Print Page | Close Window

Circuit Until

Printed From: Just Flight Forum
Category: Just Flight Products
Forum Name: Traffic X / Traffic / Traffic 2005
Forum Description: Discussion area for Traffic titles
URL: http://forum.justflight.com/forum_posts.asp?TID=23667
Printed Date: 29 Mar 2024 at 7:27am


Topic: Circuit Until
Posted By: Pathfinder1`
Subject: Circuit Until
Date Posted: 02 Dec 2014 at 6:01pm
Is it possible to set up a circuit until flight in traffic x (or 360)
without being a programming, Please do not tell me to read the Manual.



Replies:
Posted By: freddy
Date Posted: 03 Dec 2014 at 12:15am
"Please do not tell me to read the Manual". Why not?   The answer to your question is, YES, it is possible to set up a "Circuit Until" flight in Traffic X, without needing to be a programmer. And, dare I say it, that information can indeed be found in the manual. For what reason do you not want to read the manual?



Posted By: Pathfinder1`
Date Posted: 03 Dec 2014 at 11:58am
Yes Freddy I have read the Manual, I have managed to set up 208 flight plans, all working, so I must be doing some thing right, since I had a problem at EGPK Prestwick, I have set up about 40 flights from EGPK. all working,
But I still can not get a circuit flight to show, I am trying to use a airfield with no other aircraft near.


Posted By: RayM
Date Posted: 03 Dec 2014 at 1:45pm
Remember that, regardless of whether you are successfully creating TNG flights in Traffic X, unless you set your traffic levels to 100%, you may not see the flights because of the way Traffic X puts a 'percentage' value in the compiled file. So some flights will not appear. Test this by putting in 4 or 5 similar flights so that the chance of at least one of them appearing is high.

-------------
A long time FSXA and Traffic X user


Posted By: RayM
Date Posted: 03 Dec 2014 at 1:51pm
I would also point out that I use a mixture of Traffic X and AIFPC, which is a freeware AI traffic creation program. Traffic X will give me some variation in my AI flights because, every time I compile, I will get a different set of 'percentage' values thus giving me a different set of AI aircraft that I will see. Any AI flights that I always want to see, I will create using AIFPC where you can put a percentage value in anywhere between 1% and 100%! (I always put 10% in here as my FSX setting is usually over 60%).

-------------
A long time FSXA and Traffic X user


Posted By: Pathfinder1`
Date Posted: 03 Dec 2014 at 2:00pm
as I said Ray I have put in 208 normal flights, and every one of those flights are all working and all appear, I have today tried 3 circuit flights, but none work, it seems to be that I am the only one who can not get circuit flights to work. I know that if I try that test, all 4 or 5 flights will work,


Posted By: RayM
Date Posted: 03 Dec 2014 at 3:51pm
OK, you have added 208 flights A to B to A, etc. and you say that you can see all of them arriving and departing as per your schedules.

What are your traffic settings in FSX? Anything less than 100% and you shouldn't be seeing all 208?

Your TNG airfield is not one that is used by any of the 208? You haven't got any other AI that work OK at this airfield? If not, set one up at this field and see if it arrives and departs. Again I think you would need to schedule 3 separate AI flights to be sure that at least one will appear (unless of course you DO have an FSX setting of 100%).

If these don't work, there will most likely be something wrong with the airfield.

Programming AI TNG's - in the 'Leg data' box -
the 'Destination' may be the same as the 'Departure' but could be the same;
put in 'Departure time' - press Enter;
put in 'Circuits until' (rightmost box) - press Enter;
click 'Apply and Exit';
in the 'Flight Plan' box you must have at least 2 lines of schedules even if the 'Departure' and 'Destination' are the same;
don't forget the 50 minute separation between the last arrival time and the next departure time.

-------------
A long time FSXA and Traffic X user


Posted By: freddy
Date Posted: 03 Dec 2014 at 10:55pm
Ahh. I am just catching up on this thread now ...

I believe I know why your circuit flights are not appearing ...

Firstly though, it's good to have a vibrant discussion in the Traffic X forums once again; it's been a while.

I can see now why you suggested "Please do not tell me to read the Manual". It probably would have been helpful in your original post to mention that you had read the manual and had successfully got other flight plans and traffic to work. Armed with that information, my original response would have been different; as follows ...

When I first got Traffic X, I had some issues with circuit aircraft not appearing. I emailed support and the response was that FSX places a higher priority on AI traffic where flight plans fly the planes to and from airports. Circuit traffic is given a lower priority.

In other words, if an airport is "busy" and has constant activity with a number of flights flying to and from it, then circuit flights are given less importance at that airport by FSX and therefore may not appear.

If you try setting up a circuit flight at a "non-busy" airport (an airport with ZERO other AI activity), then your circuit traffic should appear.

Further to this, the other information presented in this thread about the variation of 'percentage' value that determines which AI flights appear (or not) due to a randomness factor that's built in to the compile process, is all correct. Each separate compile does indeed have a randomness factor to it. So keep that in mind when working with flight plans and doing recompiles.

By the way, this "lower priority" for circuit flights that I speak of has nothing to do with the random 'percentage' value at compile time. It's not that. The "lower priority" for circuit flights is something else that's built inherently in to FSX's coding somewhere.

Now, having said all of this, I note that you do say you are trying to use an airport with no other aircraft near. But that's not to say that airport doesn't have any other AI traffic set for it? I am lead to understand that if an airport has so much as ONE plane that is set to fly to (or from) it, then the circuit traffic is unlikely to appear.

Finally, considering having just one normal AI plane flying to and from an airport is apparently enough to stop circuit planes from appearing, it is intriguing to know that if you do get circuit planes to work/appear at an airport, you can actually have multiple planes set to do circuits at this airport at all different times of the day ... thus making the airport "busy" ... Oh the idiosyncrasies of FSX.


Posted By: RayM
Date Posted: 04 Dec 2014 at 10:26am
Freddy,

welcome back -I thought you must be on holiday!

I am not sure that I can agree with all of your points.

In Traffic X, when setting up TNG flights at an airfield, you can get sometimes get 'errors' if too many landings are scheduled. Traffic X always produces a file "log.txt" which lists any problems that it finds when the 'Compile' is done. This is stored in the following location (or something similar depending on your installation) -
C:\Program Files\MS Games\MS FSX\Justflight\TraffficX\presets\data\schedules\compile\log.txt
The message is something like -
"Not enough slots for touch and goes at EGXX" (or where ever)
so even Traffic X has problems with TNG's.

For this reason, I use AIFPC to create nearly ALL of my TNG's at airfields/airports. Doing it this way, I always get ALL of my TNG's that I ask for. FSX has never caused any not to appear. When Traffic X has thrown up an error message (as above) and the TNG flight has not appeared, I have always used AIFPC to replace it and, low and behold, it appears as I want.

This is not to say that if you add too many, they cause havoc at busy airfields with other AI traffic not managing to land because of the ever circling TNG's. FSX ATC is not good at intermeshing circuit traffic with standard arriving traffic,.
Scheduling AI with short periods of TNG (less than 15 minutes) is also a useful way of populating small airfields with at least a couple of aircraft that will always be at the airport no matter when you fly into or out of it (better than adding static aircraft in the scenery).

So I would strongly recommend using the Traffic X AND AIFPC combo to populate airfields. AIFPC also has the ability to schedule the same flight every 2, 4, 6, 8 and 12 hours automatically without you having to write every line of code for the subsequent flights. You just write the first out-and-return flights and these will repeat as required.
AIFPC is really easy to understand and use once you get to understand the way the schedules have to be written.

So to sum up, I like and use Traffic X every day to improve my FSX experience but, like all software, it doesn't manage all that I want so that is when I go over to AIFPC (which, in case you don't know, allows you to schedule any of the aircraft in your 'hangar' - AI and flyable.)

Incidentally, in Traffic X, you may also like to schedule a flight to depart airfield A and return to airfield A with an arrival time say 15 minutes later. The plane should take off, fly away and return to land a short while later. This can be scheduled with VFR and IFR but with quite different results - but not always predictable!

-------------
A long time FSXA and Traffic X user


Posted By: Pathfinder1`
Date Posted: 04 Dec 2014 at 12:36pm
I am still trying to get a circuit flight running,( I do not like being beaten) at the moment I am checking 8 airfields for parking and to see if I can get flights to operate between those airfields,
at the moment I am still wondering what TNG stands for,
and a bit on Manuals, creating flights, all end with.
Congratulations you have just created a flight.
not that you still need to compile it.
at least I may be learning a bit more, I will see if I can find that (log.txt)
and maybe think about AIFPC, any way, Thank you RayM and Freddy for all the advice you are putting in, When I first tried traffic X, I only found out from one of Freedys entries that I had to Compile.



Posted By: RayM
Date Posted: 04 Dec 2014 at 2:48pm
TNG = touch-and-go for those of us who are too lazy to type it all the time.
Sorry!

To re-iterate, every time you use the 'Flight Plans' section to add/edit any plans, you MUST click on the "Apply and Exit" button.
You MUST then go to the 'Traffic Movements' section, select which of the "Airlines/Carriers" you wish to create a compiled file (.bgl) for and click on "Compile Traffic X Flight Plans". When completed, this should create a new/revised file in your 'FSX\Scenery\World|Scenery' folder. If you have previously selected all of the Airlines/Carriers for an earlier compile, you would still select them all even if you have only changed entries in only one of the Airlines/Carriers.

When the manual says "You have successfully edited your first flight plan" or whatever, it means that you have modified/created a flight plan but YOU HAVE NOT COMPILED IT AND ALL OF THE OTHERS TO WHERE FSX NEEDS IT TO BE. You have to Compile all of your flight plans to a master 'set of flight plans' which is what FSX needs you do.The manual is not an exact science! Check the date stamp on your latest TrafficX.bgl file - it should be the date on which you Compiled it? If it isn't then I wonder where your compiled files are going to.

-------------
A long time FSXA and Traffic X user


Posted By: Pathfinder1`
Date Posted: 04 Dec 2014 at 4:54pm
I tried setting up flights between any 2 of 7 airfields I picked out as suitable for circuits, all 7 flights worked OK,I deleted those 7,then tried to set up circuit flights from the 7, But no luck, all set up and compiled according to the manual. I have now given up on Circuits.


Posted By: freddy
Date Posted: 05 Dec 2014 at 2:38am
Originally posted by RayM RayM wrote:

Freddy,   welcome back - I thought you must be on holiday!

Nope, no holiday. I'm always lurking; always here.


Originally posted by RayM RayM wrote:

I am not sure that I can agree with all of your points.

Hmmm. After reading your post I am now intrigued ...

It was Just Flight who told me about the fact that (apparently) FSX places a higher priority on AI traffic where flight plans fly the planes to and from airports, as opposed to circuit traffic which is (supposedly) given a lower priority.

But your post suggests this may not be the case.

You're probably aware that Traffic X uses FSX's own (DOS-based) Traffic Toolbox SDK to create and compile the AI files. I am certainly familiar with the SDK, its file formats, and its use. Traffic X is merely a fancy frontend interface that facilitates the creation of the appropriate files in the relevant Traffic Toolbox format(s), and then uses the Traffic Toolbox utilities to complete the process and do the AI compile. And, yep, I know about the LOG files that it creates.

Interestingly, I have plenty of circuit traffic configured in my Traffic X flight plans. Those of you who know me will be aware that I try to set up my Australian FSX experience to be as realistic as possible and there are number of airports in Australia where flight training (both military and civilian) takes place. I've got plenty of touch-and-go aircraft configured (in the Traffic X interface) for those airfields. But I do not recall once seeing the log message "Not enough slots for touch and goes at XXXX" in the log file. Hmmm.

Considering your post suggests that it is indeed possible to have touch-and-go traffic at airports where there are also other normal AI activities taking place, I am now encouraged to do some further experimentation on this subject matter. I'd like nothing more than to have touch-and-go aircraft doing their thing at these training airports. That would definitely add more realism to my experience as I fly myself to and from those locations.

I am now left wondering why Traffic X seems unable to add and create working circuit aircraft. Perhaps Just Flight were merely spinning me a line when they told me FSX places a higher priority on AI traffic where flight plans fly the planes to and from airports, as opposed to circuit traffic which is given a lower priority. To be honest, I doubt they were. FSX probably does do that. I don't really know. But with no circuit traffic appearing in my sim, despite me having circuit flight plans set up in Traffic X, that does appear to explain why. So I've never pursued it any further. But, based on what you're saying in your post, and based on the fact that Traffic X is a frontend which merely creates the appropriate files in the relevant Traffic Toolbox format(s), I am now not sure what's going on at all.

Hmmm. It looks like I may need to go back and revisit my Australian airports in Traffic X where I have flight plan setups with circuit traffic aircraft. Some experimentation is definitely warranted here.


Originally posted by RayM RayM wrote:

Scheduling AI with short periods of TNG (less than 15 minutes) is also a useful way of populating small airfields with at least a couple of aircraft that will always be at the airport no matter when you fly into or out of it (better than adding static aircraft in the scenery).

That's a good trick/tip ... that is, if I can get circuit aircraft to work.

My tip for populating those kinds of airports with aircraft is to set up one or more aircraft at the airport in question, but only set them to do ONE flight leg, in the absolute dead middle of the night, to a nearby airport (very short trip) and then back again. This way the planes are (effectively) always parked at and seen at the originating airport.



Posted By: Pathfinder1`
Date Posted: 05 Dec 2014 at 6:48am
I am getting a bit confused now about how circuits work, I had assumed that a circuit in traffic was the aircraft taking off then landing at the allotted time, but now you are saying about circuits and bumps (or touch and go) and yes my traffic settings are at 100%


Posted By: freddy
Date Posted: 05 Dec 2014 at 8:40am
A "circuit" is something a real-life aircraft does when planning to land at an airport. The aircraft flies a specific traffic pattern, usually in the shape of a square, remaining close to the airport, and then lands. If you are getting your real-life pilots licence, you would perform many circuits, over and over again, usually doing touch-and-go landings (where you land, do not stop, but instead take back off again) so that you can repeat the circuit and continue to practice.

In Traffic X, a "circuit" is defined as an aircraft doing exactly what I have said above. The AI aircraft takes off, flies a square shaped traffic pattern, lands at the same airport and then takes off again (does a touch and go) ... and continues to repeat this taking off and landing at the same airport, over and over again, until the "Circuits until" time. In other words, if you are setting up circuits in Traffic X, you are setting the AI plane to repeatedly do touch-and-goes until a certain time of the day.

This is different from a "flight plan". A flight plan in Traffic X is where a plane takes off at a specific time of the day from airport XXXX, flies to airport YYYY, lands, stops, and parks. After the aircraft remains parked for a while (50 minutes or more as chosen by you, the user), the process is repeated with the aircraft subsequently flying another leg to a different airport, or, flying back home to the original airport. This aircraft does not do touch-and-goes. In other words, you are setting up journeys for the AI plane to fly from one airport to another airport. An AI plane can fly back and forth to and from the same airport, or it can fly to many different airports. The only rule is that for its final journey it must end up back at the very first airport that it originally started at.


Posted By: freddy
Date Posted: 05 Dec 2014 at 10:39am
Ray,

I have checked my circuit flight plans. They're set up properly. In my traffic schedule files I have a military aircraft, flight number 483, set to fly circuits at Amberley airforce base (YAMB), starting at 17:00 GMT and ending at 17:15 GMT. See below. My traffic percentage slider in FSX is set at 60%, and the value of 27 for this flight is well below that, meaning the aircraft should appear in the sim.

But, alas, it does not, despite there being no compiler errors for this aircraft in the log file. And I have checked both 17:00 GMT and 17:00 local. I've even used the SDK Traffic Explorer (one of the FSX SDK utilities I have installed in FSX) to see if the plane is there; still to no avail. I've also checked both 7:00 GMT and 7:00 local time, based on the numbers I see in the example below. This circuit plane is simply not there.

Amberley airport is a large military airport and has constant traffic flying to and from it every day. By definition, I would say it is a "busy" airport. If what Just Flight told me is true, then it makes sense to me that this circuit aircraft will not appear at this airport.

However, your post does seem to indicate I should be able to get this aircraft to appear. I am curious, do the circuit aircraft done using AIFPC have the same syntax as this one? Or, perhaps you can provide some other insight as to why this circuit aircraft may not be appearing/working?


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

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

Edit ...

I've just had a look at the manual for the FSX SDK. Specifically the sections regarding AI Traffic. (Here is the link: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-au/library/cc526965.aspx" rel="nofollow - Microsoft ESP SDK - Traffic Toolbox .) It seemingly confirms that the syntax above is indeed correct for a circuit aircraft. It also makes a couple of other interesting points. Namely ...

• To make an aircraft fly circuits at the destination, specify a circuitEndTime for that leg. If the circuitEndTime is less than ten minutes before the departure time of the next leg, the aircraft will not park but will fly circuits until the next departure time and then fly on to the next destination.

• The TrafficDatabaseBuilder will not allow you to schedule more than three aircraft at a time to be doing circuits at an airport to keep the traffic pattern from becoming overly congested.

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


I've just checked, and I don't actually have more than three aircraft at a time scheduled to do circuits at the same airport. So, if circuit aircraft are supposed to work, even with other aircraft flying to and from that airport, mine certainly aren't ... and the "more than three" thing isn't my issue here. It seems to me that what Just Flight told me does appear to hold true; unless you, Ray, can point something out to me that I am missing ...



Posted By: Pathfinder1`
Date Posted: 05 Dec 2014 at 12:51pm
RayM, you say,
Programming AI TNGs` - in the leg data box -
the destination may be the same as the Departure -but could be the same,
put in Departure time - press enter
put in Circuits until (rightmost box) press enter
click Apply and Exit,
in the Flight Plan box you must have at least 2 lines of schedules even
if the Departure and Destination are the same,
don`t forget the 50 minute separation between the last arrival time and the next departure time.
I do not understand the last bit about (must have at least 2 lines)
and the 50 minute separation.
Maybe that is where I am going wrong, (I will put it down to age)


Posted By: RayM
Date Posted: 05 Dec 2014 at 5:20pm
Freddy,

I have just done a fresh TNG set up from scratch.

Traffic X TCC >> Flight Plans >> VFR traffic Australia (TX_VFR_Aus)

Cessna 172 VH_AAA Flt No. 0 VFR
YAYE YAYE Dep 11:00 Ccts until 11:30
           Dep 16:00 Ccts until 16:30

Cessna 172 VH_AAB Flt No. 0 VFR
YAYE YAYE Dep 11:30 Ccts until 12:00
           Dep 16:30 Ccts until 17:00

Cessna 172 VH_AAC Flt No. 0 VFR
YAYE YAYE Dep 12:00 Ccts until 12:30
           Dep 17:00 Ccts until 17:30

Save & Exit then Compiled to bgl.
No error messages about these in log.txt.

In FSX, at YAYE at 08:00 local, all 3 are on field (had to set VFR traffic to 100% to see all 3).
All 3 take off and do circuits as required. All appear in Traffic Explorer also.

Looking at the file TX_VFR_AUS.tcc, I find the following lines -

Cessna C172SP Skyhawk     Cessna C172SP Skyhawk White,Green     VH-AAA        VFR     ONE_DAY               0     YAYE     YAYE     0_1:30     2:0     0     YAYE     YAYE     0_6:30     7:0
Cessna C172SP Skyhawk     Cessna C172SP Skyhawk Orange,Black     VH-AAB        VFR     ONE_DAY               0     YAYE     YAYE     0_2:0     2:30     0     YAYE     YAYE     0_7:0     7:30
Cessna C172SP Skyhawk     Cessna C172SP Skyhawk Used_Trainer     VH-AAC        VFR     ONE_DAY               0     YAYE     YAYE     0_2:30     3:0     0     YAYE     YAYE     0_7:30     8:0

(note that Traffic X changes the times to UTC.)

Added a 4th TNG schedule similar to others but this time the compile threw up an error message in log.txt -
"Unable to find slot for touch and goes at YAYE for Cessna ........"
so it is correct that the SDK does not allow more than 3 TNG schedules at an airport but I can add others using AIFPC of course.

Notice the large difference in Time variations used by Traffic X and FSX -
at YAYE Traffic X uses +09:30hrs whereas FSX uses +08:00hrs!

Can you check your lines in the .tcc files for your TNG flights to see if they match mine?
The .tcc files do not include any percentage figure - this is added during the compile.

The syntax for TNG files in AIFPC is - (all times in UTC)

AC#1501,N5487S,30%,24h,VFR,14:05:00,TNG14:45:00,50,R,0000,SEGU,19:05:00,TNG19:35:00,50,R,0000,SEGU

(aircraft,reg'n,percent,repeat,VFR or IFR,depart,arrive,height,reg'n or flt no.,flt no,arrival airport, etc.)

Let me know how you get on or any questions.

Ray



-------------
A long time FSXA and Traffic X user


Posted By: RayM
Date Posted: 05 Dec 2014 at 5:31pm
Pathfinder,
sorry, I meant to say that the destination airport can be different from the departure airport but still have TNG's i.e. the plane takes off from field A and goes to field B where it does TNG's. Or field B could be the same as field A of course.
If you go from field A to field B then you probably know that you have to do the reverse flight so that the aircraft finishes back at the start field.
If you only go from field A to field A then you still MUST schedule a second flight similar to the Field A to field B situation - so there are always at least 2 lines of schedules.
If the end of first flight - end of TNG's - is 11:00 then the second flight must not start until at least 11:50.
Are you getting any clearer?

-------------
A long time FSXA and Traffic X user


Posted By: Pathfinder1`
Date Posted: 05 Dec 2014 at 6:47pm
RayM, The manual does not say any thing about having 2 lines of schedules, or did I miss that bit.
any way I set up a flight EGHD to EGDC and a return flight, both with circuit times. with a Grumman Gulf stream, at EGHD on the return it was cleared to land, but it over shot, message (is going missed) that happened 5 times, then I gave up, as each circuit took 12 mins, then I changed that flight to a Tiger Moth, changed times, and at EGHD it was cleared for touch and go, right traffic,runway 31, I watched it do 2 touch and go circuits,


Posted By: freddy
Date 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.


Posted By: freddy
Date 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.




Posted By: Pathfinder1`
Date 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


Posted By: freddy
Date 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 ( http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-au/library/cc526965.aspx" rel="nofollow - 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.




Posted By: RayM
Date 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


Posted By: RayM
Date 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


Posted By: RayM
Date 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


Posted By: Pathfinder1`
Date 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.


Posted By: freddy
Date 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.




Posted By: freddy
Date 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.



Posted By: Pathfinder1`
Date 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.


Posted By: RayM
Date 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


Posted By: RayM
Date 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


Posted By: RayM
Date 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


Posted By: freddy
Date 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."



Posted By: Pathfinder1`
Date 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.


Posted By: RayM
Date 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


Posted By: RayM
Date 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


Posted By: Pathfinder1`
Date Posted: 08 Dec 2014 at 11:15am
Yes RayM, I should have put VTR, not VHF, can not remember where the message came up.


Posted By: Pathfinder1`
Date 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.


Posted By: RayM
Date 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


Posted By: freddy
Date 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.)



Posted By: RayM
Date 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


Posted By: RayM
Date 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


Posted By: Pathfinder1`
Date 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.?.


Posted By: RayM
Date 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


Posted By: freddy
Date 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.


Posted By: RayM
Date 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


Posted By: Pathfinder1`
Date 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.


Posted By: freddy
Date 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.


Posted By: Pathfinder1`
Date 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.


Posted By: RayM
Date 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


Posted By: Pathfinder1`
Date 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.


Posted By: freddy
Date 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.




Print Page | Close Window