gday fellow Simmers. I have recently created an airport with 2 runways and 2 parking areas. one for jets and commercials and one for light GA planes.
I have tried assigning airline codes and also modified the aircraft.cfg files to include those codes however the light GA planes still decide to park in the big boys parking spots.
Also with the second runway being for GA planes, how can I stop them using the big boys runway. both runways run in the same direction so it’s not an into the wind issue.
thanks in advance
Kevin
FS is quite dumb when it comes to parked aircraft. Even with accurate codes and parking sizes, they don’t always follow the logic. The parking size is going to play a big role as to where they park. If the large spots are not big enough for the large aircraft, they will not park there. GA can basically park anywhere since they are small. You need to look in the flight_model.cfg to check the wingspan and then you can get the radius. The wingspan in the cfg is in total feet, but the radius for the parking spots need to be in meters and divided by 2 for the correct radii size.
For the runway, you need to edit the size of the meters allowed on the runway. Right click on your runway path to make those changes. That should allow for the correct aircraft to use the correct runways.
Hello there.
The problem IMHO is not exactly the parking size and or the .cfg file. The crucial problem is the “invention” with MSFS of the double radius around each parking spot that fictionally increase the real true aircraft radius of any aircraft. I have upload on flightsim.to a project realized wit ADE (Airport Design Editor) for LFPG/ Paris CDG, and allow me to paste here below an excerpt of the ReadMe:
“-The worst constraint lies in the new aircraft wingspan measurement system in MSFS. In FSX or before the rule was simple: the aircraft wingspan divided by two is/was the basis for placing a parking. For “heavy” 36 meters, “medium” 27m and “small” 18m. The creators of the new MSFS version have chosen to implement a new standard by putting another so-called security radius around the true radius. Why not, but this double radius is considered a wingspan in itself and actually limits cohabitation with surrounding aircraft. It’s called being more royalist than the King…
In the old FS versions, for example for the “heavy”, the 36-meter radius was already an extrapolation because the current wide-body aircraft do not exceed 32/33 meters (except the A380 of course), and it was therefore safe for positioning planes. The worst thing for the creator that I am is that this system is pushed to its climax: as this enlarged radius applies all around the planes, those whose wings cannot touch each other due, for example, to convergent orientation in a series of parking (hub type, bicycle spokes), cannot coexist either.
The result for CDG is the loss of almost 50% of capacity in some locations because the MSFS controller will not send an aircraft to park in a non-compatible parking under this new rule.
For example: True wingspan of a Boeing 777-300 = 60.90m. 61m/2= 31m (rounded) plus 6 meters of “safety” = 37 half-span or…74 meters of wingspan in MSFS.
I tried to cheat a little but in almost all cases it’s not possible. For “small” type this would mean reducing to such radius that no aircraft could park. This is the case for B, D, F, Q aprons among others. For these Areas the loss of parking capacity is 50% with every second parking remaining unoccupied”
This is a crucial problem and I really hope that creators of this double radius system will find a moment to restore the previous and normal system. By removing this feature there will be no need for aircraft designers to cheat with the .cfg file to reduce the wingspan and for Scenery makers to reduce a published and true radius. It is really a punishment.