I am curious if there is a way for the software to select the most appropriate runway based on the gate the aircraft is located at. I am tired of having to taxi sometimes 10-15 min around the airport when there is a runway within a few minute taxi. I usually have to request a different runway based on where I am at, but I am mainly asking about AI. At airports with multiple runways, it seems that VOX always chooses to either send AI to the furthest away, like at KDFW (35R) for takeoff or like at LAX when the want all aircraft to take off 25R and everything on the north side has to taxi around the airport. Both these airports I am using FSDT and when I use the default ATC, it works properly sending aircraft to appropriate runways. I rarely get multiple runway ops also, which I would like to change. I really don't want to have to edit the AFCAD if possible because I am not very familiar with ADE software. I haven't seen any settings that would help fix this either. I sure wish the developer would put a little more effort into checking out some improvements to their software as well as answering requests from users. 

That's one of the more interesting questions that's been asked here and I've also wondered about that myself. What I have noticed it that VOXATC seems to give departing and landing AI aircraft some kind of precedence when taxiing and that the user's aircraft gets routed around to avoid other ground aircraft traffic. I've also wondered whether setting too high an AI traffic level exacerbates this problem. And the more complex that the taxiway network is, the more circuitous the taxi route is. It doesn't happen at all airports under all conditions, so either its a flaw in the logic or as things get too busy, the AI is too cautious about routing. One experiment would be to turn the AI traffic to 0% and see if that makes a difference. 

As an aside, the actual geometry of the taxiway network could have flaws and that may be the reason for the wayward routing, at least in some circumstances. As I wrote in another thread I've redone a lot of the bigger North American stock airports for personal use with ADE. I originally just wanted to fix gate numbers, sizes and airline codes but I got carried away and started fixing overlapping and broken taxiway links, eliminating closed runways and duplicate taxiway designators.

I believe what you see with runway assignment is not what vox or any other traffic engine calculates but what the sim itself calculates / scores (& which then is used by vox to determine taxi paths .. to/from runway/gate)

the "scoring" formulae to my knowledge has never been published by fsx/p3d but is "thought" by the likes of fsdeveloper to account for weather / navaids / length & a/c weight etc. .....& that the highest score is what you see.

2 hours ago, vadriver said:

the "scoring" formulae to my knowledge has never been published by fsx/p3d but is "thought" by the likes of fsdeveloper to account for weather / navaids / length & a/c weight etc. .....& that the highest score is what you see.

In addition, would be very surprised if the formulae did not take into account a simulator-based flight plan (.pln in FSX) when one has been constructed in the sim, or saved from say the Reality XP GPS gauges and then loaded into the simulator.  i.e. direction of departure based on plan. 

I recall that the subLogic ATP:Flight Assignment simulator of the early 1990's clearly considered a flight plan in runway assignement for departure, as well as for arrival, at airports with multiple live runways such as KJFK, KATL, KORD, KLAX, KDFW, etc. Of course that sim did not factor in gate assignment.

Obviously if no sim-based flight plan is in play then it could not consider it.  Just have to believe if one is live that it would be considered.

frank

my suspicions are that the scoring is about AI not one's own aircraft .... although you may be correct.

I wish LM would at least provide some details of the formulae (P3DV4 is different to FSX from observation) to help one better forecast / guess the runway in use 30 minutes after needing a clearance & receiving an atis ??

Interestingly the vox atis aligns well with my thinking on which runway is assigned & used by AI at the time .....a lot more accurately than activesky does.

5 minutes ago, vadriver said:

I wish LM would at least provide some details of the formulae (P3DV4 is different to FSX from observation) to help one better forecast / guess the runway in use 30 minutes after needing a clearance & receiving an atis ??

Upon some additional thought, find it interesting that for approach a different runway can be requested! Why not on takeoff and departure?

 

frank

more than interesting i suggest ... inconsistent is a better word in my mind.

just as on approach, it can be well over 20 minutes from sid clearance to take-off & there can be weather changes ....

checking the TAF might suggest so etc ... most of the time a weather change happens, you'll notice AI using a different runway to your cleared before any other clue.

1 hour ago, fppilot said:

Upon some additional thought, find it interesting that for approach a different runway can be requested! Why not on takeoff and departure?

 

If you’re talking about VOX, you can request a different runway. All you have to do is get your tax clearance and then after you read back the original, just as for “callsign request taxi to runway xx”. That works for me almost every time as long as it lines up with weather. 

22 minutes ago, b757 said:

If you’re talking about VOX, you can request a different runway. All you have to do is get your tax clearance and then after you read back the original, just as for “callsign request taxi to runway xx”. That works for me almost every time as long as it lines up with weather. 

No. Comment was in regard to logic embedded in the the native simulator(s) themselves.

Ah ok. I feel like there is so little we actually know or can do to the default ATC because of the coding. I wish we could just have software that replicated real world ops without all the hassles. 

10 minutes ago, b757 said:

...... I wish we could just have software that replicated real world ops without all the hassles. 

my fingers are crossed that vox7 / utbridge / utlive will be the upgrade I / we are looking for ...... but nothing but LM telling us the "scoring" formulae will help us "forecast" what will be assigned for what weather when we finally take-off / touch-down.

unless of course if an atc developer wants to talk to activesky about future metars (in historic mode) being fed to /for an atc clearance call based on the scoring.