• Which the release of FS2020 we see an explosition of activity on the forun and of course we are very happy to see this. But having all questions about FS2020 in one forum becomes a bit messy. So therefore we would like to ask you all to use the following guidelines when posting your questions:

    • Tag FS2020 specific questions with the MSFS2020 tag.
    • Questions about making 3D assets can be posted in the 3D asset design forum. Either post them in the subforum of the modelling tool you use or in the general forum if they are general.
    • Questions about aircraft design can be posted in the Aircraft design forum
    • Questions about airport design can be posted in the FS2020 airport design forum. Once airport development tools have been updated for FS2020 you can post tool speciifc questions in the subforums of those tools as well of course.
    • Questions about terrain design can be posted in the FS2020 terrain design forum.
    • Questions about SimConnect can be posted in the SimConnect forum.

    Any other question that is not specific to an aspect of development or tool can be posted in the General chat forum.

    By following these guidelines we make sure that the forums remain easy to read for everybody and also that the right people can find your post to answer it.

Creating Flight Plans from Timetable Data

Status
Not open for further replies.

gadgets

Resource contributor
Messages
9,388
Country
ca-britishcolumbia
Please download from http://stuff4fs.com and install Development Release 3.2.01(j). The problem you were experiencing arose when you attempted to use that function when the Flight Plan menu item ETD Preset/Standard Sit Time was not checked - which you should have been able to do. (Checking or unchecking of that item was intended to control only automatic enforcement of the minimum sit time when creating flight plans.)

Good catch!

Don
 
Messages
123
Yes I have ETD preset/standard sit time set to 41 minutes as mentioned at beginning of my previous post.

I just tried the (k) release of the program. It corrects the problem with the first eg but still seeing this on the 2nd one.

Adjusted: VT-IAO
(9) 2/00:05, 2/02:20, 350, F, 251, VEGT
(10) 2/03:01, 2/03:49, 210, F, 251, VEIM - now correct
(11) 2/04:30, 2/05:22, 220, F, 222, VEGT

Adjusted: VT-IAP
(1) 1/00:35, 1/03:15, 360, F, 132, VIDP
(2) 1/03:56, 1/06:15, 270, F, 184, VILK - increased
(3) 1/06:56, 1/07:59, 280, F, 147, VIDP
 
Last edited:

gadgets

Resource contributor
Messages
9,388
Country
ca-britishcolumbia
I admit only checking the first one, since the resolution was so obvious. Perhaps there's a second bug "lurking". I'll take another look in the morning.

Don
 
Messages
123
Using the (k) version from what I can see, if a return leg pair lies at the beginning of the plan its flight time is getting increased. Changing the day sequence to move it down from the top avoids the bug.
Not sure if any other legs are also being affected.
 
Last edited:

gadgets

Resource contributor
Messages
9,388
Country
ca-britishcolumbia
As I suspected, there was a second bug. In this function, the departure time of the first leg is not adjusted, so the originating airport for the first leg to be checked (i.e., the second leg in the FP) should be the destination of the first leg in the FP. However, I had coded it such that the originating airport for the first leg checked would be the the last leg in the FP. Another good catch!

Look for another development release soon, hopefully later today.

Don
 
Messages
123
The flight times look fine now with the (l) version.
However found an instance where it does not appear to be preserving ETA if later (from which I understand it should keep the original flight time if longer than calculated),
In first flight plan (VT-IAO):
original:
(25) 3/14:45, 3/17:05, 350, F, 277, VECC
Adjusted:
(25) 3/15:10, 3/17:13, 350, F, 277, VECC

Another minor problem- if the function is unchecked in the menu, after running it does not correctly display which plans have not been updated, says all plans updated.
 
Last edited:

gadgets

Resource contributor
Messages
9,388
Country
ca-britishcolumbia
it does not appear to be preserving ETA if later
It appears you may have misunderstood the prompt "Preserve existing ETAs if later?". This has nothing to do with flight times. The intent (if you answer "Yes") is that if the newly calculated ETA (asuming the departure time has changed) is earlier than the currently-specified arrival time, then the arrival time will remain unchanged.

Typically, users override system-calculated arrival times to reflect the scheduled arrival time of the flight they are trying to emulate - which is almost always later than the system-calculated value. If you use this function to adjust departure times, the schedule is no longer relevant. So, to minimize time-shifts throughout the flight plan, when a departure time is adjusted, AIFP recalculates the ETA based on aircraft performance.

after running it does not correctly display which plans have not been updated, says all plans updated
I suspect another misunderstanding, probably caused by the inarticulate wording of the User Manual "iderntifies the flight plans that were not adjusted". The manual should say "that could not be adjusted", e.g., the modified flight plan extends beyond its repeat period. There is no intent that flight plans that didn't need adjustment be highlighted. What purpose would that serve?

Don
 
Messages
123
Thanks for the clarification. Though I understood the option of preserving ETA correctly in context of the adjust ETA to reflect cruise speed function, I wasn't too sure of it with the adjust sit time function.

About the second issue, I think my wording confused what I was saying. If the function is unchecked (which is only meant for automatic enforcement as you explained) AIFP does not highlight/warn about plans that extended beyond repeat period after applying the adjust sit time function. It does so if the sit time function is checked. In my understanding shouldn't be dependent on checking/unchecking of the automatic reinforcement option, which I thought was a malfunction and pointed out.
 
Last edited:

gadgets

Resource contributor
Messages
9,388
Country
ca-britishcolumbia
If the function is unchecked
By "the function", presumably, you mean the Flight Plans/ETD Preset-Standard Sit Time, since Adjust Departure Times ... does not have an associated checkmark. When checked, this item controls the interval between previous arrival time and the automatically established departure time of a new leg in the FP editor. It has (should have) no effect on Adjust Departure Times operation.

AIFP does not highlight plans that extended beyond repeat period after applying the adjust sit time function.
Perhaps you could provide an example.

It does so if the sit time function is checked
Presumably, the "it" in this case is the validation report and, yes, it only reports violations of the minimum sit time.

If I have misinterpreted your concerns, please respond with a little more detail.

Don
 
Messages
123
By function I was referring to "Adjust Departure Times for sit time". The "ETD preset/Standard sit time" check mark is having affect on how AIFP is reporting the result of applying Adjust Departure Times for sit time.

By "it" I was referring to the report that automatically follows after applying "Adjust Departure Times for sit time"

You may try applying adjust departure times for sit time of say 35 minutes in the previously attached set with and without check applied.

If I have the check applied then if there are problems the report says "All selected flight plans except xx,xx,xx.. updated", if unchecked then it gives no warning and invariably says "All flight plans updated" even though the issues are present which can be found by validating the FP while having the "Minimum Time Arr - Dep" set to the same and checked. I thought this may lead to compiling an erroneous flight plan without knowing.
 

gadgets

Resource contributor
Messages
9,388
Country
ca-britishcolumbia
Found the cause. You will reacll i mentioned a day or so ago that whether or not ETD Preset/Standard Sittime was checked unintentionally played a role in the performance of the Adjust Departure time function. In fixing that problem, I neglected to make a change in one place where it was also necessary.

The next development release (probably later today) will fix this.

Don
 
Messages
123
Running the (n) version the message now notifies of problems with and without the ETD preset checked.

On working with the attached set I have come upon another issue with "Adjust departure times for standard sit times" if I have "Sequence legs starting on" selected to a different than the original plan. As before ETD Preset is set to 41 minutes. In the below plan if I do not have it rearranged then after applying "Adjust departure times for sit times" function there is no change to the plan as expected. However on rearranging the plan with say day 0 - Sunday selected and then applying adjust departure times for sit times, the plan is changed completely as though AIFP is simply aiming for 41min sit time. Other plans that I checked in the set don't seem to be affected.

In flight plan (35) VT-ALF:

Original: (with no "Sequence legs starting on" checked)
(1) 4/01:30, 4/03:35, 390, F, 401, VECC
(2) 4/04:30, 4/06:40, 400, F, 21, VIDP
(3) 5/00:25, 5/05:00, 360, F, 925, OERK
(4) 5/06:15, 5/10:30, 330, F, 926, VIDP
(5) 6/02:40, 6/03:45, 280, F, 461, VIAR
(6) 6/05:00, 6/06:15, 270, F, 113, VIDP
(7) 6/08:05, 6/17:00, 360, F, 113, EGBB
(8) 6/20:30, 0/04:30, 370, F, 114, VIDP
(9) 0/06:35, 0/07:45, 280, F, 114, VIAR
(10) 0/09:15, 0/10:20, 270, F, 462, VIDP

Rearranged: (with "Sequence legs starting on" set to 0 - Sun)
(1) 0/06:35, 0/07:45, 280, F, 114, VIAR
(2) 0/09:15, 0/10:20, 270, F, 462, VIDP
(3) 4/01:30, 4/03:35, 390, F, 401, VECC
(4) 4/04:30, 4/06:40, 400, F, 21, VIDP
(5) 5/00:25, 5/05:00, 360, F, 925, OERK
(6) 5/06:15, 5/10:30, 330, F, 926, VIDP
(7) 6/02:40, 6/03:45, 280, F, 461, VIAR
(8) 6/05:00, 6/06:15, 270, F, 113, VIDP
(9) 6/08:05, 6/17:00, 360, F, 113, EGBB
(10) 6/20:30, 0/04:30, 370, F, 114, VIDP

Adjusted after rearranged:
(1) 0/06:35, 0/07:45, 280, F, 114, VIAR
(2) 0/09:15, 0/10:20, 270, F, 462, VIDP
(3) 0/11:01, 0/12:51, 390, F, 401, VECC
(4) 0/13:32, 0/15:37, 400, F, 21, VIDP
(5) 0/16:18, 0/20:31, 360, F, 925, OERK
(6) 0/21:12, 1/00:45, 330, F, 926, VIDP
(7) 1/01:26, 1/02:25, 280, F, 461, VIAR
(8) 1/03:06, 1/04:02, 270, F, 113, VIDP
(9) 1/04:43, 1/13:19, 360, F, 113, EGBB
(10) 1/14:00, 1/21:20, 370, F, 114, VIDP
 

Attachments

  • aig_airindia_summer_2015.zip
    35 KB · Views: 164
Last edited:

gadgets

Resource contributor
Messages
9,388
Country
ca-britishcolumbia
Running the (n) version the message now notifies of problems with and without the ETD preset checked.
Please be a little more specific when reporting such issues. After what action were you notified? Of what sort of problems were you notified? I'm going to go out on a limb here and assume you are referring to the validation report which highlighs such things as departure before arrival, etc. ETD Preset has no bearing on those reports.

Regarding the application of the standard preset following resequencing, I can reporduce the issue and will fix it ASAP. (The prior resequencing should have no effect on the subzequent stanbdard preset application.)

Don
 

gadgets

Resource contributor
Messages
9,388
Country
ca-britishcolumbia
I have discovered the problem with using the ETD preset following resequencing.

For a reason I don't recall, when I developed this feature I put in a check to ensure the gap between arrival and departure did not exceed half the repeat period. Once you resequenced the plans the gap between 0/10:20 and 4/01:30 triggered this check. Before resequencing, the gap was 4/01:30 to 0/10:30, which is less than half the repeat period, so all was well.

While I could easily fix this issue by removing that check, I put that check there for a reason which, at the moment, I don't recall. So, I'm going to have to rework the code with this situation in mind.

So, while it will be fixed, it likely won't be today.

Don
 

gadgets

Resource contributor
Messages
9,388
Country
ca-britishcolumbia
Please download and install Development Release 3.2.01(o) from http://stuff4fs.com.

The half-repeat period check was to differientiate between uncorrected departure before arrival situations and over-weekend flights. The fault is obvious (now). The new algorithm is more robust.

Don
 
Messages
123
The plan (35) is now fine with the (o) version after rearranging and adjusting. Looks like I might have to recompile some of the flight plans.

About the message notification problem, I just intended to confirm there that the issue got fixed with the (n) version.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top