AI Traffic Separation Utility

[ronzie 21]

Sitting in a plane spotting position with a TCAS in the panel, I did not see any AI parallel runway conflicts, that is some AI continued to use 30L and 30R. Anybody notice anything different?

[Guest DLM9000]

I have been observing, and most of the parallel runway approaches are fine. I think what I observed at Philly was a fluke (although it happened more than once) where a Dash-8 was on approach to RW8, and another aircraft was one approach to 9L or 9R. If the Dash crossed behind the larger aircraft, at at around 6 miles out, the Dash-8 would occasionally get backed up. I think as it crosses the plane in front of it path, if it is queried, it falls within the 20 degree heading (RW9 vs RW8) and considers it a conflict. It really wasn't a a big deal, as it works most of the time. At Newark, I just watched around 20 minutes of parallel approaches and not a single conflict. Again my observations are just feedback. The good far outweighs any problems. Most of the problems I have seen are with the way FS2004 handles / generates traffic. This is a major break through.Dennis

[Guest DLM9000]

I just tried it for you. With UT and traffic at 100%, and with the settings I used at Philly, the take off line not only grew to around 15 deep, but became gridlocked by incoming traffic. I tried changing the Minimum Separation to 7 miles and the Desired to 8. Still, after about 10 minutes, the takeoffs were about 1 to every 6 landings. FS AITS Utility is not the problem here. The problem is the unequitable use of the parallel runways. (There is a reason the airport authority build two runways.) Everyone tries to take off from RW4L. Almost all traffic land (or tries to land) on RW4L. An occassional plane will land on 4R. I opened KEWR in AFCAD (Another breakthrough for Flight Simmers) and checked the properties of both runways. RW4R is closed for takeoffs in the default scenery. I opened it up but planes still line up for 4L. So, as I did in Philly, I closed the 4L runway for landings.I set the Minimum Separation to 6 miles and the Desired Separation to 8 mile, because it takes the planes longer to get off the runway here. I set the time to 1730 local, and things flowed better than in real life. I was averaging 2 to 3 planes in the Takeoff Cue and a pretty constant feed of landing aircraft. (Maybe we sould call the tower at Newark and let them in on our plan!)I have stayed away from Newark because it was such a cluster. I think FS AITS Utility and the trick of closing one runway makes simming at one of these traffic jams tolerable.Thanks Armando, this is fun.Dennis Mitchell

[SQUAWKIDENT 3]

I'm embarassed to say I spent another 30 minutes earlier sitting at the hold for 27R at EGLL just watching them come and go!Great fun *reaches for thermos and sandwiches*Now where's my spotters reg book and pen?!Adam

[ronzie 21]

No move zone setting? How far behind was the Dash when it got shoved. The other option is the heading limitation which might be reduced to take of sidestepping if need be although 20 degrees should be just fine so as not to disturb other conflict cases.

[ronzie 21]

Until RC v4 is released, those interested might note I just tried it with RC 3.1 and there did not appear any interference. Landing at KMSP 30 L in dense traffic I noticed that AI were seperated nicely including from me. No GAs were necessary because preceding AI cleared the runway (I have a minimum sep of 4 nm which spaced us out before the no move zone. I had my TCAS set at a 20 nm range which I usually do to maintain seperation. There was some crossing traffic during the final vectoring before being established on the loc but their heading and timing was such that any potential conflict was resolved.

[Guest DLM9000]

For the Dash-8 on KHPL RW8 vs. the 737 on RW9R problem, the No Move Zone Setting was at 5 miles, and the Heading was set to 20 degrees. I was able to reduce this instance by making the No Move Zone 6 miles and reducing the heading to 12 degrees.I haven't seen a parallel problem elsewhere, and only here if the planes sequence in just right.The New York Approach airspace is circus around 6:00PM. This utility makes it flyable. Dennis

[Guest bugbee]

I love this program near the airport, very good work, but on the airway I like to use my TCAS, will I always be separated 5 miles outside of the blue circle?, like to live a little dangerous. :-) Ken

[Guest byoung]

Anybody else try this on WideFS?Any comments?Thanks!Barry

[Guest Jetfan]

RJ,I hope you do get the database converted... I would love to be able to use this in FS2002. Best of luck.Thanks,Bob

[Orlaam 306]

>I love this program near the airport, very good work, but on>the airway I like to use my TCAS, will I always be separated 5>miles outside of the blue circle?, like to live a little>dangerous. :-) >> KenTherein lies the biggest problem. A great tool for busy airport traffic, but makes TCAS in the sim null and void. I realize ATC does a great job of keeping piolts safe, AFAIK, but to have a nice TCAS feature like the new add-ons have ruins this idea for me. :(

[Ken Pryor 0]

>Anybody else try this on WideFS?>>Any comments?>>Thanks!>>Barry>I have and it seems to work just fine.KP

[ronzie 21]

Can you clarify your comment on TCAS? I use it and did not have any conflicts enroute. It is not "null and void" of you set your minimum seperation and desired seperation small anough and your no move zone at an airport just right. I still needed my TCAS and the alerts from Radar Contact 3.1 about possible conflicts. I also need it to meter my speed to assist seperation and deviate during approach vectoring if necessary.The seperation entering the airport area before the no move zone is necessary so AI is given the time to clear the runway, something FS does very poorly.

[Guest LSangiovanni LIML]

Hi Dennis.>I opened NAV3.1 to watch the AI Traffic on the networked machine.I'm going to run my copy of AITS utility on my client PC as well; but i need to install MS Net Framework before.Can you please explain how do you get AI TRAFFIC on NAV3.1 via WideFS? Iwas used to look at it during FS2002 days but never had AI TRAFFIC shown with FS9 :-(Thanks for helpingLuigi ;-)

[Guest bugbee]

Sorry, I should have read more closely, does not separate the user from the AI, next version will, but not in front of the user. Ken