Jump to content

Manchester X AFCAD Issues


tomkellock92

Recommended Posts

Hi,

 

Just recently purchased this product and have noticed the following AFCAD errors:

 

Missing taxiways:

Rapid Exit taxiway AE missing (which links upto taxiway AF)

Taxiways H and G are partly missing (the ones near T3) - Holding points H2 and G4.

Taxiway K missing from where it joins D upto where it joins C - Holding point K4 and K5

 

Runway errors:

Taxiways leading onto the runway will cause AI aircraft to taxi for quite a while down the runway before they commence their roll. Perhaps you should consider changing these to the 'Runway' paths instead?

Runway 23L needs extending back towards holding point T1 so that the hold short distance meets the runway - again, this would cause issues for AI traffic

 

Missing stands:

Stands 100 and 101 are missing near Terminal 1 Pier B - These are frequently used by the likes of Jet2 and Flybe for remote parking

Stands 16 and 17 are missing in-between Terminal 1 and 3

Stand 41 is missing at Terminal 3

Stands 50 and 51 are missing at Terminal 3

Stand 21 is missing at Terminal 1 pier C - in the corner of Pier C and Pier B

Stands 80, 231 and 241 are missing from the remote parking area between Terminal 2 and the Cargo area

 

I've noticed that you have put the taxiway P in instead of stands 80 and 231. Although they do sometimes use this taxiway, the stands should still be there and are detailed on the charts.

 

Incorrect stand numbers / types:

245 should be 85 (Remote Area)

251 should be 86 (Remote Area)

253 should be 81 (Remote Area)

252 should be 82 (Remote Area)

Parking 93 should be 32 (Terminal 1)

14 should be 15 (Terminal 1)

3 should be 7 (Terminal 1)

61 should be 47 (Terminal 3)

86 should be 57 (Terminal 3)

85 should be 58 (Terminal 3)

23 should not be a 'RAMP_GA' and instead should be 'GATE' (Terminal 1)

 

The 4 cargo gates are numbered wrong and are also either 'PARKING' or 'RAMP_MIL_CARO', which is also wrong.

There are also way more stands than this at the cargo area.

 

A few stands have been named 'GATE_G' - These should just be 'GATE'

 

Other issues:

Stand 41 (T3) is missing a jetway

Stand 54 is missing a taxiway link, meaning AI will never leave this gate if spawned there

There is no AI parking allocations set, meaning AI traffic will park all over the place and not at the right terminals.

 

Multiple gates are the wrong size, meaning bigger AI aircraft won't be able to park. An example of this is stand 12, which is the A380 stand, yet this has been put as a 'Medium' with a radius of 23M - This should be around a 41M radius and a 'Heavy'

 

The car park next to Terminal 2, and over stands 217, 218 and 219, has now been removed in the real world and those gates are now back in action - could you alter the scenery to reflect this?

 

Any possibility that the tower view could be moved to the new tower?

 

Sources:

For the taxiways:

http://www.ead.eurocontrol.int/eadbasic/pamslight-43B21D1F153D3AA6158DFE12EBAF70A6/7FE5QZZF3FXUS/EN/Charts/AD/AIRAC/EG_AD_2_EGCC_2-1_en_2016-12-08.pdf

 

For the stands / gates:

http://www.ead.eurocontrol.int/eadbasic/pamslight-43B21D1F153D3AA6158DFE12EBAF70A6/7FE5QZZF3FXUS/EN/Charts/AD/AIRAC/EG_AD_2_EGCC_2-2_en_2016-05-26.pdf 

 

 

If you need any further information, please let me know.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've also just noticed that there a few stands that are missing the lead-in arrows on the floor. For example, stand 243 in the remote area near T2 doesn't have any floor markings, yet does have the yellow centre line leading into the stand.

 

There are some other's as well, but can't recall which ones.

 

Quite a few errors here guys. Can't say I'm too impressed!

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, awf said:

Just starting to wonder about the quality control lately here :o

 

Does make you wonder...

Although, I don't think it's Aerosoft's fault. They just manage the project and do a very good job of that :D

The problem lies with the developer. It's them that code, design, model and tweak the scenery for hours on end! 

I understand that IDS are fairly new to this and that it takes time to get the hang of it, but they've released 3 airports now, all of which have had issues - Sacramento, Nassau and now Manchester.

Hopefully, with a bit of guidance, they'll soon crack it and we'll all be happy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, awf said:

Just starting to wonder about the quality control lately here :o

 

It think. they were a little bit to much in a hurry to release it.

UK2000 is coming with a version 2 of their Manchester tomorrow.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Ad said:

 

It think. they were a little bit to much in a hurry to release it.

UK2000 is coming with a version 2 of their Manchester tomorrow.....

 

Yeah, I get that impression too.

Will see what the UK2000 version is like. I've been a long and loyal user of their products.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the Aerosoft one looks fantastic, the texturing etc is right up there I think. I think they just need to fix all these taxiway issues then it'll be a great product.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another issue, approaches are not recognized. When arriving I was instructed to do a visual 23 approach, but when selecting an approach for 23R the list was empty?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hello,

we are workign on a hotfix adressing reports by the community.

We apologize ofcourse for the problems some of you experience and will see what we can fix from this easily :)
 


 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, I.D.S said:

Hello,

we are workign on a hotfix adressing reports by the community.

We apologize ofcourse for the problems some of you experience and will see what we can fix from this easily :)
 


 

 

Whilst it's great that you're working on fixes, I find it a little too late as many people have already bought the product with quite a lot of errors.

 

I'm about to post my own issues with the scenery as well so I hope these are addressed too.

 

This was definately rushed out and skipped the quality control department.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

vor 8 Minuten, calzoom sagte:

 

Whilst it's great that you're working on fixes, I find it a little too late as many people have already bought the product with quite a lot of errors.

 

I'm about to post my own issues with the scenery as well so I hope these are addressed too.

 

This was definately rushed out and skipped the quality control department.

Feel free to message us all issues you have encountered.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Privacy Policy & Terms of Use