Hello,Today I wanted to use RC4 and setup a flight from KMIA (fly tampa version) to KORD for PAC 56... Route was as followsWINCO J73 LAL CTY J91 ATL J89 KURTZ VHP OKK OKK1now 1st problem I kept running into was that RC4 doesnt have the right runway information... my options were runways that doesnt even exist in KMIA (such as 27R,L) and all the runway lengths were wrong...i got to take off from runway 12 which is where all the planes were taking off from, and once I did i was being told that I was off course and to turn to 140 when i'm supposed to be heading 320... I redid the flight 3 times and all 3 times were the same thing... I rebuilt the scenery for RC4 couple of times and that didnt fix it either... lastly I MADE sure that i was loading up the correct FPL for RC4 which I was....so gents, what just ahppened?

I'd also like to add I have www.fs-freeflow.com 's FL scenery

did you rebuild the rc scenery database? i only know about the runways that are in your scenery files. if you have special ones, then you have to tell me about them, by running thre rebuildjd

yes, as I have said earlier I did it couple of times with no luck... :(

i'm guessing there is a scenery conflict somewhere. maybe one of the scenery gurus can jump in here.jd

Regarding the runway layout, there has been enough drift perhaps in the mag variation to cause some of the runways to be renumbered. The current real world chart is here:http://naco.faa.gov/d-tpp/0609/00257AD.PDFThe runway numbering in the default AFCAD has for the real runways 9/27 which was true when the AFCAD was created and the magnetic variation was different. Note the true headings in the chart, the variation, and the rate of change. Today they are numbered 8/26. The deafault AFCAD runway lengths match those of today's chart within 07 feet.Since I do not have the Fly Tampa AFCAD for MIA, I can't compare it but it should be similat to the chart and depending on the year it was created the runways in question would be 9/27 or 8/26. 12/30 did not change.Your first waypoint is 56 nm out at a heading of 320 as you state. This means if you did not alter your departure options that you would get vectors as best determined by RC. When cleared for take-off before you rolled you might have been given an initial heading to take as soon as you were a couple of hundred feet AGL. If you did not turn as indicated you would get quite fast a correction vector.Your plan takes you in almost the opposite direction of the runway. If 8L/8R might be used then almost certainly you would be given a right hand departure - it is not always the closet heading to your first leg, and you would have been vectored a right base, then climbing downwind turning to intercept the heading when far enough away to avoid traffic vertically as well as horizontal clearance to intercept the WINCO waypoint. Had yopu been given a left turn that might not have been correct -maybe- if it would have crossed so soon the outbound path of both 8L/R should they also have been active. On departure there is not much time lag to respond to ATC as deoarture/arrival tolerances are much tighter than enroute. Also be sure if not using pilot auto reply to promptly acknowledge RC commands.I looked at the RC runway data file built from the scenery and it matches the default AFCAD.Get the freeware AFCAD 2.21 from the utilties section. Open the airport search for KMIA. In the resulting listing there should only be a stock airport plus one more. If you have more than one additional listing besides stock, you need (look at the AFCAD title bar for each one) to determine the valid one for Fly Tampa that you wish to use and rename the rest. Start up FS and let it rebuild the scenery index. Close FS and have RC rebuild its database so it matches your chosen AFCAD - the priority in your FS scenery.cfg just built should dominate and the RC database will then match your scenery.Take the dominant AFCAD and compare it to the chart for runway properties. I have a 2003 FAA chart that shows the 9/27 markings as opposed to the current chart's 8/26, so take magnetic variation drift into account.

I recall there were some patch files for this. I would insure your version is up to date.