Author Topic: Airports and Routes tables review  (Read 45 times)

lesmar

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 32
    • View Profile
Airports and Routes tables review
« on: July 12, 2018, 08:13:51 AM »
airports table
Remove all redundant information ie fields not used
Create database based on up to date Arinc data such as Navigraph
Include Gmt and timezone if possible as this can be used in route input to automatically generate Flight duration from departure and arrival times.
Routes table
Add a new field for flight distance and use this field as guidance like duration.  There is a formula that uses latitude an longitude to create a reasonable approximation of distance in Nautical Miles

given the timezones of airports and a departure time then using an average of cruise speed across aircraft flying the route + 15 minutes to depart and land then it is possible also to generate the duration of the flight based on the distance between the airports and thus an arrival time say rounded to the nearest 15 minutes.  Of course arrival times are only approximate as well as distance as you never know what aircraft is flying the route and what sids and stars are being used especially when on line

I would add to the pilot route selection screen that the flight arrival times and duration are approximations only and are for guidance
« Last Edit: July 12, 2018, 04:38:50 PM by lesmar »

quepsi83

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 48
    • View Profile
Re: Airports and Routes tables review
« Reply #1 on: July 13, 2018, 08:07:08 PM »
I agree with your suggestion. Thank you for mentioning it. Now... whether it can or will be implemented - AND - how long to do it - AND - how such an upgrade may delay delivery of the long awaited v2.7 upgrade? That's the $1m question...

Cheers,

Keith

lesmar

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 32
    • View Profile
Re: Airports and Routes tables review
« Reply #2 on: July 14, 2018, 05:33:31 AM »
Personally I think the upgrade will not be available just yet as there are still many things that need to be fixed or finished first.
There is a need for the cars to be ported to OSX and Linux and not stay as windows

My upgrades should be able if not in a release be done as an add-on as then if file structures have not changed then they will be easy to re-implement after 2.7  or maybe it will become 3.0

quepsi83

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 48
    • View Profile
Re: Airports and Routes tables review
« Reply #3 on: July 16, 2018, 10:57:51 PM »
Agreed with the delay in updates.   It's a better decision IMHO to fix the platform first... instead of putting 'lipstick' on the not-so-fixed package.

If 50% of the suggestions were reviewed and streamlined... that could result in a 30% improvement in an ALREADY DECENT Management System.

After 4 months of running VAM as a subdomain in 'beta' - just me, my CFO and GM doing flights - I'm still nervous about running 'alpha'... having a pilot roster... and having to maintain tables... answer questions... and essentially run yet another 'support center'  for VAM...   because I am still experiencing issues here and there with no immediate fix in sight.

I'll throw this in here... Not all applications/installations of VAM should be seen as relative ONLY to mainstream airlines.

Some of the PENALTY FLAGS that ACARS kicks up - not only is it not done with an operation like ProjectFly - my GM... a r/w pilot assures me that if he requests a high speed departure from r/w ATC and there is no congestion in the area?  He can climb out faster than 250kts below 10,000'.  The FAR/AIM has rules and suggestions for use of landing lights or even lights in general.  Most GA pilots look at replacing burnt out bulbs as a huge expense... they turn on their lights when it is absolutely requires/necessary.

Pausing the sim.   Why penalize a virtual pilot because he is flying ONLINE - maybe an 11hr rotation - and needs to go to work in the morning... disconnect from VATSIM... pause the flight...  and will resume the flight tomorrow?

Cheers,

Keith

lesmar

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 32
    • View Profile
Re: Airports and Routes tables review
« Reply #4 on: July 17, 2018, 03:35:53 PM »
I guess the problem with flight penalties as you say it has to be a general thing because likewise you dont have all the real-world options and human risk decisions built into VAM.

My concerns are that the database looks to me to be copied from a free download some years ago and is not really upto date with airport ICAO changes and new airports and why include closed airports ?.

Airports in my view must or should be accessible from reliable data sources such as Simbrief which in turn uses the NAVIGRAPH data that is fairly upto date . If it is not on Navigraph then is it worth having in VAM and why have data that is not used such as website and wikipedia and keywords if you are not using them.