richboy2307

I believe it decides on the basis of the Title="" section of the Aircraft.cfg included in your livery package. You can cross-check against other -1000 community liveries to be sure how they're doing it. But this is from an iniManager livery for example. Note the Airbus A350-1000 in the Title. My advice would be to try and mimic the below items as shown in your own package as well. Thanks!

@Speedbird193@BrianT Team is requesting if you can ideally provide a video of the following so they can observe the BeyondATC ATC and AI behaviour? An overview drone camera showing the marked area, let it play for a few minutes that shows what the AI traffic is doing (with beyond ATC) The instructions BeyondATC are giving you There is no wholly "realistic" solution to this issue is the problem. Doing it one way will create "unrealistic" problems for another use case. No matter what is done, there will be a sacrifice to realism somewhere to some user. To you your use case is more likely, and thereby a bigger issue, whereas to a non BeyondATC user, this may not be so. Yes its "unrealistic" for AI to use 9R for landing per "preferential" flows, but its not impossible for that to happen in the sim currently. But regardless of runway used, aircraft should not land on displaced threshold, which to some users would be the greater "unrealistic" behaviour. You see my point? We're not trying to be dismissive of your issue or the gravity of it. We acknowledge it and see it, but I am just relaying to you that it isn't a simple solution and changing these things can have other knock-on effects (and I'm not just talking about ATC/AI here anymore, though that was certainly one of the issues observed). For the most part AI / ATC pathing in MSFS (20 or 24) leaves a lot to be desired, with very little in the way of control over this process in the scenery editor. We can't dictate a path the AI uses when there are multiple taxiways available; we can only specify where a runway or taxiway is. (This runway start point isn't exclusively used for AI either, its just where the sim sees as the runway start point overall so it can affect how runways data, lights, markings and other things are shown in the sim). So even then it may not resolve the issue of AI traffic trying to cross 9R for example after changing where the runway is. In any case, your suggestion is noted. We will see if a suitable workaround can be found, however I cannot guarantee it will be changed if trying to achieve this results in other problems. From what I know this was something they had gone over already in development and the current implemented solution is one that caused the least amount of problems overall. Thanks for understanding!

Your suggestion is noted. The issue is that BATC is not the the only traffic addon that will get affected by this change. There is default sim AI traffic and also others that may not have as well defined logic for runway selection or relying on "real-time" data, and those will end up being affected with wrong landing point as a result. So its a case of accommodating one use case, but then users complain for other type being broken. For the most part, yes this is an issue for MS/Asobo to address. For the moment the start point was chosen to be from displaced threshold to avoid such issues with the sim AI traffic, as you can't re-direct landing AI traffic but as a user you can still taxi over to the full-length point on your own accord. Thanks!

For those of you experiencing this issue, can you please create a custom save when your tiller is unresponsive, and share the save ".bin" file with us here? This may help to reproduce the issue. For instructions on how to create custom autosaves and where to find the save files see: Thanks!

Can you all confirm you have entered a valid and active Hoppie ID on the OIS Settings > 3rd Party page? The D-ATIS/METAR is pulled via Hoppie servers and as such an active Hoppie ID is required. Thanks!

Hi, Sorry we're not seeing this issue on our end on any of our own liveries (default or from the iniManager). Try loading into a -1000 variant on the default iniBuilds livery or any livery installed via the iniManager to verify. This China Airlines livery appears to be a community made one so you should contact the maker of this livery if you continue to experience issues. FS20 FS24

Thanks, reported.

Hi @CR7 This is a follow-up for your specific 2 instances of reported WASM crashes. Just curious if you're still able to reproduce these as of v1.0.7? We tried internally and could not reproduce recently. In case yes, for these or any other WASM crash experienced, can you please also provide the most recent autosave ".bin" file before the crash, in addition to the usual WASM crash report that can help us better to reproduce the issue. Location of the autosave files and other information can be found here: Thanks!

Hi @JonnyT1041 Few of our testers have tried based on information provided and none of us could reproduce this WASM crash sadly. In case you're able to have this consistently, or any other instance after selection of ANF, can you please share the latest autosave ".bin" file from before your crash? Location for the autosave files can be found here: Thanks!

Thanks logged

There is no SD/HD option as of v3.1.4 anymore as it is no longer required due to optimizations made to textures across versions. Thanks!

Should be fixed as of v3.1.4. In case you still have issues please make a new post. Thanks!

Hi, Apologies for late reply but this is because you appear to be in offline mode. You need to ensure your Online Functionality, Bing Data World Graphics and Photogrammetry are enabled for such data to show up. Thanks!

Apologies for late reply, Please see: Thanks!

Hi @Speedbird193 Unfortunately a sim limitation that prevents us from doing so. You can't define displaced thresholds, only runway start/end points and moving it to the first entry point will make it so the AI start landing from within the displaced threshold. Thanks!

Hi, (Click to enlarge image) Sorry we're not able to reproduce this issue. Please try to reinstall the scenery via the iniManager and clear your scenery indexes. You may also try running with only KLAX in your community folder to rule out any addon conflicts. You don't need to re-install all your addons, simply follow the steps below to test: 1. Rename your existing community folder to ``_Community`` 2. Create a new ``Community`` folder in its place. 3. Copy only the ``inibuilds-airport-klax-losangeles`` folder inside it. 4. Run the sim and see if same problem persists. If you are no longer seeing the problem, then there is a potential conflict and you will have to figure out which addon is causing the issue via trial-and-error testing. To restore your addons 1. Delete the new ``Community`` folder you made 2. Rename the ``_Community`` folder to ``Community`` Thanks!

Thanks reported.

Absolutely agreed, which is why we do run tests for these with autolands to try to get best co-incidence for the glideslopes and PAPIs. There are certain sim limitations that prevent this being perfect (ie matching real life 1:1), for example although the runways have slopes/terrain following, in the sim data, each runway still only has a single height value calculated at the centroid. This results in a slight difference between the PAPI GS (which sit at the 'physical' ground height) and the ILS GS position. Sometimes there's other limitations such as discrepancies between datasets (e.g. at OMDB between Navigraph vs Sim Default Navdata). The scenery editor tools available for such adjustments are also fairly imprecise with a lot of trial and error required in the placement of these. Anyways, in relation to your query below are screenshots from a video recorded during earlier test builds using Sim default navdata on the A330 on 24/25 Runways. Its not 100% co-incident with PAPIs at 50ft due to aforementioned issue but the glideslope does intercept 50ft AGL at about the the start of runway threshold as we observed in testing. Its not perfect but we believe it to be within margin of error for whatever precision the sim allows us to achieve. 24L 24R 25L | 25R Just for checking your report, tried with latest Navigraph navdata (2503 rev3) as well in the A321neo and cannot reproduce the Glideslope being *above* the user at 50ft RA at the threshold. If you are simply testing by slewing, do note the instruments (particularly GlideSlope) may not update until aircraft is released and as such not reflect the proper values in slew. Thanks!

Duplicated. Please see linked response and use the post below for further communication of this issue: Thanks!

Hi all, Thanks for your reports. Unfortunately extremely long load-times appears to be a core sim issue that we have no control over. Personally not experiencing this nor is it like this for any of our other testers at the moment on SU1 (FS24 v1.3.25.0). A much smaller sample who are on the SU2 Beta also cannot reproduce the loadding issues described above. It may sound tedious, however you may try a full sim re-install to see if it resolves the issue in your instance. It is recommended by MS/Asobo, especially if you installed your sim initially during first few weeks post-launch, as there is a chance that core sim files are "corrupted" due to the server issues that were present at the time. Some additional context: Some of us internally (dev team and testers) were experiencing weird issues with certain scenery 3D objects (e.g. PAPIs or twy edge lights) that were very slow to load (or not loading at all) after you spawn in. This was resolved after re-installing the sim. All that were experiencing such issues had installed FS2024 on launch or during the affected period. So while rare, it can happen and worth a try if you continue to experience such issues. Thanks!

Hi @nmahink Thanks for your report. FS2024 has a new LOD system that works differently to FS2020, hence why you wouldn't have seen this in 2020 or a version of the scenery made with the FS2020 SDK. There are considerable challenges still to this system and what you're noticing is one such instance. In order to keep it loaded in at a higher Level of Detail (LOD) you have to make the bounding sphere of the ATC Tower asset extremely large, which will in turn can have a significant performance impact on some systems as the sim does not like them to be so large. Setting them to standards as described in the SDK leads to "aggressive" pop-in or "LODing" so a balance has to be struck. The way it is currently is the best that can be achieved without sacrificing too much performance for the end users as we have seen in testing. We are hoping that further refinements to this system are made in future sim updates so we can better harness the performance benefits with less sacrifice of visual fidelity. Asobo are aware of this as this issue has also been raised by other scenery developers, for example: https://devsupport.flightsimulator.com/t/bounding-sphere-issue-lods-screen-size/13580/10 Thanks!

Hi all, Thanks for your reports. As mentioned above, if you are on SU2 Beta, there is a known sim issue at the moment that affects jetway operation. This is not caused by KLAX or any scenery in particular. Here are some screenshots of these jetways working as expected in SU1 (FS24 v1.3.25.0). Note: There is a new GSX Profile for FS24 KLAX Enhanced. In theory you can have both profiles and GSX should switch automatically based on the sim, however in practice we have seen this feature not working as intended for some users. For such users GSX still tries to load the FS20 profile in FS24 (or even both profiles at the same time) which can cause unexpected issues. In case you are experiencing issues on SU1, please try to delete your FS20 profile and then restart COUATL. Thanks!

We're excited to unveil deeper SimBrief integration in the iniBuilds A350 directly within the OIS (Onboard Information System). Say goodbye to switching between apps and windows — now you can plan your entire flight, from departure to arrival, right from the cockpit using the new FLT OPS PLAN page! Accessing the Planner The new planner has its own dedicated page which can be reached via FLT OPS MENU > FLT OPLS PLAN. (Click to enlarge image) Creating a SimBrief Flightplan via the Planner In order to create your flight plan, only the following fields are mandatory FROM* - Input your Departure airport's 4-letter ICAO code here (e.g. LPFR) TO* - Input your Arrival airport's 4-letter ICAO code here (e.g. EGLL) Then, press the GENERATE PLAN button to create a SimBrief Flightplan using the default "AUTO" values. (Click to enlarge image) For additional customization, you can also tweak the below fields which are optional ALTN - Input your Alternate airport's 4-letter ICAO code here (e.g. EGCC). Default value is AUTO. AIRLINE - Input any 3-letter ICAO airline code (e.g. BAW) FLT NUM - Input any alpha-numeric flight numer (e.g. 25A) FROM RWY - Select your Departure airport's desired runway. Default value is AUTO. TO RWY - Select your Arrival airport's desired runway. Default value is AUTO. PAX - Input the number of desired passengers. Values exceeding the MAX will use MAX instead. Default value is AUTO. FREIGHT - Input the desired weight (KG/LBS) of cargo. Values exceeding the MAX will use MAX instead. Default value is AUTO. CRZ FL - Enter your desired Cruise altitude in 3-digit flight levels (e.g. 380 for 38,000ft). Default value is AUTO. REG - Enter your desired aircraft registration. Default value is autofilled from the ATC ID field of aircraft.cfg. CPT NAME - Input custom Captain's Name on the OFP. Default value is AUTO. FO NAME - Input custom First Officer's Name on the OFP. Default value is AUTO. PLAN - Choose the desired OFP format from the list that shows on screen. Default value is LIDO. FUELING section - Choose between WEIGHT or MIN units and enter the desired numeric value for that particular fuel section on your OFP. Default value is AUTO. To reset the page back to its default state, click the CLEAR button. (Click to enlarge image) To change the planning units between KG/LBS, change the Aircraft Weight Units from the OIS Settings page. (Click to enlarge image) Using your New Flightplan - OFP Once you have successfully generated a flight plan, the OIS will automatically go to the OFP page and give you a 'PLAN GENERATED SUCCESSFULLY' notification at the top of the screen. That's it! Your new flightplan is now active on SimBrief, same as if you had generated via their Dispatcher Tool or Website. Now you may use this new plan on the FLT OPS STATUS, LOADSHEET, TO PERF or LDG PERF pages of the OIS by Importing or syncing with Simbrief as usual. You may also request your new flightplan on the FMS via the CPNY F-PLN REQUEST button on the INIT Page. For more information please see the following guides:

We're excited to unveil deeper SimBrief integration in the iniBuilds A350 directly within the OIS (Onboard Information System). Say goodbye to switching between apps and windows — now you can plan your entire flight, from departure to arrival, right from the cockpit using the new FLT OPS PLAN page! Accessing the Planner The new planner has its own dedicated page which can be reached via FLT OPS MENU > FLT OPLS PLAN. (Click to enlarge image) Creating a SimBrief Flightplan via the Planner In order to create your flight plan, only the following fields are mandatory FROM* - Input your Departure airport's 4-letter ICAO code here (e.g. LPFR) TO* - Input your Arrival airport's 4-letter ICAO code here (e.g. EGLL) Then, press the GENERATE PLAN button to create a SimBrief Flightplan using the default "AUTO" values. (Click to enlarge image) For additional customization, you can also tweak the below fields which are optional ALTN - Input your Alternate airport's 4-letter ICAO code here (e.g. EGCC). Default value is AUTO. AIRLINE - Input any 3-letter ICAO airline code (e.g. BAW) FLT NUM - Input any alpha-numeric flight numer (e.g. 25A) FROM RWY - Select your Departure airport's desired runway. Default value is AUTO. TO RWY - Select your Arrival airport's desired runway. Default value is AUTO. PAX - Input the number of desired passengers. Values exceeding the MAX will use MAX instead. Default value is AUTO. FREIGHT - Input the desired weight (KG/LBS) of cargo. Values exceeding the MAX will use MAX instead. Default value is AUTO. CRZ FL - Enter your desired Cruise altitude in 3-digit flight levels (e.g. 380 for 38,000ft). Default value is AUTO. REG - Enter your desired aircraft registration. Default value is autofilled from the ATC ID field of aircraft.cfg. CPT NAME - Input custom Captain's Name on the OFP. Default value is AUTO. FO NAME - Input custom First Officer's Name on the OFP. Default value is AUTO. PLAN - Choose the desired OFP format from the list that shows on screen. Default value is LIDO. FUELING section - Choose between WEIGHT or MIN units and enter the desired numeric value for that particular fuel section on your OFP. Default value is AUTO. To reset the page back to its default state, click the CLEAR button. (Click to enlarge image) To change the planning units between KG/LBS, change the Aircraft Weight Units from the OIS Settings page. (Click to enlarge image) Using your New Flightplan - OFP Once you have successfully generated a flight plan, the OIS will automatically go to the OFP page and give you a 'PLAN GENERATED SUCCESSFULLY' notification at the top of the screen. That's it! Your new flightplan is now active on SimBrief, same as if you had generated via their Dispatcher Tool or Website. Now you may use this new plan on the FLT OPS STATUS, LOADSHEET, TO PERF or LDG PERF pages of the OIS by Importing or syncing with Simbrief as usual. You may also request your new flightplan on the FMS via the CPNY F-PLN REQUEST button on the INIT Page. For more information please see the following guides:

Hi sorry we're not able to reproduce the issue currently internally or amongst any of our testers. Having both tiller and rudder axis assigned to different hardware, and trying both to link them via the RUDDER CONTROLS TILLER option or not. Not seeing the issue across any phase of flight (pre or post). In case you're having this issue consistently, I'd recommend trying with an empty community folder (only A350 installed) to rule out any sort of addon conflicts. To run with a blank community folder without losing your addons: 1. Rename your existing community folder to ``_Community`` 2. Create a new ``Community`` folder in its place. 3. Copy only the ``inibuilds-aircraft-a350`` folder inside it. 4. Run the sim and see if same problem persists. After finished testing, you can close the sim, and restore your original folder as follows: 1. Delete the new ``Community`` folder you made 2. Rename the ``_Community`` folder back to ``Community`` Thanks!