Change the 'START' time at waypoint 0 to be desired takeoff time for aircraft

[Northstar98]

Hi everyone,

 

Would it be possible to change the 'START' time at waypoint 0 for aircraft to be desired takeoff time, for aircraft either starting from cold or hot starting from parking.

Right now its function is identical to late activation, triggering 'group activate' at the time specified - which is already easily achieved (though involving a few more steps) via the triggers menu, making it redundant.

Personally, it would be better if this time was the desired takeoff time, which would allow us to consider the time required to start-up and taxi (or just taxi for aircraft hot-started from the ramp). Right now, the ETA displayed only considers distance from the previous waypoint and airspeed.

Of course, you can 'fix' the time and the ME will calculate the ground speed required to reach the waypoint, but if I factor in the start-up and takeoff time, it may set the speed outside of whatever the valid range is for whatever aircraft. This doesn't seem to be an issue (the ME doesn't flag an error, though it will draw a red border around the time and speed) though in aircraft like the Viggen, which has an automatically generated kneeboard containing the list of waypoints and waypoint parameters, you'll see an incorrectly calculated speed, which will conflict with HUD indications, which is obviously undesireable.

 

This would also allow us to better define TOS directly from the mission editor, and use that to inform aircraft settings (this more applies to DTC improvements, but right now the Viggen will use the time set in the mission editor for TOS, though the problem is that it doesn't consider the time required to startup and takeoff, which leads to the above problem).

This would also allow us to define a schedule for ATC to follow, which when/if it's improved should then manage aircraft such that they takeoff at the desired time (or as near to).

 

Ideally AI aircraft would spawn at mission start (unless late activation is desired), then start-up (which should take a realistic time) at a time such that they will takeoff at (or as close to) the desired takeoff time.

[Exorcet]

7 minutes ago, Northstar98 said:

Hi everyone,

 

Would it be possible to change the 'START' time at waypoint 0 for aircraft to be desired takeoff time, for aircraft either starting from cold or hot starting from parking.

Right now its function is identical to late activation, triggering 'group activate' at the time specified - which is already easily achieved (though involving a few more steps) via the triggers menu, making it redundant.

I don't think the redundancy here is a huge deal, although I do like your idea as well. From my time mission building there are two common situations with delayed starts, which are fixed delays and relative delays. The former is where using WP 0 time is preferred because it shouldn't change ever. The latter is best set with triggers because it can be dynamic.

Maybe we could just make a slight tweak to your idea and make a new WP type, takeoff (timed) or something. When WP 0 is set to this, then the time entered is the takeoff time. This also has the benefit of being more backwards compatible.

7 minutes ago, Northstar98 said:

Ideally AI aircraft would spawn at mission start (unless late activation is desired), then start-up (which should take a realistic time) at a time such that they will takeoff at (or as close to) the desired takeoff time.

As much as I want realistic AI start times, it could cause chaos in existing missions. You also have to consider how ATC handles things. Hopefully ATC will be much better in the future, but as of now you have problems like AI refusing to even taxi just because another aircraft is landing, or some other flight has started first, etc. The old simple AI start up should probably be kept as an option.

[Northstar98]

2 hours ago, Exorcet said:

I don't think the redundancy here is a huge deal, although I do like your idea as well.

It's not that it's a huge deal, but IMO, we don't need 2 ways to accomplish the same thing, when I'd argue one of them would be better suited to takeoff time.

Right now the ME doesn't factor time required to start-up, taxi and takeoff in its speed or time calculations, meaning you have to do it manually. This is a very simple calculation, but it would be better if the mission editor supported this outright.

This also means that in aircraft like the Viggen you'll see incorrectly calculated speeds in the kneeboard.

2 hours ago, Exorcet said:

From my time mission building there are two common situations with delayed starts, which are fixed delays and relative delays. The former is where using WP 0 time is preferred because it shouldn't change ever. The latter is best set with triggers because it can be dynamic.

The triggers menu is suitable for both, just with different conditions (with group activate being set after a certain time), it's a slightly longer process and only accepts seconds, but it does mean that all of my late activations are easily accessible from one place.

2 hours ago, Exorcet said:

Maybe we could just make a slight tweak to your idea and make a new WP type, takeoff (timed) or something. When WP 0 is set to this, then the time entered is the takeoff time. This also has the benefit of being more backwards compatible.

Yeah, that would work.

2 hours ago, Exorcet said:

As much as I want realistic AI start times, it could cause chaos in existing missions.

I mean if you need aircraft to be started and ready to taxi within a couple of minutes, isn't that what hot starting is for?

It takes just under a minute (~50 s) per engine for the AI to be ready to taxi when cold starting, compared to hot starting.

Even if that difference is significant enough to 'cause chaos' it's fairly easy to edit any time based conditions to account for the difference. This is also a reason to always use late activation, and have any time based events contained within the triggers menu, as that way all the times can be found in one place, and I don't have to bounce between aircraft, waypoints and triggers menu to edit any time-controlled events.

2 hours ago, Exorcet said:

You also have to consider how ATC handles things.

Well that's quite simple, they barely handle anything - personally I always have them muted because I find them utterly not fit for purpose, especially compared to a certain other ATC system.

Some ATC scheduling system is absolutely contingent on major ATC improvements in the first place. Right now it's more or less a race between starting first and getting to junctions and entrances first. Being able to define the schedule via desired takeoff times would give more control to mission editors.

2 hours ago, Exorcet said:

Hopefully ATC will be much better in the future, but as of now you have problems like AI refusing to even taxi just because another aircraft is landing

It looks like AI aircraft and ATC don't coordinate with each other at all, and personally I've experienced the exact opposite.

With a player/client aircraft on final approach, cleared to land by ATC, AI aircraft will taxi onto the runway and takeoff, with fairly predictable results.

2 hours ago, Exorcet said:

The old simple AI start up should probably be kept as an option.

Again, isn't that more along the lines of what hot starting is for?

Edited May 8, 2022 by Northstar98

[Exorcet]

1 hour ago, Northstar98 said:

It's not that it's a huge deal, but IMO, we don't need 2 ways to accomplish the same thing, when I'd argue one of them would be better suited to takeoff time.

Right now the ME doesn't factor time required to start-up, taxi and takeoff in its speed or time calculations, meaning you have to do it manually. This is a very simple calculation, but it would be better if the mission editor supported this outright.

This also means that in aircraft like the Viggen you'll see an incorrectly calculated

Yeah it's not a hue issue at all, but DCS has had both options for so long I just want to be cautious about outright removing one, and they do have very slight pros and cons.

1 hour ago, Northstar98 said:

I mean if you need aircraft to be started and ready to taxi within a couple of minutes, isn't that what hot starting is for?

It takes just under a minute (~50 s) per engine for the AI to be ready to taxi when cold starting, compared to hot starting.

Even if that difference is significant enough to 'cause chaos' it's fairly easy to edit any time based conditions to account for the difference. This is also a reason to always use late activation, and have any time based events contained within the triggers menu, as that way all the times can be found in one place, and I don't have to bounce between aircraft, waypoints and triggers menu to edit any time-controlled events.

It's not so much about how much time a given startup takes, it's that existing missions won't factor in realistic start times for AI. The missions can always be updated of course, but if AI start up times change and there is no way to revert to the old start up times the missions will be potentially broken until someone gets around to fixing them. I prefer to have somewhat realistic airbase operations in my missions so I tend to start planes from an uncontrolled state (although I've given up and just do air starts at airports that the AI are horribly at navigating). Since every start up is just a couple of minutes it's easy to factor that time into mission planning. If we switched to realistic start times I'd use that going forward but I don't know if I'd want to have to revisit dozens of old missions for updates as soon as the patch hits.

1 hour ago, Northstar98 said:

Well that's quite simple, they barely handle anything - personally I always have them muted because I find them utterly not fit for purpose, especially compared to a certain other ATC system.

Some ATC scheduling system is absolutely contingent on major ATC improvements in the first place. Right now it's more or less a race between starting first and getting to junctions and entrances first. Being able to define the schedule via desired takeoff times would give more control to mission editors.

It looks like AI aircraft and ATC don't coordinate with each other at all, and personally I've experienced the exact opposite.

With a player/client aircraft on final approach, cleared to land by ATC, AI aircraft will taxi onto the runway and takeoff, with fairly predictable results.

Again, isn't that more along the lines of what hot starting is for?

 

Interesting that you're seeing the opposite that I am with AI ATC, though you mention player aircraft. I was testing a mission the other day and had an AI fighter flight sit in the hanger for maybe 5 minutes after start up because a tanker landed just before their start up. The AI refused to taxi until it parked despite the airbase having two runways and the tanker never blocking their route. Fortunately this flight was mostly for scenery and to show the intended path for the player to take to the runway so the delay wasn't a big deal. If enforcing takeoff time also comes along with fixing issues like this that would be a huge benefit, but if they are separate in the code it could complicate adding the new feature.

[Northstar98]

20 minutes ago, Exorcet said:

and they do have very slight pros and cons.

I mean, on the one hand late activation allows you to have all the times contained in one place (the triggers menu), but on the other hand it takes slightly longer, and the times are all seconds after whatever action, instead of an absolute time.

20 minutes ago, Exorcet said:

It's not so much about how much time a given startup takes, it's that existing missions won't factor in realistic start times for AI.

That's kinda what I meant, though it doesn't really matter what the time actually is because if it's in any different it's the same amount of editing, just changing it by a different number.

20 minutes ago, Exorcet said:

I prefer to have somewhat realistic airbase operations in my missions so I tend to start planes from an uncontrolled state (although I've given up and just do air starts at airports that the AI are horribly at navigating).

I agree completely, and I often run into situations (even with very simple missions), where the lack of ATC functionality and AI issues result in me giving up and just sticking to air-starts (though I sometimes try to replicate them having just taken off).

Though right now there's no way to adjust the scheduling and the ATC and AI are fairly stupid, and don't coordinate with each other.

20 minutes ago, Exorcet said:

Interesting that you're seeing the opposite that I am with AI ATC, though you mention player aircraft.

Yeah it's likely my scenario applies in that specific circumstance where you have a player coming in to land and AI aircraft taxiing to takeoff.

20 minutes ago, Exorcet said:

I was testing a mission the other day and had an AI fighter flight sit in the hanger for maybe 5 minutes after start up because a tanker landed just before their start up. The AI refused to taxi until it parked despite the airbase having two runways and the tanker never blocking their route. Fortunately this flight was mostly for scenery and to show the intended path for the player to take to the runway so the delay wasn't a big deal.

I don't doubt it, and it's issues like these will often result in me setting the ATC to silent mode and avoiding AI operations around aircraft.

Either their silly decision making (either by making incursions onto runways when aircraft are on final, or by waiting around despite not needing to), pathfinding issues, not scheduling properly and not coordinating with ATC that results in me just throwing my hands up and avoiding it.

20 minutes ago, Exorcet said:

If enforcing takeoff time also comes along with fixing issues like this that would be a huge benefit, but if they are separate in the code it could complicate adding the new feature.

It sounds more like an overhaul of the ATC and AI (and how AI interacts with ATC) than being able to set desired takeoff times, though they're intertwined.

Setting desired takeoff times should provide ATC with the ability to schedule and coordinate aircraft properly, and should give commands to taxiing aircraft (be they player or AI) accordingly.

If you've ever played the other sim, you should be aware of what I'm talking about, and it's just so much better than what we have now.

[upyr1]

I would love this. I figure on a the best way to do it would be to have a line for start time and one for take off. Which would let us see the start time for a cold aircraft. 

[sirrah]

8 hours ago, upyr1 said:

I would love this. I figure on a the best way to do it would be to have a line for start time and one for take off. Which would let us see the start time for a cold aircraft. 

Indeed, being able to set the take-off time independent of the start time, would be a huge improvement!

It would allow for some awesome new scenario's, such as:

• AI aircraft starting up, sitting idle on the tarmac for a few minutes and then shut off (simulating wingman abort scenario or maintenance engine testing)
• Have multiple different aircraft types start up at around the same time and then have them taxi out simultaneously (regardless of their startup sequence time)(right now you'll have to block AI pathing somehow to keep them waiting for you or other flights)
• Increase AI time from startup to taxi out (cold start times of AI aircraft are way too short at the moment, as if they don't do INS alignement)
• ... and probably more...

 

It would be beyond awesome, if somehow AI aircraft would wait for each other near the active runway, like they do in real life. But I'm afraid that's just one bridge too far at the moment and not all airfields have parking (holding) spots next to where you enter the runway...