Custom profile adding luggage weight out of nowhere

From SimBrief: Saved Airframes - ToLiss - X-Plane.Org Forum

I always used the top link to make sure my shares were not tied with my account (probably most of the airframes were created before the bottom link existed). Most of the airframes were also created before the split (passenger and separate luggage weight).

Example link:

https://www.simbrief.com/system/dispatch.php?sharefleet=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

.
For the above, simBrief adds 55kg of luggage weight out of thin air, for a total of 155kg (where it really should be 100 + 0 for 100kg total).

The original airframe used to share the above (I used an alternate account to avoid cluttering my main account’s airframe list) still has the correct weights (100kg passenger, 0kg luggage).

The problem being, most of the links in that topic have not been edited in years, so unless the x-plane.org forum software somehow changed them, it seems simBrief may have accidentally changed something on its end?

Regards,

Tim

1 Like

Other example: SimBrief: Saved Airframes - General Discussion - X-Pilot

That one was not edited since May 2020, almost two years before the baggage weight separation was introduced (the ToLiSS topic was edited recently, but only to add new airframes rather than modify previously-shared ones).

Because the IXEG 7347 Classic’s custom load manager simply has you set ZFW and CG manually, I retained the default simBrief passenger weight of 230lbs total when creating/sharing the corresponding airframes. But when using the links in said topic, I now get 285lbs (230 + 55) instead.

Regards,

Tim

Same issue here SimBrief: Saved Airframes - 320 Ultimate by Flight Factor - X-Plane.Org Forum (84 → 84 + 55), here SimBrief: Saved Airframe - A350 by FlightFactor - X-Plane.Org Forum (edited in december 2020 to bump passenger weight to 120kg → 120 + 55), here SimBrief: Saved Airframes - Boeing 757 v2 Professional - X-Plane.Org Forum and here SimBrief: Saved Airframes - Boeing 767 Professional - X-Plane.Org Forum (210 → 210 + 55 lbs) etc. etc.

Regards,

Tim

Basically, it looks like for airframes created before the split, the parser is attempting to automatically map the total passenger weight into passenger + baggage, but:

  • is adding 55 units to the total without subtracting it from the passenger weight, incorrectly increasing the actual pax + bag weight
  • using 55 units unconditionally (where it should be 25 for metric airframes)

In addition, even if both the above were fixed, I think it would still be preferable to not attempt to automatically split the weights.

Many addons’ custom load manager have e.g a slider or input box for passengers where the luggage weight is included and a separate slider for freight specifically.

For those addons, bag weight must be set to 0 otherwise the figures in the loadsheet and/or the OFP cannot be used as a reference for their custom load manager (because the cargo figure then includes some baggage weight and cannot be loaded as freight, requiring instead that the pilot compute how much to subtract from the cargo figure manually based on passenger count).

So, when importing older airframes where there is no pax/bag split yet, it may be more useful to place all the weight in the passenger and none in the bags (except perhaps with an exception when the weight is exactly the same as the default of 230lb or 104kg)? For some reason I think this has come up before, but cannot remember where or when.

Regards,

Tim

Thanks Tim, I will implement the above logic in the next version (no ETA quite yet though).

Best regards,

1 Like

This should now be fixed in version 2.14.0.

Cheers,

Thanks! Appears to work everywhere unless I missed something.

Regards,

Tim

This topic was automatically closed after 22 days. New replies are no longer allowed.