1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Military parking specs

Discussion in 'Airport Design Editor' started by samcaine, 3/1/08.

  1. samcaine

    samcaine

    Joined:
    7/6/07
    Messages:
    62
    Country:
    wales
    I apologise in advance if this question has been asked and answered before. I've searched for the answer on various forums and I'm just as confused as when I started. The Military Ramps thread doesn't seem to definitively answer the question.

    In ADE (and AFX) the atc_parking_types= for military spots says RAMP_MIL_CARGO or RAMP_MIL_COMBAT. Do the aircraft.cfg entries need to say the same, or the FS9 type of entry, which was MIL_CARGO and MIL_COMBAT.

    I've written a HOWTO for installing MAIW packages in FSX and have found a bit of confusion over this.

    On a similar note; do multiple ramp specs in atc_parking_types=MIL_CARGO,CARGO,RAMP get honoured by FSX? I've read somewhere that if all MIL_CARGO spots are full then the AI aircraft will look for an available CARGO spot, then a free RAMP spot.

    My thanks in advance for any help you can give.
    Last edited: 3/1/08
  2. jvile

    jvile

    Joined:
    24/1/05
    Messages:
    8,108
    samcaine

    That is correct and what the parking spot MUST say

    Yes same as FS9. The aircraft.cfg MUST say MIL_CARGO, MIL_COMBAT or just CARGO for a Cargo type airplane.

    Reggie should answer that since he has worked out the pro's and con's on what happens with all the varibles when multiple atc_parking_types are used or not used.
  3. samcaine

    samcaine

    Joined:
    7/6/07
    Messages:
    62
    Country:
    wales
    Jim,

    Many thanks for your reply. I'll re-write my guide. Looking forward to Reggie's answer to the other question.

    Once again, many thanks.
  4. rfields

    rfields

    Joined:
    29/9/06
    Messages:
    823
    Country:
    us-arkansas
    There is really no such thing as a RAMP spot in FS airport design. I strongly suspect that code was created for and is used by the TrafficDatabaseBuilder program.

    There are:
    RAMP_CARGO
    RAMP_GA
    RAMP_GA_LARGE
    RAMP_GA_MEDIUM
    RAMP_GA_SMALL
    RAMP_MIL_CARGO
    RAMP_MIL_COMBAT

    When someone uses RAMP - it appears to tell FS to use any spot from those catagories - and passes the criteria on to other decision factors such as parking spot size and place on the list of parking spots.

    MIL_CARGO,CARGO should make RAMP_CARGO the second priority in parking types.

    Now - if the empty RAMP_CARGO spot has a parking code different from the aircraft, it will be bypassed.

    In my testing, RAMP does no use the RAMP_GA parking spots as a priority over the RAMP_CARGO, RAMP_MIL_COMBAT, or RAMP_MIL_CARGO spots. The deciding factor of spots without parking codes is the size of the aircraft and the size of the parking spots.

    The only thing RAMP does is make the seven types of RAMP spots a slightly higher priority than GATE spots.

    Even there - it appears 3M is the break point, but I need to do more testing.

    i.e.
    Aircraft #1 - C-12 (Beech King Air) set to atc_parking_types=MIL_CARGO

    Aircraft size - 9M

    RAMP_MIL_CARGO Parking Spot size - 9.1M

    Overflow spots:

    RAMP_MIL_CARGO - 21.1M
    RAMP_GA_SMALL - 10M

    If the 9.1M spot is full - this aircraft parking in the RAMP_GA_SMALL spot.

    Aircraft #2 - Default King Air set to atc_parking_types=RAMP

    Aircraft size - 9M

    Modified parking spot sizes:
    RAMP_GA_SMALL - 7.1M
    RAMP_GA_MEDIUM - 10.1M
    RAMP_GA_LARGE - 13.1M

    Overflow spots:

    RAMP_MIL_CARGO - 9.1M
    RAMP_MIL_CARGO - 21.1M

    This aircraft parks in the RAMP_MIL_CARGO spot as a priority over RAMP_GA_MEDIUM

    Aircraft #3 - Default King Air set to atc_parking_types=RAMP

    Aircraft size - 9M

    Default parking spot sizes:
    RAMP_GA_SMALL - 10M
    RAMP_GA_MEDIUM - 14M
    RAMP_GA_LARGE - 18M

    Overflow spots:

    GATE_SMALL - 13.1M (regional jets)
    GATE_SMALL - 14.1M (regional props)
    GATE_SMALL - 18M

    This aircraft parks in the RAMP_GA_SMALL and RAMP_GA_MEDIUM spots when available. However, if the only spots available are:

    RAMP_GA_LARGE - 18M
    GATE_SMALL - 13M
    GATE_SMALL - 14M

    The aircraft will park in a GATE_SMALL 13M spot. If the 14M spot is the smallest gate - the aircraft parks in the RAMP_GA_LARGE spot.

    Of course in these tests - there is no parking code in any of the parking spots.
  5. rfields

    rfields

    Joined:
    29/9/06
    Messages:
    823
    Country:
    us-arkansas
    Now, lets fall back and look at the concept, theory and practice of overflow parking.

    We need overflow parking options on airports because the number and type of aircraft vary through out the day.

    Overflow parking also has an important diagnostic function - to provide us quick visual confirmation that the airport parking does not match the flight plans on that computer.

    Always remember the most powerful determinant in parking is aircraft and parking spot size. If an empty parking spot large enough for the aircraft exists on the airport - the aircraft will be parked there - parking codes, parking types - etc, do not matter - SIZE matters.

    Also never forget that parking is never IF/ THEN. If there are RAMP_MIL_CARGO spots - use them, if not then use RAMP_CARGO spots, if not then use other RAMP spots.

    Parking is always a weighted value where every empty parking spot on the airport has a value caclulated based on how well it fits the criteria from the aircraft.cfg - size, size difference, parking codes, parking type, parking spot name, place on the list - all are calculated and product a spot total value. The spot with the highest value wins.

    You can work out a parking plan for the airport with one, two, maybe three or four overflow options.

    The problem is always what causes the overflow situation. It is very seldom the 'problem aircraft' - but usually another aircraft / airline higher up the load order.

    So we set some limited overflow options in the aircraft.cfg with multiple atc_parking_codes and atc_parking_types entries.

    We can also set some overflow options in the parking spot properties with multiple parking codes.

    But what almost always happens is that the number of codes ends up creating many options with near the same weighted value - and creates unpredictable behavior.

    You want this aircraft to park in MIL_CARGO spots - great.

    You choose CARGO as an overflow option - again great because there are no default MIL_CARGO parking spots in FSX.

    You can choose RAMP as a third overflow option because there are a great many RAMP_GA_LARGE spots on default airports in FSX.

    That may be useful to set a priority of RAMP_GA_LARGE 18M spots over GATE_SMALL 18M spots on default airports.

    However as the third option in the list - it's weight is relatively low.

    Depending upon how the parking list is setup - the aircraft may park at GATE_SMALL spots near the top of the list over RAMP_GA_LARGE much lower on the list at many default airports.

    Now one part of setting up the aircraft.cfg is to prepare the aircraft for default airports - because it is very unusual to modify all airports in the world the aircraft visits.

    We can do this for a few small flightplans - but it gets to be an overwhelming task if the bird visits a lot of airports.

    The second part of overflow and the most important involves how you setup the home airport of the aircraft - or other airport which you are working upon.

    Any aircraft should never overflow to a third option if you are setting up the airport correctly. By third option - I mean in the aircraft.cfg file.

    Taking this aircraft - having CARGO and MIL_CARGO spots on the airport - your MIL_CARGO parking needs to be setup so that this aircraft never overflows. If it does - something much more serious is wrong with your airport.

    My personal preference is 10-15% of parking needs to be overflow with no parking codes.

    If the airport has a KC-135 squadron with 8 aircraft - I need 10 MIL_CARGO spots on the airport. I can code 8 for the squadron/ K135 - but I've got to have two uncoded MIL_CARGO spots.

    Using the FS2004 default 44M size for MIL_CARGO is a problem for FSX.

    The C-5 is 34M
    The C-141 is 25M
    The C-17 is 26M
    The C-135/KC-135 is 20M

    The difference between 26M for the C-17 and 44M for the MIL_CARGO spots can result in the C-17 parking at GATE_HEAVY 36M spots as a preference of the the MIL_CARGO 44M spots if the placement on the list order is far enough apart.

    The best way to test parking setup is with that airline / type aircraft / flight plan as the only one of the airport. You have to make sure the parking works correctly with no other AI traffic.

    Then you setup an overflow capacity.

    Then you test with additional AI traffic - the key thing you are watching for is to see the 'perfect' parking for the desired aircraft/ airline goes wrong.

    If it does - the problem is not with that aircraft/ airline - it's with another airline/ aircraft not having sufficient parking, including overflow parking on the airport.
  6. samcaine

    samcaine

    Joined:
    7/6/07
    Messages:
    62
    Country:
    wales
    Thanks Reggie, that answers my question most thoroughly. I have work to do methinks! :D

Share This Page