OnCourse Software

martinlest wrote:

OK, traffic arriving on Rwy 32R (in this example) comes off the runway using taxiway B7 (sometimes B6 or B5) and, if taxiway T2 is completely free, continues to the gate. Fine....

However, (and this may or may not be true, but it looks this way), if outbound traffic has been given clearance to taxi to runway 32R a

You are having AI taking-off and landing on the same runway. So for each parallel runway close one for take-off the other for landing. So using London Heathrow as a working example 27L take-off only, 27R landing only, 09L landing only, 09R take-off only. Do this in the afcad, rebuild the PF3 database and then go to the SID STAR page for UUDD and open close the runways in the same manner.

Yes, that's a good idea - but does doing that in the AFCAD really work in FS9? I haven't found it to be very reliable in practice. I'll give it a go with the UUDD AFCAD anyway and see what happens.

There were a few blank main taxiway links that I have changed to 'M' or 'T2' as needed - I did all the editing of duplicate taxi links in AFCAD2, I just found the graphics in ADE too confusing for that amount of editing. What may I have to add back manually now? Anything vital?

Thanks.

EDIT: I marked Runway 32R as closed for landing in the AFCAD, saved and restarted FS9. Database rebuilt... AI traffic still lands on 32R as before. Is there something else I have to do? Remove the default UUDD maybe (though shouldn't the payware airport override anything in the AP***** file?).

martinlest wrote:

I know I may be in a minority here, but I find the ADE interface MUCH less clear to work with than that of AFCAD2 and for such a large task I would MUCH rather use it. But what exactly would be the price to pay for that? I seem to remember taxiway sign go (?), but also NAV aids (???) - which would be a pain of course.

I think you do lose taxiway signs. I don't think AFCAD2 supports them. Navaids are OK, though. Airport Facilitator X (AFX) is a fairly inexpensive payware option that looks and works almost exactly like AFCAD2 but supports taxiway signs. It's very easy to use and you can do quite a bit with it.

martinlest wrote:

Yes, that's a good idea - but does doing that in the AFCAD really work in FS9? I

Thanks.

Yes, it works perfectly. If you use afcad2 instead of ADE you will loose the taxi signs option but you can still add the via other add-ons.

Presumably you'd only lose taxiway signs in default airports - most 3rd. party sceneries have a bgl file for them, which would not of course be affected.

I've looked at AFX a number of times in the past, but actually it seems quite expensive when AFCAD2 does most of what I want for free, and I am happy to use ADE for small tasks. (I almost never use FSX).. I spend so much money on scenery (and to a lesser extent, aircraft) already!!

Quote:

Yes, it works perfectly.

As per my edit, not on my setup, it almost never does. AI traffic are still using 32R for landing, though it is clearly marked 'closed for landing'..

M.

martinlest wrote:

Presumably you'd only lose taxiway signs in default airports - most 3rd. party sceneries have a bgl file for them, which would not of course be affected.

I've looked at AFX a number of times in the past, but actually it seems quite expensive when AFCAD2 does most of what I want for free, and I am happy to use ADE for small tasks. (I almost never use FSX).. I spend so much money on scenery (and to a lesser extent, aircraft) already!!

Quote:

Yes, it works perfectly.

As per my edit, not on my setup, it almost never does. AI traffic are still using 32R for landing, though it is clearly marked 'closed for landing'..

M.

You need to look at the bitmaps for the airport. Sometimes they include the taxiway signs. So they are part of the scenery. Otherwise they are default and either made into a separate bgl file or included in the main bgl file. In which case you need to "exclude" them and then add your own.

Ok, thanks.. the taxiway signs are something I can live without if necessary anyway. But what about the supposedly closed runway (that isn't, in practice)?

martinlest wrote:

Ok, thanks.. the taxiway signs are something I can live without if necessary anyway. But what about the supposedly closed runway (that isn't, in practice)?

Well, as I said it does work in FS9 so you may have another problem such as a duplicate afcad. There's nothing in FS9 per se that would prevent a runway being closed to AI. Though you might try looking at your FS9.cfg under [TrafficManager] just to see if any of your add ons has put something there that might affect runways.
If not then your only recourse is to disable the offending scenery as quite often something like this is rolled up in the scenery bgl file.

Quote:

try looking at your FS9.cfg under [TrafficManager] just to see if any of your add ons has put something there that might affect runways

No, nothing.

Quote:

may have another problem such as a duplicate afcad

Not that I can see.. I deleted my old UUDD scenery when I bought this one. I searched my whole FS9 setup for anything with UUDD or Domodedovo in it - blank, apart from in the folder in question. (People say use ScanAFD, but that fails to locate so many third-party AFCADs I have installed that I can't rely on it).

Quote:

If not then your only recourse is to disable the offending scenery

?? You mean find a scenery bgl file that may be causing this, I assume. It'd be a bit pointless disabling the scenery as a whole, having just bought it!

M.

martinlest wrote:

Quote:

try looking at your FS9.cfg under [TrafficManager] just to see if any of your add ons has put something there that might affect runways

No, nothing.

Quote:

It'd be a bit pointless disabling the scenery as a whole, having just bought it!

M.

Unfortunately you may have to do just that. There is a lot of payware stuff out there that cannot justify being payware in comparison to some freeware.
The point being if you disable your payware scenery and the default works correctly then there's your answer.