ysfsim

sorry I meant to say ga aircraft. My average for airliner traffic in the lax area is around 200.

I understand but when I tested it, only lax and SFO were on the list. I saw planes in places like Klgb kbur ksna etc. When I flooded the region with game aircraft ( over 900 aircraft simulated rather than the average of 200 plus for the lax area) the program went to work and cut that list down but still left some again.

I see thanks. Didn't know Trevor was involved.

okay, I tried the aicull program and it works..mostly.It misses some airports. I have it set to scan ground traffic and min altitude set at 1000ft.

What is this "CustomHoldWaypoints" file for?

Thanks a lot Roland. This is going to be fun.

if you purchased an airac cycle from navigraph, you get access to all the available brands.

The choice is always ultimately up to you as the user of what you want to get out of fsx. Have you tried to shrink the 777's textures, I did, and I think it helps. Just a thought. What would you think if the reason the 777 uses so much vas is because of the systems simulation? Remember, the 777 is a complex aircraft that has computers onboard to run its systems. Pmdg managed to get it down smaller to run on your pc.

Thats why I shy away from buying such lavish expensive airports. To be honest some freware or "simple afcad" airports are not bad looking at all. If the airport has some things or elements (important) that are not represented, then I would buy the payware version. For example, MHTG with the default is horrible, even with the an a freeware afcad. However, the taxi 2 gate payware version is great because it helps you to accurately fly the approach using real landmarks etc. What good is it to buy say a fsdream team LAX that may hurt your 777 experience when a blueprint studios LAX or a freeware LAX from Glenn Johnson would do.My point is that It is not pmdg's fault that you had bought a performance intensive airport when you possibly did not have to when there are decent alternatives out there that do the same job but without the same performance hit. For my set up, I found that hd clouds drives me to ooms after two consecutive ngx flights and about one 777 flight. After that change back to reduced cloud sizes, I managed two back to back ngx flights and one 10 hour 777 flight and still no ooms. All this was before I did a major tweak to get an addition boost in frame rates.

I would really like the air cull function to work as I had suggested in a separate program. Us that posdiblw , Roland? I was in Boston last night and less than say 10% of the air land after a long time. I think the 10 mile radius for ai circle until assigned approach needs to be shrunk? I alsowould llike to see the ability to create holding points that are runway specific to allow planes to circle instead of the airport. Theses points can be near the required runway to allow fsx to assign approach easier.

But from what I understand is that fsx cant follow full approach procedures like the one for MHTG. Am I wrong?

Report: Regarding the two spectacular approaches for SBRJ Santos Dumont, success! I managed to get the rnav02rw to work. Of course I had to fool fsx to do so. So the plane over flies the airport and then starts the procedure. The only problem is that because the plane got its clearance, departing planes have to wait a long while for the landing aircraft to finish the approach. BIG NEWS!! To me at least. I found a way to know where fsx positions it approach fixes. With this info, we can better create our procedures with less problems. ADE9X has a function that displays approaches. It is located on the top right corner of the window. The first thing you need to do is to have ade9x open a default airport which would contain fsx's approaches. Select list approaches and all will be shown. I am tempted to modify some but I am not sure if fsx would accept that so easily because its a stubborn sim XD. Cheers!

I just notice an odd phenomenon. Ai planes cant get near to NZQN Queenland. They spawn about 60 nm away but the is "culled" for som reason. The plane is high enough to be out of the mountains and I have ai cull =0 set. I Aisidstar is not running, the plane will come in. odd. BTW I have achieved success with SBRJ Rnav02rx. The plane flys by the Sugar Loaf mountain and turns in to land on rwy 2r. I will now try to do the more dramatic rnav02rw approach. This approach brings the plane from the opposite side and makes a hard left bank in the bay to rwy 2r. Also, it would seam that you can't pause for extended periods or go to the aircraft selection menu without disrupting aisidstars.

Hey Roland, about your previous posts regarding IAF...Is there a way to actually see where fsx places it IAF and FAF. I think if we know where these are it would help tremendously with our approaches. I just did a procedure for svmi to have the air follow the coast and land. Since there are no stars for this airport, I created a single way point as an approach for the air to target. However, once it does the ai gets clearance and does a turn around and then heads to the runway. I had only guessed where the far was. I will try putting the way point greater than 20 miles back rather than the 10 miles I had it. It is really hard to get clearance for ai who tries to land on runways with circle approaches like mhtg rwy 2, skbo rwy 31l and 31r, mroc rwy 25, sbrg rwy 2r rnav02rw etc. If these were straight in approaches it would be fine as the faf can be intercepted easily but with these turns it doesn't have the vectors to intercept it. I will try to find a work around such as have the air over flybthe target runway to get its clearance and have it circle back on an approach file to land. I put all this effort because I want the air to taxi in after landing. I would like ai leaving and none coming in. Cheers!

Its finally happening! :lol: :yahoo: :yahoo:

I really like the idea of this "Ai cull", why didn't anyone think of that? I was wondering if you can modify this feature a bit. Maybe some of us have a whole lot of airports monitored (I have AISIDSTARS monitor most of the major airports of the USA and Canada-not to mention the rest of the world. Its needed for the high traffic airports) but we may be bypassing some on the way to a different one. Eg KIAD to KEWR, I am not flying to DCA, BWI, LGA, or JFK but they are monitored. Can you create a file that the user specifies their departure, destination, alternates and or an (un)limited amount of airports to "save" from culling for that flight. This list should be progressively scanned so any changes while the program is running can be seen right away. With this, all AI will be culled via your already set parameters (ie 1,2 or 3) unless they are on the "safe list". If I overfly JFK which is monitored, I don't want to have traffic on the ground generated because it is not the airport I am going to. I hope you understand what I mean. thanks On another note: If you open traffic toolbox's map function, you see all the ai that is present in fsx's reality bubble. If you notice each flying aircraft has a node of sorts always in front of it. I think that node is the target "imaginary waypoint" that fsx ai engine uses to direct where the ai plane should go to. Once this node is arrived at, a new one is created and the process is repeated until the plane is landed at its destination. I noticed that the nodes contain altitude, speed, position( of course). These are the information "aiplayer" dll uses to know where to fly the plane. Now AISIDSTARS I believe does similar but allows preset nodes (waypoints) to be created. It would be a great experiment to see if you can interfere with what fsx is sending to that node. Suppose fsx commands speed 220 @ 13000ft somewhere, and according to the approach plate, the plane should be 180@ 9000ft here. Could it be possible to impose the approach plate's direction onto the fsx's? If this can be done, you wont here the atc repeating ignored commands as it stands now, but also the plane could be better controlled I think. Your thoughts... Cheers!

I did but there are no approach files. I make approach files for airports that do not have straight in approaches.

nice!

Yes I noticed that too but didn't know that it was because of the AGL threshold. No it wasn't me, I just stumbled onto this forum recently. I see you have a point about the go arounds. but could there be a cfg file that has default braking rates and aircraft specific ones to control stopping. This should also cover the fact that tight runways or separations will involve quick stops to get the plane off the runway but must be within the aircraft's true capabilities. For example: a 737-700 could land normally in over 6000ft but if you land in in SBRJ, it will land in the available 5000ft to simulate max braking applied as in real life. Also in Heathrow with tight separations, the planes will brake hard within their capabilities to reach the high speed exits.One more thing, how about some of the "rules" that are applied in the ini file be specific to certain selected regions or airports. cheers!

Mr Roland, Is there a way to control the planes without slew? And how about an option to let the plane roll out on its own like normal?

I would like to see that! This program needs more exposure. Jim Vile did an admirable job with his active ils system, but this goes even further.

What Roland is referring to is the stock approach way points in the sim. If you open your map view in the sim around your airport, you can see blue triangles that lead up to the runways ( at least in fsx). The IAF on these points is the farthest on out and if you let the default atc do its job, you will notice this is where all the ai follow. In fsx, most of these approaches are unrealistic and "straight in".

Ya I missed that one

Thanks for the tip. I will try it out

An update of my progress on MHTG. result: failure. The only thing that works is the SID. The STARS are problematic because when the plane finishes it, ATC still doesn't pick it up so the it continues into the ground and disappears.