Well, taking it back to the topic's main question (for support reasons):Everything works better now with the use of some AFCADs, AIsmooth and knowledge about how RC really works and handles AI. It's now more clear to me, and that reflects in the way I fly and in what I expect from the ATC and RC4.I appreciate the atention and tips I received from everyone. It really helped!The only issue that still remains is the conflicting weather, mostly related to Winds, Temperature, sometimes cloud altitude and Dewpoint. It's not totally diferent from the weather I get from FSX but there are some discrepancies. Is it common to use FS own weather (real time) and RC4?

Well, taking it back to the topic's main question (for support reasons):Everything works better now with the use of some AFCADs, AIsmooth and knowledge about how RC really works and handles AI. It's now more clear to me, and that reflects in the way I fly and in what I expect from the ATC and RC4.I appreciate the atention and tips I received from everyone. It really helped!The only issue that still remains is the conflicting weather, mostly related to Winds, Temperature, sometimes cloud altitude and Dewpoint. It's not totally diferent from the weather I get from FSX but there are some discrepancies. Is it common to use FS own weather (real time) and RC4?

are you running asa? i can't remember. if so, from what i've gathered, it takes longer for asa to set the weather, than say the native fsx weather. given this information, then the weather in fs/rc will be different than what asa says it is.but, keep in mind, the weather in fs, is what you are flying in. you aren't flying in weather that another app is reporting - but hasn't set in fs.jd

You can listen to SFO radio scanners here when you have NNE and E winds of greater than 10 knots or so:http://www.liveatc.net/search/?icao=sfoCurrent activity and weather is here:http://flightaware.com/live/airport/KSFOThe diagram and IFR bundle is here:http://flightaware.com/resources/airport/KSFO/ALL/all/pdfThis note appears on DPs see attached.Since there is "rapidly rising terrain from the south" I would suspect that is the reason for no IFR approaches to the 01 runways due to their length and it would be a steep approach. If terrain is an obstacle up to 12 knot tail wind components may be acceptable. RC will assign active AI direction first. The airport is at 13 feet is on three sides in a bit of a hole. You can see the DPs and STARs are using corridors to the N, E, and S to avoid terrain.So I would expect no landings on 01L/R except by visual circle-to-land with smaller aircraft. Take-offs would be limited to lighter gross weight aircraft because of shorter runway length. 1L/R is described in DPs.Any more explanation would be too long. Just look at the DPs and STARs for descriptions and MSA in the legs, and the IAPs for terrain clues including noting performance requirements.

--------------------snip--------------I still seem to get strange goings on at SFO.I'm not there very often in real life but do they ever use 10L/R for landings and take offs and 01 L/R for landings?There are some RNAV/SID procedures for 10L/R in the books I have.

Thanks for all that Ron.I do have all the current charts for KSFO and have flown in there a few times.I have been in the jump seat when an approach to 19L had to be abandoned due to a/c taking off from 28.I do listen to liveatc occasionally.I have also stayed at the hotel which overlooks the airport.I've seen many 757 departures from 01L at the same time as arrivals on 28L/R.Never an arrival or departure on 10L/R.I was just curious as to how RC handles it.The terrain is very tricky.The AI take the lead and RC follows but sometimes it's not right.It must be a difficult model but I understand what is happening.

All I can say is look forward to RC5 handling "tricky terrain" much better as defined in published plates.Remember that RC4 has the IAP option selectable via the extended menu item 9 after acknowledging the approach runway assignment and first vector which will let you navigate on your own to follow charts and that portion of your FMC legs if you edit the LEGS page. For SFO though most STARs suggest vectoring to the airport pattern or IAF. I didn't look at the RNAV plates.RC4 does look at what runways AI are using and if they are active and constant when RC approach assigns the runway then it should match. If FS has aircraft landing on 1 L/R then that's what approach will assign. FS itself will avoid using it unless there is a high wind and should not at all in IMC and approaches are defined in the FS scenery if the scenery correctly does not have an ILS for that pair. (You can get this information from the new freeware ADE9X airport editor in its approach mode.) RC does not follow the AI path in the pattern but uses the patterns described in the RC43 manual (available from jdtllc.com) which are fairly standard.If no AI are active then RC will use its normal weather and runway facility assignments.jd will have to answer if RC4 pays attention to runway restrictions such as closed for landing. RC5 will.FS9 and I believe that FSX AI do not pay attention to restricted runway use based on one end only although there have been postings saying this is not correct. I know AI will not use a runway if the properties at both ends match.All other runways should not be a problem.

I should have said I always use the published procedures when I do IFR flights in FS9.I have a large collection of plates and use Navigraph's excellent product.I hardly ever take vectors although I have done so out of curiosity to see how they are handled compared to the real thing.I concoct my own approaches when the STARS in the FMC leave you needing vectors.Based on what I know of real world operations.