Hi Alberto I am afraid you are messing things up a bit.What is this word "and" doing in the code?If you want the 2 conditions to be true you have to use&& where the "and" is now!For what aircraft are you making this? 51 feet might be a little late.It would be a good idea to download some aircraft that have an autoland and study the gauges. Roelof>This is my code now:>>>>>> > > (A:RADIO_HEIGHT,foot) 51 <>(A:AUTOPILOT_AIRSPEED_HOLD,bool) and> if{ (>K:AP_PANEL_SPEED_HOLD) }> > >>>>Sadly It does not work (and don't know why)>Thanks for your Answers>>Helio Alberto Regalado Moreira

Roelof,>What is this word "and" doing in the code?>If you want the 2 conditions to be true you have to use>amp;amp; where the "and" is now!Forget about amp;amp; :-) It is much easier to use "and" in boolean comparisons, as well as "or" instead of ||. Both syntax work the same in FS XML.Tom

>Forget about amp;amp; :-) It is much easier to use "and" in>boolean comparisons, as well as "or" instead of ||. Both>syntax work the same in FS XML.>>TomI'll take your word for it Tom. Even better, I'll test it!How come that I have never seen it being used in XML? I have looked at a lot of XML code by now. Even in A. Bartels list there is no mentioning of it.Is the whole boolean logic applicable? Roelof

>>>Forget about amp;amp; :-) It is much easier to use "and" in>>boolean comparisons, as well as "or" instead of ||. Both>>syntax work the same in FS XML.>>>>Tom>>I'll take your word for it Tom. Even better, I'll test it!>How come that I have never seen it being used in XML? I have>looked at a lot of XML code by now. Even in A. Bartels list>there is no mentioning of it.>>Is the whole boolean logic applicable? >>Roelof>>Actually wasn't me who discovered that; it was mentioned in a thread on this forum by Jan, or Paul (pve), or someone else (I can't remember more details,to be honest)They seem to work exactly the same as amp;amp, and ||, full applicable to boolean comparisons but I think much easier to write.Tom