FSA Beta Client

VA Crew Room and general forum area.

Moderators: Guru's, The Ministry

adysmith
VC10
VC10
Posts: 563
Joined: 12 Jun 2013, 11:43
Location: EGNH

FSA Beta Client

Post by adysmith »

Hi Guys,

I am using the beta client (v2.2.0.b8) and checking out its "features"

In order to do this I will need to deliberately incur lots of penalties just to check where they do and don't kick in.

I'm not just having a bad month!

Ady
ImageImage
Image
Old pilots never die, they just run out of runway.

Elvis Presley
Meteor
Meteor
Posts: 90
Joined: 03 Sep 2016, 18:51

Re: FSA Beta Client

Post by Elvis Presley »

Thank you for your sacrifice on our behalf. I'm not sure I personally deserve it, but thank you anyway
Jim
Image

User avatar
blanston12
Vintage Pair
Vintage Pair
Posts: 2718
Joined: 28 Jun 2004, 20:45
Location: San Francsico, California

Re: FSA Beta Client

Post by blanston12 »

After you have done your testing, mark the flights as 'needs review' on FSA and they can clear the penalties.
Joe Cusick,

Image
I am serious, and don't call me Shirley.

adysmith
VC10
VC10
Posts: 563
Joined: 12 Jun 2013, 11:43
Location: EGNH

Re: FSA Beta Client

Post by adysmith »

Thanks Joe, tried out the hard landing yesterday :agree:
ImageImage
Image
Old pilots never die, they just run out of runway.

User avatar
DaveB
The Ministry
Posts: 30457
Joined: 17 Jun 2004, 20:46
Location: Pelsall, West Mids, UK
Contact:

Re: FSA Beta Client

Post by DaveB »

Thinking back on beta's.. I think I only ever flew with the very latest version. Looking at my HD.. I've literally 10's of client downloads :-O It's always better to use the very latest beta and there should be (at least there was) a tickbox on the client to inform you of any new release. You really shouldn't have to try and force errors and risk penalties just to see if the fixes work. Any that don't will have undoubtedly been reported at FSA :)

ATB
DaveB B)smk
ImageImage
Old sailors never die.. they just smell that way!

User avatar
Globitz
Comet
Comet
Posts: 198
Joined: 29 Jun 2004, 18:01
Location: Sipson AKA EGLL 27R (if they get their way......)

Re: FSA Beta Client

Post by Globitz »

David,

They appear to be adding new penalties such as for a Hard landing and no Navigation lights etc.
Personally I think that this is going too far, I fly for enjoyment and stress relief after finishing a days work and would hate for my hobby to feel more like a job with rules and restrictions.

I too have incurred a penalty for a hard landing under the beta and have requested the removal of the penalty. However I do believe that FSAirlines asking for more people to test the beta is a good idea as more comments will hopefully be made about improvements and changes to the client and structure that may otherwise go unheard.

Just my two pen north.

Cheers

Andy
Cheers

Andy

They did give a million monkeys a million typewriters. They call it the internet!
ImageImage

User avatar
DaveB
The Ministry
Posts: 30457
Joined: 17 Jun 2004, 20:46
Location: Pelsall, West Mids, UK
Contact:

Re: FSA Beta Client

Post by DaveB »

Hi Andy :hello:

If you're happy with the stable client.. then stick with it mate. I honestly don't think a hard landing should incur a penalty for the sake of it as this is already reflected in the airframe life by accelerating the onset of a maint period. We actually did all these things and more in our own client years ago (remember when FSA threatened to charge for membership!!) and it was a giggle for a while but fortunately.. FSA changed their policy at the 11th hour. I flew the FSA betas as I felt bound to do so being an active 'flying' CEO but there's never been a requirement for all pilots to do so. Sometimes, there are advantages in doing so but these can also be offset by unwarranted restrictions.
ATB
DaveB B)smk
ImageImage
Old sailors never die.. they just smell that way!

JoeFremont
Chipmunk
Chipmunk
Posts: 3
Joined: 07 Jun 2017, 07:30

Re: FSA Beta Client

Post by JoeFremont »

The problem with beta clients is that someday they become the stable client.
I have been trying to get this client released and has been taking way too long, but I hope to get it finished soon.
I tried to make all the penalties more forgiving, even gave the option to turn off the minor penalties all together, but wanted to add a few that were more meaningful, and based on suggestions we received on the forum there are the three new ones, which are navigation lights, hard landing and low altitude. I see lots of comments on how some pilots hate this penalty or the other. I was concerned that I was not getting a good sample of opinion from the forum so I created a survey for all pilots that has been on the fsa site for about a week now, I have not published the results yet but based on what I can see the hard landing and navigation lights are the most popular, low altitude is not as popular, but in all cases, for each penalty they answered 'I like it the way it is, or it could be made more strict' more often than they answered 'I don't like it and I think it should be removed.'. Which to be honest, does not help me much. I know I can't please everyone but I don't feel I am making anyone happy, and despite all my efforts usership of the site keep decreasing, and I quite don't know what to do.

User avatar
DaveB
The Ministry
Posts: 30457
Joined: 17 Jun 2004, 20:46
Location: Pelsall, West Mids, UK
Contact:

Re: FSA Beta Client

Post by DaveB »

Hiya Joe :hello:

You've been doing this long enough to know you're never going to please everyone.. as frustrating as that is :lol:

Nav lights is a no brainer (as in red green and whites). Not so sure about beacons and strobes though. Some of our old fleets didn't have beacons and even the newer ones didn't have strobes but R/G/W's.. yup. All pilots should have them on as a matter of course and it's fair game to get a penalty for failing to do so.

Low level..
Another no brainer as far as I'm concerned. Looking at the reasons for this one at FSA, I'm staggered that some airlines will try and 'fake' flights so if this catches them out.. fairy snuff. We only have one flight that may struggle a little.. Westray-Papa Westray (the worlds shortest scheduled flight) but I think a thousand feet is still do-able.

Heavy Landing..
I'm not sure how I'd like to handle this one beyond accelerated airframe life. I used to aim for as close to zero as possible on every flight and I'm sure most pilots do but every now and again.. it can go pear shaped. Perhaps anything above -500fpm which, in the RW would be a cause for concern, might force the aircraft into an immediate A check? This would act as a deterrent to pilots who regularly throw their aircraft at the deck with impunity. Dare I add a penalty against the airline too as passengers wouldn't be happy at either a) the hard landing and/or b) an enforced 24hr stop-over while the A check is done?

I honestly don't know about this one. The last thing you want is unhappy pilots. Airlines don't want a drop in revenue and FSA doesn't want a fall in users. How to juggle it to please most will be the difficult thing.
ATB
DaveB B)smk
ImageImage
Old sailors never die.. they just smell that way!

JoeFremont
Chipmunk
Chipmunk
Posts: 3
Joined: 07 Jun 2017, 07:30

Re: FSA Beta Client

Post by JoeFremont »

Hi Dave, thanks for you kind words. I know I am not going to please everyone, sometimes though it would be nice think I have pleased somebody. Here are some thoughts on the penalties:

Navigation lights: I also thought it would be a no brainer, something simple to replace the parking brake penalty that was removed, turn them on and forget about them. There are different times when the beacon, strobe and nav lights should be on but to keep it simple the client just requires one of them. But as some have correctly pointed out that there are times you are allowed to turn them off, if leaving them on would cause a safety hazard, and some older aircraft are not equipped with them. We could say you have to have them on while on the ground and you can turn them off for an hour during flight, but I am really not that attached to it so I may just drop it all together.

Low Altitude: According to the survey one of the least popular but as you pointed out it was done to address a real abuse of the system. But then we also made a mod to the client that if you don't fly a certain distance or climb to a minimum altitude the client just won't record the flight. Of the 15000+ flights with the beta client, this penalty has triggered 204 times. Some options I am considering are; drop the penalty, see if I can modify it to not trigger over water, expand circles around the destination and arrival airport where it does not trigger, clear the penalty if the crash or wrong airport penalties trigger.

Hard landings: According to the survey, one of the most popular. About 700 flights have triggered this penalty. I personally would be more annoyed by taking the AC away for 24 hours than getting the 5% deduction, but then I have never prided myself a 100% life time rating. With a 500+ fps landing its likely that some of the passengers will require medical attention which is very bad press for the airline. Its also a way to catch those pilots who if they had crash detection turned on would have crashed instead. Right now I am reluctant to change it, increasing the threshold will make it meaningless. We added a warning for exceeding the landing weight, which does cause additional damage to the AC, but exceeding the landing weight would not normally injure passengers.

Post Reply