Welcome to
Microsoft Flight Simulator’s SDK Q&A Platform!
Please take a moment to read the platform’s guidelines before you get started!
Hi,
The following options for runway objects don't work to me
No Primary Landing
No Primary Takeoff
No Secondary Landing
No Secondary Takeoff
Had no luck in several attempts with different runway size settings even with extremely short runway, ATC does not respect it. Also noted that ATC uses any runway for AI traffic regardless its physical dimensions.
Could you clarify current functionality of these options, because I suspect that they're left as legacy support
thanks
Hello.
These options are used on runways like EDDF 36 that are closed in reality.
This threshold exist in the game but we use these options to disable its use by ATC.
That said, this is used to compute a weight and if the wind configuration makes it so that this flagged threshold is the only usable one, ATC will bypass those flags.
This will not be a problem on airports like EDDF where an alternative will always be found but will occur if you have a single runway.
About AI Traffic, what kind of traffic are you using in game? Real-time ? Offline ? SimConnect controlled ?
Regards,
Sylvain
Hi Sylvain,
I use real-time AI traffic, due to lack of auto generated offline traffic at test airport, but I mostly care about user-flyable plane, because the main idea to have separate RWY with only one working threshold for STOL traffic within existing airport structure.
In my test project with 2 main crossing RWYs, I've added 3rd very short RWY with only one working threshold( using options above), taxiway and parking spot which are separated from main taxiway network. It works OK so far despite the ATC completely ignoring the restriction flags.
Anyway, thanks for pointing me out EDDF, I'll look into it
Real time traffic will not take this kind of restrictions into account, this type of traffic relies on real traffic data and we don't filter it based on airport restrictions.
If the runway you're talking about is completely separated and has its own parking spots and taxiways, I expect the same behaviour will occur. ATC will try to avoid using this runway but if the wind is blowing in the opposite direction, it will always prioritize this over the "No Takeoff/Landing" flags.
As an alternative, have you tried removing the runway start in your runway properties?
Regards,
Sylvain
hi,
thanks for info about AI traffic differences, it makes sense and not mentioned in SDK docs.As for runway start positions, in my tests AI planes do not take them into account for takeoff. There's some sort of internal hard coded logic for AI takeoff roll
best
This has probably been updated since then, but when I fixed up ENZV a year ago I had an issue of the sim not respecting those flags. My solution was to edit the xml file so runway 18/36 was listed before 11/29 in the xml. That caused the atc to prioritise 18/36. Might be worth a try.
No Primary Landing
No Primary Takeoff
No Secondary Landing
No Secondary Takeoff
The don't work for me either. My Airport has 2 runway and one it's just for smaller planes but the ATC even if I have an airbus a320 they lead me to this small runway. What can we do?
Your parking spot is linked to the bigger runway and still ATC sends you to the flagged runway?
If you upload your package sources, I can check it.
Regards,
Sylvain
The two runway are disconnected... I could upload it but it's 6gb so if you can figure it out from here it's better... Let me know!
That's an issue. The ATC system computes some kind of weight depending on the runway options, parameters, wind, etc...
The runway length is very important in the calculus so I would expect your longer runway to be selected, even with wind matching the smaller runway axis.
Can you tell me where this airport is located and what wind conditions you're using so I can run some tests?
Regards,
Sylvain
I've created a very basic LIME airport with just the 2 runways and a tower but I don't have the issue.
When flying an A320, ATC always proposes a 10/28 landing, even when the wind matches the smaller runway axis.
Can you provide a link to your package in a private comment so I can test it in case there's some other factor playing a role here?
Regards,
Sylvain
4 People are following this question.
