utilities needed

[lfe 0]

does anybody know of any utility that could assign a specific aircraft to use a specific runway or taxiway?it's getting a bit annoying the way AI behaves in the FS world. for example, i have a very short or very narrow runway and a very long runway, yet heavy planes are often directed to the runway that is so short they even overshoot and ga planes are directed towards long runways making traffic in both ground and air heavy.ATC also cannot determine that the plane it is directing is to wide for a very narrow taxiway. it would be great if there is a utility or if FS could be modified to conform to this "common sense" (i was going to write "simple aviation rules"). it would be something like a parking designator where you can assign a ga plane, a small jet, a heavy jet. one where you could specify a runway for use with heavy jets only or for all types; or for small jets only; or limited to ga planes only; and also a taxiway that would limit a specified plane size with respect to the width of the taxiway.

[Jim Robinson 122]

If you decompile an Afcad, there's a weight limit specified for all taxiway paths and Afcad seems to set them all to "500000" (lbs). Here's an example of a 1200' grass strip robust enough to support a fully loaded B767:Haven't tried it, but possibly by decompiling the afcad with BglAnalyze9.exe, modifying the weight limits, and re-compiling with bglcomp.exe, a person could filter which traffic had access to certain runways and taxiways.Jim

[lfe 0]

wow, what a revelation!thanks. i'll try this and see if it works. i hope future afcads could be configured to realistic settings.

[Jim Robinson 122]

On the other hand there are a multitude of parameters like this throughout FS where adjusting the value has no effect. I think a lot of these were put into the program with an eye toward future development and maybe this or that particular functionality hadn't yet been developed when it was time to release it to the public. This weight limit thing could very well be one of them.I said "Afcad" in my first post, but if you decompile any of the default APxxxx.bgls they too all have this weight limit set to 500000 lbs, so it's really not an Afcad specific thing. Not to rain on your parade, but I'd guess chances are good that you will see no effect by altering this value, and Lee Swordy probably knew that when he wrote Afcad and therefore never bothered to code in a box where you could set a weight limit for taxiways and runways.Please try it though, and let us know if you have success or not. It's one of those things I have no immediate need for, and don't really want to mess with right now, but would love to file the info away in the ole gray matter for possible use in the future sometime :) .Jim

[Mike... 7]

Weight limit doesn't work. What is the airport you're working on?

[lfe 0]

for a moment i thought that would end my frustration. i was working on the rpll scenery with rwys 13-31 (2200m long x 45m wide, no ILS) and rwys 6-24 (around 3700m x 60m wide with ILS on both ends). afcad is available at avsim. please search for "RPLL 2007 version 4 (update)".i would like to limit rwy13 for GA and small jets for take-offs; and GA landing (and close rwy 31, well if take-off with no landings is possible then the better). rwy6-24 is open to all aircraft type.the problem is atc sends heavies and jets to rwy13-31 for landing and GA planes to rwy 6-24 for landings. and taxing heavy planes is annoying because atc sends them through narrow aprons with parked planes they'd hit their tails.thanks.

[RFields5421 1]

it's getting a bit annoying the way AI behaves in the FS world. for example, i have a very short or very narrow runway and a very long runway, yet heavy planes are often directed to the runway Yes it is frustrating - maybe someday the AI aircraft will have flight dynamics which use the built-in capabilities of FS.The magic number in FS2004 is 93,000 lbs empty weight of the AI aircraft.That will make the aircraft assigned to a runway longer than 7,000 ft for landing if available. It will keep the jets off the GA runway at KSNA.Unfortunately most AI aircraft use modifications of the default B737 or default Lear for their flight dynamics.And you end up with aircraft like a popular B763 @ 74,170 lbs; or a B744 @ 89,120 lbs; or an A321 @ 62,170 lbs.This also impacts takeoff runway selection / performance.The empty weight is how FS knows the difference between a light and a heavy jet.But be careful if you alter that setting - it can cause many aircraft to not fly.

[lfe 0]

i have tried reducing the runway length to 1599.9 (5249.27190 ft)and just extended the overrun area (for exit nodes). somehow, the heavies stopped landing there. anything longer than 1600 m and i still have the 777 being dircted.i can't wait until these issues has been resolved, then i'd stopped growing white hairs.

[Mike... 7]

Well, a lot of us expected better ATC and AI traffic management in FSX, but there were only marginal improvements. Apparently, if they want to improve those systems, they have to start from scratch. Well they have my blessing.

[RFields5421 1]

If the AIRCRAFT are designed correctly - they work just fine.But the majority of FS2004 AI aircraft are not designed correctly.Empty weight and engine type in the .AIR and aircraft.cfg files rae is how FS knows if an aircraft is a heavy or not. This has been known since FS2002.When an AI designer makes a B747 a two engine small jet weighing less than 90,000 lbs - it's not the ATC fault that it is assigned to land on a shorter runway.The FSX ATC system has exentsive and significant improvements over FS2004.

[RFields5421 1]

What is the empty weight of the B777 from the aircraft.cfg file?There are thresholds concerning runway length vs aircraft weight.I'd like to know your weight so I can add this threshold to the common knowledge bases.

[Mike... 7]

You are right, but I made a comment about ATC and AI management overall, not about this issue in particular.Extensive and significant? Well, I guess it depends on one's point of view, but last time I checked, nothing worth getting excited about. Is there a list somewhere?How about runway closures? Can you close just one end for landing or take-off, to get say EHAM's 36L/18R to work properly?Multiple runways in use? The star technique still has to be used, right? Okay airports (in the broadest sense of the word) don't have to be devoid of traffic in order to adapt to wind changes, but that has led to head-on traffic meating in the middle of the runway...Traffic separation? Apparently slightly better, but just deleting traffic to accomplish that is not an improvement.Are there now holding patterns? Use of SID's and STAR's?Does the sim assign a gate to the user based on a parking code now? I seem to remember the same question being asked about that in the FSX forum, as they have been about FS9 during past years.That's what I call improvements. And that part about starting from scratch came from someone on the ACES team, in response to complaints about the lack of advancements in those areas. If there were real/big improvements in FSX, then surely he wouldn't have responded with the re-write excuse.

[lfe 0]

>What is the empty weight of the B777 from the aircraft.cfg>file?>>There are thresholds concerning runway length vs aircraft>weight.>>I'd like to know your weight so I can add this threshold to>the common knowledge bases.hi,i checked and the aircraft weighed a mere 110,000 lbs. i guess the designer forgot to edit the correct empty weight. so i changed it to around 393,000lbs. surprisingly, it still lands on the shorter runway. above 400,000lbs and the plane don't show up anymore. please see attached pix. tried to follow this one.http://forums.avsim.net/user_files/177662.jpg

[lfe 0]

thanks to this forum. the empty weight is the magic word for the runway designation. now, i can control which planes can use a specific runway (well, except for on particular heavy). i also discovered that it is the solution to my other problem : of jets stopping to soon after touchdown causing a lot of holds.the "empty weight" is just the solution i have been looking for and i was facing the wrong direction all the time tinkering with toe brake scalar. almost all AIs have been designated an actual empty weight setting, but in reality planes don't really fly empty therefore adding more weight makes sense. heavier planes requires more thrust and more thrust means farther stoppage.thanks all!