to JF support, answer I got back,( if you have followed the tutorial exactly then it should be working. I can`t add anything that isn`t better explained in the manual.) I have sent a answer back to say I have got the flight working by not following the manual, but I did not say what method I used, Support told me the same thing when I had the problem at Prestwick
( read the manual) Again I was helped by You to solve the problem.
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: 12 Dec 2014 at 5:36pm
It sounds as if, without too much help from JF and its Manual, we are all getting to where we want to be with this.
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: 12 Dec 2014 at 6:18pm
answer from JF'
(The manual (and indeed the programming) was done by a German, His english is very good but he doesn`t always say exactly what he means to say,
The tutorials were really just to get people over the initial fear of the complexity, it is designed to be pretty logical and you pick up the finer points as you go).
I think that means I get the finer points from RayM and Freddy.
    Thank You.
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: 12 Dec 2014 at 10:44pm
Compliment accepted.

I have a confession ...

I was UNABLE to get touch and go flights working at all, even with the manual and the tutorial. It was not until THIS VERY THREAD that I learned you need to have TWO LINES for them. I haven't mentioned that fact until now. It was RAY'S post stating you need two lines that got me up and running. Yes, as part of our discussions here I had changed a parameter in a file from a NO to a YES, but it was the TWO LINES thing which also played a big part in finally getting the touch-and-goes working in my sim.

Interestingly, I have read the "two lines" thing over and over again in many other forums, but always about REGULAR flight plans which fly from airport to airport ... it never once occurred to me to try two lines for a touch-and-go because that just seems, well, unnecessary. I always thought touch-and-goes weren't working for me for some other reason, but I never really bothered to research too hard to work it out because I didn't consider having touch-and-goes that big a deal. (Although, now that they're working for me, I might change my opinion on that.)

In my everyday job as an IT customer support person, I regularly tell customers to read the manuals. However, telling them that is only going to be of value, if the manuals are in fact correct. In this case, the Just Flight manual is NOT correct. As I said, I was initially unable to get my touch-and-goes working, and I can assure you I had read the Traffic X manual and tutorial(s) from cover to cover many times.

But, that is where FORUMS and HELP DESK EMAILs etc really do come in to their own. So, yes, we can read the manuals as a start, and we learn the basics by doing and observing the results. But we all get the finer points and refine from there by using forums etc. In this case it appears the finer point was to learn you need two lines for a touch-and-go.

Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <123
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down