Is it possible using afcad2 to inhibit, on a single runway airport (lirq, 05-23), landing on rwy 23 and take-off from rwy 05?I open afcad, list the runway, select 5/23 and click properties. On reciprocal end sub-menu, designator 23, I check closed for landing. On base end, designator 05, I check closed for take-off. I save the file. When fs9 start, it generates news file... but on lirq nothing happens, my ultimate traffic ai (when I force proper wind conditions) lands on rwy 23 and take-off from rwy 05. I need some help. Where is my mistake?Igor

I would like an answer to this also. I've had some success with some airports with parallel runways where I've closed one set for landing and the other for takeoffs. Sometimes it works, like Newark (KWER) and other times the AI seems to ignore what I've done (KDEN). When it works it really helps the traffic flow problem. Mike

Ok, thanks.Maybe someone has an answer ...igor

I am no expert on AFCAD2, although i do use it. I have heard in other forums that it is very difficult to specify runways for take off/landing, because of the way FS9 handles AI traffic. I dont think you are doing anything wrong with the changes you have made, it is simply a case that they might not work.Check out the "Ultimate Traffic" forums, John Goodwin there is very knowlegable. Also do a search in the UT forums as this very point has come more than once.Peter

>Is it possible using afcad2 to inhibit, on a single runway>airport (lirq, 05-23), landing on rwy 23 and take-off from rwy>05?>I open afcad, list the runway, select 5/23 and click>properties. On reciprocal end sub-menu, designator 23, I check>closed for landing. On base end, designator 05, I check closed>for take-off. I save the file. When fs9 start, it generates>news file... but on lirq nothing happens, my ultimate traffic>ai (when I force proper wind conditions) lands on rwy 23 and>take-off from rwy 05. >I need some help. Where is my mistake?>>IgorAs you can see these settings are not absolute. FS also deterimes if there is an alternative runway within wind condtions. For example if there was another runway say 7/25 which 7 was open for takeoff and 25 was open for landing, than FS would probably select those instead. Wihout a suitable alternative though, FS will give higher priority to wind conditions for landing and ignore these settings.

Go to the PAI forum on flightsimmer.com. There is a subforum for AFCAD.Assuming you are using FS9 and AFCAD2.21, you may have to create a "fake" runway parallel to the existing one that is short and has no start points so FS thinks there are parallels. Search out the STAR or cross runway method. There are pros and cons if using FS ATC in that the fake runways show up in the ATC landing menus.The parallel must be within three degrees.Over at projectai.com perhaps there is an AFCAD2 download available that might have a solution.If you only have the default AFCAD, you can try duplicating with the save as function. Make sure there is only one afcad besides the default. Sometimes changes in other than default afcads are respected.

select 5/23 and click properties. On reciprocal end sub-menu, designator 23, I check closed for landing. On base end, designator 05, I check closed for take-off.This will not work in FS2004. Most of the time both ends of a single runway have to be set the same - either open or closed. Otherwise FS sees it as an error in the AFCAD file and reverts to the default airport setting.You can close a runway for takeoff on both ends almost anywhere in FS2004 and that will work.There is a way to close one end of a runway to takeoffs and landings - so you could have all landings on Rwy 23 and all takeoffs on Rwy 23 - with no landings or takeoffs on Rwy 5.Landing is a little trickier. You cannot close for landing either end of the only runway with an instrument approach procedure written into the airport database. If Flight Simulator sees this - it will consider your AFCAD an error and ignore it. However, runways with two localizers seem to have an issue and force most traffic onto a second parallel runway.You might ask why would Lee include the options to open and close runway ends differently in AFCAD. Those values / options existed in FS2002 and the markers exist in the XML based code for FS2004.It is the implementation which is different in FS2004 due to the inclusion of real world approach data.We are hoping the markers/ runway end options are a setting which Microsoft will implement in FSX.

I kind of gave up on this at PHNL. I have 8R open takeoff closed landing and 26L open/open. 8L closed takeoff open landing and 26R closed/closed. ATC insists on using 26R for landing when winds require and no options available. With or without Jim Vile's Active ILS approaches. The 4/22's are both closed/closed on both ends.scott s..

Ok, I think it's better to hope in FSX ...igor