D-48071

Community-Unable to Generate Combined Run Report

Description

We have identified an issue where users are not able to generate a combined run report on customers other than DAL. The issue occurs when the system attempts to locate a report template that is only available for DAL, which prevents the generation of reports for other customers.

Resolution Details 

To resolve this issue, we implemented a check to verify whether Short Call is enabled for the customer during the generation of the combined report.

D-48305

Community-Running out of DB connections on shared servers

Description

We resolved an issue where excessive database connections were being pooled in PBS. Previously, each running application (such as UI, ClassBid, and Scheduler) would create a separate pool with a maximum of 1000 connections per ALC. This leads to a high number of sleeping connections. This issue is now resolved.

Resolution Details

To address this, we added a new parameter called MAX_DB_CONN in /navtech/parm/NAVNWSParams.xml, which sets the maximum connection pool size. This parameter can be configured globally or per ALC, with a default value of 1000 if not set.

D-48125

Community (ASA/ASAP)- Adding Prefer Off Ordering Issue

Description

We resolved an issue where adding a Prefer Off preference to a bid group does not insert the preference in the correct order. Instead of being placed at the intended position, “Prefer Off” is always added to the top of the group. The issue is caused by inappropriate indexation.

Example

When adding a “Prefer Off” preference to line 3 using the "insert below" option from the “Avoid” pairing bid preference (which is at line 8, previously line 7 before the “Prefer Off” was applied), the insertion does not respect the correct ordering. 

Resolution Details

To resolve this issue, we implemented new functions (getFirstInsertIndex and getLastInsertIndex in WebApp/js/services/bidsservice.js) that introduce a safer approach to bidline indexing. This correct indexing ensures that the "Prefer Off" line is now added in the appropriate order within the bid group.

D-47906

Community (reported by ASA/P) - Editing "Prefer Off and AVOID" JUMPS the added order of Award

Description

We resolved an issue where editing existing negative bids, such as “Prefer Off” or “Avoid,” causes these lines to jump above the Award statement when positioned below it.

Example

After editing an “Avoid” line at line 12 and modifying line 9 to a specific range, the Prefer Off line does not correctly move above the Award statement.

Similarly, if ABQ is added as a landing requirement to line 11 causes the Avoid line at line 12 to jump above line 11.

Resolution Details

To resolve this issue, we implemented changes in the bidline indexing logic within ClassBid: bidsservice.js, which corrects the unexpected movement of bidlines after editing. Furthermore, these changes ensure that the “Prefer Off” preference no longer changes its position after posting, maintaining consistent and expected ordering.

D-48252

JBU-Inflight CM's cannot submit RCL Reserve bid groups

Description

An issue where the Award Reserve function for the RCL Reserve Bid Group does not work, preventing successful submission is now resolved. 

Note: This occurs regardless of the method used.

Resolution Details

This issue is fixed by implementing several small changes in multiple places:

• We introduced a separate restriction to ensure that if there is more than one bidder-entered “Award Reserve” (without Reduced Credit Line), then all except the last one must have “Max Above.”
• Similarly, a separate restriction is introduced if there is more than one bidder-entered “Award Reserve (Reduced Credit Line),” then all except the last one must also have “Max Above.”

D-48208

SCX- Enable Add Bid Mode Error

Description

We resolved an issue where the WebApp is creating bidlines with the PairingNumberStartOnDates property despite not being defined in the SCX configuration, which only has the PairingNumberCheckInDates property. This issue causes validation failures during bid submission.

Example: Error message

Resolution Details

To resolve this issue, we implemented a fix that adds logic to prevent the creation of bidlines with PairingNumberStartOnDates when it is not configured, ensuring smooth validation and bid processing.

D-48534

[Community] Ordering problems related to bid lines

Description

We identified multiple issues related to D-48125, including problems previously presented in D-48462 and D-48538. The issue related to D-48125 has been reverted in the develop unified branch and versions 25.3 and 25.5, and now require retesting.

Additionally, we identified an issue in the Training tab where the system-generated “Award Training” line can be deleted, preventing the submission of bid lines. This problem is not reproducible in the Pairing or Default tabs.

This issue is like the issue fixed in D-48462 for the Pairing tab as part of D-48125. In addition, the problem also involves incorrect placement when adding a “Prefer Off” preference between SC lines.

Example: Error message

Resolution Details

For SCX, we resolved an issue where the configuration defines PairingNumberCheckInDates but not PairingNumberStartOnDates, causing WebApp to create bidlines with PairingNumberStartOnDates that fail during validation. We added logic to prevent this from occurring, ensuring smooth validation and processing.

D-48672

[Community] Reserve Bid Group-Set Condition without set precedence is going on the bottom of the Reserve Bid Group

Description                    

We resolved an issue where a Set Condition without a set precedence is placed at the bottom of the Reserve Bid Group, along with Award Reserve lines which also do not appear to have a defined precedence.

Based on the configuration file, the “Consecutive Days Off in a Row” condition does not have a precedence set. Please see the image below as reference.

Resolution Details

To resolve this issue, if the precedence of the added line matches existing lines, we enforce usage logic based on the currently selected line and the insert above/below state (to correctly determine the placement of the new line).

D-47536

DAL/ASA/Community-Pairings Tab > Filter for Duty on > If Not, Every > Date List

Description

We resolved an issue in the Pairings Tab filter for “Duty On > If Not, Every > Date List,” where the filtering logic does not correctly evaluate pairings. 

Example

Delta Pilot 028382200 in BOS330A. Evaluated May 2025 bid package for cases of “IF/IF NOT, ANY, and EVERY” for Duty On the date of 14 May. There are 6 trips operating 13 times with duty on the 14th. Note: Every trip that operates on the 14th also operates on at least one other date, which drives the table below.

There are 42 pairings in the bid package.

In the above example A021 and A022 are not returned as meeting the criteria IF NOT EVERY Duty on May 14, 2025.

Resolution Details

To resolve this issue, we updated the filtering logic to correctly distinguish between the “IF NOT EVERY” and “IF EVERY” options. Previously, both options behaved the same way, causing “IF NOT EVERY” to not correctly filter out results it shouldn’t. This change ensures that each option now functions as intended, producing the correct filtering behavior.

D-47745

QXE - Historical File Loading Issue

Description

We identified an issue where Horizon Airlines can not load their historical file, causing problems on their end.

Revert the fix made for SCX on other ALCs. 

Resolution Details

We resolved this issue through a Code change, therefore reverting the fix made for SCX only for QXE, since SCX is on a newer version of AIMS.

D-48670

[Community] Reserve Bid Group - Set Condition "Max Above" with precedence 2 (forced to extreme top) is not added on top when Prefer Off is first line

Description

We have identified an issue where the Set Condition “Max Above” with precedence 2 (forced to extreme top) is not added at the top when “Prefer Off” is the first line. While it can be manually moved to the top, the navigation arrows then become blocked, preventing it from being moved down and “Prefer Off” can not be moved back above the Set Condition.

Note: Set Conditions for different ALCs may have varying precedence values and behaviors.

For DAL, the precedence value has been updated to 3.

Resolution Details

We resolved this issue by removing faulty logic that inserts a new bid line with some precedence value (such as “Set Condition Max Above,” though it also applies to other bid lines with some set precedence) below a “Prefer Off” bid line. The updated logic now places the inserted/pasted bid line according to its precedence value first, and only continues searching for the proper location after checking the precedence.

D-48661

[Community] Reserve Bid Group lines ordering issues

Description                                                                                

During testing of D-48534, we discovered that the ordering logic for bid lines in the Reserve Bid Group needs to be re-implemented and fixed.

The following three issues were identified:

• A “Prefer Off” line can not be inserted above a “Set Condition” placed in the first row of the Reserve Bid Group.
• An “Award Reserve” line can not be inserted above a “Set Condition” placed in the first row of the Reserve Bid Group.
• When a Set Condition (without a set precedence) is cut and pasted after the last line of the Reserve Bid Group, it is pasted under “Prefer Off” if it exists in Reserve Bid Group.

Resolution Details

We resolved this issue by inserting a new bid line above the selected bid line. If the new line has no set precedence, or if its precedence matches that of existing lines, it is now allowed to be inserted above. In addition, we removed the logic that checks for a “Prefer Off” line, which previously caused the new line to be inserted in the middle instead of at the end.