Aircraft keep missing there approach/not landing

[mikeangelt]

I have a question about why the aircraft keep on missing there approach they appear find and everything but when there about 100 ft from landing they just go back up in the air and keep doing the same thing over and over.This happens for both default airports and airports i created.If anyone can please tell me what is wrong I would appreciated.

[bobbyjack]

Welcome to the fourm

There are a number of things that can cause this. I don't think any of them have anything to do with a problem with AIFP.

Let's say you have a lot of AI traffic at an airport with one runway, and many different types of aircraft trying to land. ATC takes them in a certian order. If a faster plane overtakes a slower plane and tries to land, it will be told to go around. Also if there is a plane that has not yet exited the runway, a landing plane will have to go around. Some planes just do not make good AI, so make sure you are indeed using AI planes for AI. Yes, some people have good luck converting user planes to AI, but untill you know what your issue is, stick with AI planes.
You can try a program like AISmooth, but just as well to spread out AI in your flightplans.

Bob

[robystar]

And regarding the number of things that could cause this behaviiour would be amongst others:
- what AI aircraft does it concern? All of them?
- is your runway long enough?
- do you have enough parking spots and of the right size?
- have you used ADE fault finder to see if anything is wrong with your airport layout?
If it happens also on default airports that have the necessary runway links, taxiway links, apron links, etc. then I think it must be either the AI aircraft configuration or indeed the flightplan for some unfathomable unlikely reason.

[gadgets]

mikeangelt contacted me previously. We've eliminated all the usual causes (including all the suggestions in this thread). The only thing unusual (aside from the "go-arounds") is that in Traffic Toolbox Explorer, all the flight numbers for all the flights from this particular traffic file are shown as -1, even though valid flight numbers are assigned to every leg. Otherwise th eentries as would be expected.

This file originates with WoAI and has been processed by AIFP a number of times. I'm concerned that something got "broken" at one time or another. However, the file decompiles fine.

Other suggestions, any one?

Don

[bobbyjack]

Flight numbers becoming -1 rings a bell, but I can't put my finger on it.

What happens if the flightplans are installed without converting to FSX? Or maybe if they are coverted with (gasp) another tool?

Could there be something in the aircraft cfg that is not right?

I'd be willing to put the package on my machine, if that will help.

Bob

[gadgets]

Miguel, I removed the TNGs from the flight plans you sent me, recompiled and loaded them. (I removed all the TNGs using a text editor, not just a few.) The aircraft now land at MMMX. The flight numbers are still showing as -1, so I've still got some work to do. But, it looks like the "not- landing" problem was somehow linked to the TNGs. FSX handles TNGs differently from FS9. I'll have to make sure the compiler handles them properly.

I know we previously had both removed the TNGs from the legs of interest without having any apparent effect. So, the problem may have to do with the first or last leg being TNG. I'll get to the bottom of it eventually.

Bob, any luck in recalling the etails of the "-1" problem.

Don

[gadgets]

Well, the "-1" problem is solved. That's what happens if you specify the flight is to be identifed to ATC as reg. No.. FS then reports the FN as -1.

Don

[jvile]

Bob

Do you use UT 2?

Flightplans cannot be read properly from the explorer window and causes -1 since the FP is not a BGL but loaded from the internet. Most of the explorer window will be blank when UT 2 is loaded.


EDIT**********

I see above that Don found the -1 issue

[gadgets]

Thanks for the input Jim. No, it's not UT2; just a few simple flight plans prepared with AIFP.

Miguel, it appears that FSX has an aversion to large numbers of TNGs in the same flight plan. Even if the legs of interest aren't TNG (they all were - about 100 legs - initially), FSX still doesn't "behave" . When I removed the TNG from all legs, things went back to normal. I did, however, have one successful run with most of the legs still marked TNG. But, for that, I had the default traffic off. So, the problem may be load-related. (MMMX is a very busy airport).

I have confirmed that AIFP is handling TNG properly. So, I guess my advice is "don't have too many TNG legs in a flight plan".

To reiterate the earlier post, the -1 was a "red-herring". That is normal operation of Traffic Toolbax Explorer when the 'Use a/c reg no." option is selected.

Don