Oliver Gruetzmann Posted May 1, 2020 at 11:07 PM Posted May 1, 2020 at 11:07 PM Hi, we did some testing before we went forward and obviously missed XSquawkbox. Trying to use real frequencies (like 118.825, 123.225) we found out that XSB is the only client doing some weird stuff (converting everything to xx0). The other clients most likely transmit/receive on both, buggy Vatsim and real frequencies, only XSB prevents communication. Any chance to get this changed? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Christopher Collins Posted May 2, 2020 at 08:18 AM Posted May 2, 2020 at 08:18 AM 9 hours ago, Oliver Gruetzmann said: Hi, we did some testing before we went forward and obviously missed XSquawkbox. Trying to use real frequencies (like 118.825, 123.225) we found out that XSB is the only client doing some weird stuff (converting everything to xx0). The other clients most likely transmit/receive on both, buggy Vatsim and real frequencies, only XSB prevents communication. Any chance to get this changed? As much as I appreciate your enthusiasm, Ross and I have both discussed this whilst trying to work out why on earth the frequency hack is in there (it's been in all the old versions of XSB as well, so you honestly did not test this very well). VPilot and XPilot have selective behaviour in this area dependent on what the controller advertises whereas XSB consistently uses the truncated. Until such time as VATGOV5 presents a ruling, as far as I'm concerned, the standing guidance to use the truncated frequency stands otherwise then I risk breaking the client for territories who are still following network guidance and using the truncated frequency. (Damned if I do, damned if I don't). XSquawkBox - Developer/Maintainer Please post any support related questions to the XSquawkBox support forum rather than private messaging me, thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oliver Gruetzmann Posted May 2, 2020 at 01:58 PM Author Posted May 2, 2020 at 01:58 PM 5 hours ago, Christopher Collins said: As much as I appreciate your enthusiasm, Ross and I have both discussed this whilst trying to work out why on earth the frequency hack is in there (it's been in all the old versions of XSB as well, so you honestly did not test this very well). VPilot and XPilot have selective behaviour in this area dependent on what the controller advertises whereas XSB consistently uses the truncated. Until such time as VATGOV5 presents a ruling, as far as I'm concerned, the standing guidance to use the truncated frequency stands otherwise then I risk breaking the client for territories who are still following network guidance and using the truncated frequency. (Damned if I do, damned if I don't). Yep, obviously missed XSB, but for this reason we only switched over a small part (and reverted to the old frequencies already). The only thing we keep is the ATIS frequencies to be compatible to vATIS, which doesn't allow for .x20 or .x70, but the impact of this should be very limited (if there's any at all). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bernardo Reis Posted May 13, 2021 at 11:27 PM Posted May 13, 2021 at 11:27 PM With the removal of the legacy clients, XSB is now the only one with this kind of behaviour. Are there any plans to make it work like the other clients on this area? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dhruv Kalra Posted May 30, 2021 at 10:18 PM Posted May 30, 2021 at 10:18 PM On 5/13/2021 at 6:27 PM, Bernardo Reis said: With the removal of the legacy clients, XSB is now the only one with this kind of behaviour. Are there any plans to make it work like the other clients on this area? Can we please get a definitive statement on this from the BoG (specifically from @Matt Bozwood-Davies)? The same argument has been ongoing back and forth in the AFV Discord about frequency consistency for over 4 months. Dhruv Kalra VATUSA ZMP ATM | Instructor | VATSIM Network Supervisor Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts