After AFCAD edits only one RW in use - ever!

[Guest]

Hi Guys,could anyone please offer an explanation to the following? I have edited EHAM with AFCAD, and after fiddling with some runway settings (locking them for departure or landing) the ONLY runway that is now ever used is RW24 (for departure) and opposite RW06 (for landing).ATIS for Schiphol today definitely announced RW27 for landing and departure, but ATC directed me to RW24 (again...). RW27/09 is not locked in any direction.Any ideas?Thanks!Vince

[Guest hermes]

what settings did you?

[Guest]

The only real changes I did were to close several runways in given directions:24 closed for landing06 closed for takeoff19L closed for landingand that was about it.I now believe that this has actually little to do with the problem - I have now reduced the length of RW06/24 to being less than the next runway in length (27/09), and also moved the airport "center point" (as in AFCAD) closer to RW27.This helped, in that RW27 is now the *only* runway in use regardless of wind direction :-(I still seem to be unable to have the active runway change depending on the weather. Today I plan on making all runways equal length in AFCAD and see what that does. But even if it works - that shouldn't be necessary, really!Adios!Vince

[Guest hermes]

FS choose longest runway (e.g.9/27) and then takes care of the wind to determine between 9 or 27; if 2 RWY have same length then FS choose between both.

[Guest]

Thanks for your reply.If I understand you correctly, what you're saying is this is the normal situation and it cannot be changed? And I thought it was me fiddling with AFCAD....Vince

[Guest]

Hey VinceI have in EHAM close ALL runways for takeoff and landing exceptRW24 for takeoff and RW19R for landing no fiddling with runway lenghts.I do evry week a other runway for landing and takeoff no prob.I use AFCAD 122.Even with the wind in wrong direction they take the runway i want. Jan EHAM FS2002 and NL2000 Scenery and 125 Aircrafts on EHAM

[Guest Stamatis]

"ATIS for Schiphol today definitely announced RW27 for landing and departure, but ATC directed me to RW24 (again...). RW27/09 is not locked in any direction."Regarding the ATIS bit: Whatever changes you do in AFCAD will unfortunately not affect the ATIS transmission. It is a known issue that ATIS will keep transmitting the active runway as if no changes had been made in AFCAD. However, Approach will direct you to the correct runway, based on your AFCAD modifications.Stamatis

[Guest]

Jim,do the following to get a realistic runway configuration at EHAM:close runway 06,19R,01R and 27 for TO and close 240,1L,19R and 09 for landingthen you have to make all runways the same lengthnow,you'll have two active runways,both automatically chosen depending on windif you want to make it even more realistic,you could do the above method and then make two overlays with that AFCAD file=>you won't have to make the runways of the same length and you''l have 4 active runways in use (2 for TO,2 for landing),which is normally done at EHAM in real life

[Guest Stamatis]

"then you have to make all runways the same length"Does this change also affect the touchdown zone (TDZ) for the AI aircraft landing on these runway(s)?Is it better to equate all runway lengths to the shortest or the longest runway?Stamatis

[Guest]

Stamatis,good questio,forgot to say thatyes,runway length has influence on aircraft touchdown zone=>it's best the have an average runway length.if you have e.g. a runway of 10000 feet,11000 feet and 9000 feet,take 10500 feet or something like that

[Guest]

Hi all!Thanks for all the information - I was hoping I could do without changing the lengths of the runways, but apparently I can't. I did find a common length of 11100 ft that seems to work for EHAM (no grass-landings, and for takeoff planes take the furthest runway entrance).I decided against using overlays - I'm happy with separate runways for departure and arrival, and Schiphol's configurations are pretty complex and it would be impossible (IMO) to create overlays that cover all situations anyway - primarily because in low-wind situations almost opposite runways are used (I remember seeing takeoffs at RW24 and RW09 simultaneously). I just uploaded the resulting file to the library and look forward to constructive criticism (i.e. useful comments) :-)http://ftp.avsim.com/library/sendfile.php?DownloadID=20731Cheers!Vince