Jonas Kuster (1158939) Posted June 4, 2023 Report Share Posted June 4, 2023 Is there a way to make GRP differentiate between passenger and cargo aircraft of the same operator, such like UAE Emirates? According to the developer guide, the word "cargo" in the FPL remarks has only an influence if the operator is defined as military. Is there a possibility to consider this word in the FPL remarks independent from the operator type? Jonas Kuster Leader Operation - vACC Switzerland | www.vacc.ch Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Juha Holopainen Posted June 5, 2023 Report Share Posted June 5, 2023 "CARGO" will mark the flight as a cargo flight if civilian and as a transport if military, so it should be working as requested already. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martin Loxbo (811805) Posted June 6, 2023 Report Share Posted June 6, 2023 What about a combination of airline and aircraft type to define cargo? For example UAE and B74x = cargo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonas Kuster (1158939) Posted June 6, 2023 Author Report Share Posted June 6, 2023 20 hours ago, Juha Holopainen said: "CARGO" will mark the flight as a cargo flight if civilian and as a transport if military, so it should be working as requested already. I exactly added this word to the flight plan remark so when again assigning a stand, a suitable one would be used. I reproduced the situation with the log file and observed the following situation. This is the flight plan after my modification: Type: IFR Aircraft: B77L/H-VGDW/C Depart: LOWW Arrive: LSZH Alternate: LFSB Altitude: 280 Speed: 468 Amended By: LSZH_APP Route: OSPEN DCT ABRUK DCT SETAL DCT DETSA/N0463F310 M984 NAXAV DCT RESIA/N0459F300 Z50 KELIP KELIP3G/14 Remarks: PBN/A1B1C1D1L1O1S2T1 DAT/1FANS CPDLCX SUR/RSP180 260B DOF/230604 REG/HL8043 EET/LIMM0030 LSAS0043 SEL/HJMP CODE/71C043 RMK/TCAS EQUIPPED /V/ CARGO GRP would always propose gate B34 initially, and then either B31 and T55. All of them were available. Only T55 is marked as a gate for cargo aircraft. No other gate would be proposed. Here are the definitions of these 3 stands. STAND:LSZH:B31 CODE:E USE:A ENGINETYPE:J NOTATYP:B743 BLOCKS:B33:C COORD:47.451975:8.56047222222222 COORD:47.4512916666667:8.560375 COORD:47.45136388888890:8.55959166666667 COORD:47.45202777777780:8.55970000000000 STAND:LSZH:B34 CODE:E USE:A ENGINETYPE:J NOTATYP:B743 PRIORITY:1 BLOCKS:B32,B36 LIMITS:B38:D:E:999:999 COORD:47.45066111111110:8.55967222222222 COORD:47.44988611111110:8.55956111111111 COORD:47.44990555555560:8.55929444444445 COORD:47.45067777777780:8.55938055555556 STAND:LSZH:T55 CODE:E USE:CMT COORD:47.44615530810927:8.565629706181834 COORD:47.446572796213175:8.565344952384994 COORD:47.44687460501502:8.565417489152702 COORD:47.44690518642485:8.565490377530123 COORD:47.44688109207479:8.565522141976484 COORD:47.44702577929378:8.56583556648456 COORD:47.44700248598073:8.565861485964927 COORD:47.44706243238498:8.566001648171651 COORD:47.446999701577795:8.566055721032743 COORD:47.44669179786337:8.566272714957893 COORD:47.446301079949194:8.566160082209844 COORD:47.446152430752115:8.565687758627906 There are also other stands available marked as being used by cargo aircraft, but with a lower priority. It seems the priority has much more weight than the use of stands. Not sure if this is intended to be like that. But I would rather have a lower priority stand assigned, but with the correct use. Thanks for looking into this case. Jonas Kuster Leader Operation - vACC Switzerland | www.vacc.ch Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Juha Holopainen Posted June 6, 2023 Report Share Posted June 6, 2023 Out of those stands, T55 should be the first choice if available, and then B34 and B31 in that order. I'll mark that down as a possible bug. Sad to see "VGDW/C" still being a thing... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now