I have some concerns regarding airport configurations on previous sims (mainly FSX, so is a MS one) and the way the sim handles the active runways.

I'm going to make an example with LEMD Madrid-Barajas Airport, but it can be applied to any airport with similar characteristics (feel free to post here the airport, setting or issue of your concern).

I'm making this topic mainly because, as MSF developers said, they read the forums, so I think is a way of giving those "issues" some visibility. I'm aware of maybe this is fixed. But hey! We don't know anything yet, so better say it now than when the sim is already released.

Example

LEMD counts with 4 runways, which are used in pairs for take off and landing. It also count with 2 configs, north and south. 

When active config is north, runways 32L/R are used for landing, and 36L/R for TO, and with south 18L/R for landing and 14L/R for take offs. I know, pretty obvious, but I just want to clarify it.

The issue

Until now, with FSX (not going to mention other sims so there aren't made by MS), the AI traffic uses the airport runways at their convenience. Some come over the terminal and lands on 14R and other ones take off over the 18L. I thinks there was not enough settings on the AFCAD/airport files to match it with real one. For those who may say "third parties can fix it". Well, Aerosoft tried something with their payware scenery, but an external app was needed, and you have to change the config everytime you start the game (killing the immersion), and if the wind changed it's direction during flight you ended landing on the wrong runway again, returning to the starting point.

 

So, some new settings regarding airports could be perfect for a new gen simulator. Mainly if the airport could act as one and no as a independent set of runways, and the settings could be changed depending of the airport config (set which runways are used for what depending of the available config), that could improve the sim experience a lot. 

That's all 🙂 

Edited August 2, 20196 yr by aleex

Yes I agree, the "Active" runway should be decided by the wind direction on the day and at that time.

With airports with multiple runways, if parallel (Left and Right) then one should be for Take-off and one for Landing.

For very large airports like Shiphol or Vancouver, with crossing runways, only parallel runways should be used for Take off and Landing (by default), as above.

Also, "Heavy" aircrafts should not be given a shorter runways for landing by ATC if a longer runway is available.

I often fly to Nice (LFMN) which has a lovely approach along the coast over the sea, where runway 04L is the active (when the weather is good) but it is the shorter one of the two, and it is also active for both take off and landing. This creates queues of planes waiting for take off because there is a plane on final. I tend to request 04R to land every time but it is not default.

It would be "Nice" to see a better management of runways 🙂

I am refering to FSX/FSX SE here, of course.

Generally, the take-off runway is the longest and the landing runway is the shortest.

Not sure if I can't see the actual issue, but what I do is open the AFCAD in ADE and close runways for takeoff or landing. I've tweaked several airports and the AI use the runways as per reality.

1 hour ago, threegreen said:

Not sure if I can't see the actual issue, but what I do is open the AFCAD in ADE and close runways for takeoff or landing. I've tweaked several airports and the AI use the runways as per reality.

But you can’t close only one end for takeoff. Both ends have to be the same and it’s the same for landing. More flexibility is needed.

2 hours ago, threegreen said:

Not sure if I can't see the actual issue, but what I do is open the AFCAD in ADE and close runways for takeoff or landing. I've tweaked several airports and the AI use the runways as per reality.

 

12 minutes ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

But you can’t close only one end for takeoff. Both ends have to be the same and it’s the same for landing. More flexibility is needed.

Exactly, Ray.
Perfect example of the issue is at EGCC.

Runway 23L should be open for departures and closed for arrivals. But the reciprocal, 05R, should be the opposite, closed for departures and open for arrivals.

The AI engine gets into a muddle if you try and use ADE to keep one end open and the reciprocal closed.

Would like for this limitation to be eliminated.
 

Yes - the Tower Controllers and AI need to be much more intelligent and logical - then there is the Ground Control. Hopefully MSFS will have a much more robust, realistic, and thorough approach to ATC & AI. 

24 minutes ago, pracines said:

Hopefully MSFS will have a much more robust, realistic, and thorough approach to ATC & AI.

Indeed ....... I have often thought a SODE type "conditional variable" (as SODE can switch runway lighting for different visibility & wind direction in sim) is the way forward.

A runway (each end) has / would have such properties as length, pavement capacity & approach navaids defined that can be  on / off in different winds (tailwind to "x" knots),time of day (noise abatment) visibility etc. that a developer / user could set to reflect real world flows ...... eg KLAX using opposing takeoff / arrivals in the early am & west op downwinds most of the time.

I've long wished for a .cfg file or other method to exercise absolute control over runway and approach usage.

Good info for CONUS airports can be found on the FAA ATC OIS page, under the "East/West Directory" tabs.

https://www.fly.faa.gov/ois/