ASPEN V1.10 FSX runway direction problem

[psykie 1]

Hello

Has there been a fix for the Aspen fsx v1.10 runway traffic use? I looked in the forums and I noticed the topic was brought up but no sulution. I have aircraft landing on runway 33 when they should ONLY be using runway 33 for take-offs and 15 for landing. I went into my AFX afcads to make sure the runways were set up correctly but ATC still directs me to land on 33 and I watch other aircraft landing on 33. Any solutions? I appreciate any constructive feedback. Also, in my AFX program I have a "stock afcad" for KASE but its greyed out and below the one I want to use.

Matthew

[Shaun Fletcher 570]

Hello Matthew,

I'll see which way my traffic is landing if any, but AFX is showing you correctly whats what, the priority AFCAD is normally at the top and the others greyed out.

[psykie 1]

Thanks Shaun:

This is a great scenery so it bums me out to see traffic going the wrong way at this airport. Also, where should my "afcad" be within FSX. I'm wondering if the wcenery isn't reading my afcad and the settings I made for the runway.

Matthew

[Psybear 10]

Yes. I confirm the wrong landing direction at AspenX. One would think that a specialized airport add-on would get this major thing right. And certainly corrected if not.

Aerosoft pumps out a lot of add-ons...and for the most part good ones...but is sometimes very slow in updates when needed...sometimes even remiss. Perhaps you could focus on some fixes for a week or two? Bush Hawk XP, Aspen X due come to mind. Crack the whip on those developers. Or else threaten them with the comfy chair!

[Shaun Fletcher 570]

Hello Folks,

Bad news I'm afraid, I disabled the AFCAD that comes with Aspen X and altered the default to reflect the same. Landing one and taking off from 33 but planes still landed on 33 so maybe the AI doesn't want to comply for some reason.

[Psybear 10]

Hello Shaun,

I'm confused. Or maybe it's the weather but it seems to me we already know this. Can anything be done to make it right? Are you suggesting that the approaches cannot be altered?

Don't specialized airport add-ons do this all the time? I'm not an FSX developer so please pardon my ignorance but doesn't anyone in the vast Aerosoft brain trust know?

I realize that this is a small rather unique airport but it is called Aspen X after all.

Thanks

[psykie 1]

Hello Shaun:

Yes, I too agree with Psybear in that it seams as though something should be able to be done about this issue. This is a Great scenery and I find myself returning to it in my defualt Lear 45 over and over again only to be directed by ATC to land on runway 33.

I guess my question is, can anything be done about this issue? Thanks Shaun.

Matthew

[Psybear 10]

Seems like RWY 15 is closed in the KASE - ASPEN-Pitkin Co_Sardy3.BGL when looked at by ADE.

Could this be at least part of the problem?

[Shaun Fletcher 570]

Hello Psybear,

When I checked the file it was only closed for Takeoff and not completely closed.

So if the default AFCAD wont play with the AI then I suspect that the scenery will not do it either.

[Psybear 10]

Hello Psybear,

When I checked the file it was only closed for Takeoff and not completely closed.

So if the default AFCAD wont play with the AI then I suspect that the scenery will not do it either.

Ah ha. But still confused Shaun. Just to be clear, the item I posted was from Aerosoft Aspen X by Matthew Dalton.

Appreciate your time but quick and dirty, what are you saying? (A) It's impossible: there is no way to fix this and get it right?

( It's possible: but we don't know how?

Just probing for a solution.

[GaryGB 0]

Ah ha. But still confused Shaun. Just to be clear, the item I posted was from Aerosoft Aspen X by Matthew Dalton.

Appreciate your time but quick and dirty, what are you saying? (A) It's impossible: there is no way to fix this and get it right?

( It's possible: but we don't know how?

Just probing for a solution.

Hi Guys:

I agree that it would be important for Aerosoft to give more and timely attention to fixes and updates for its products.

Some might even say that maintaining "quality products and service after the sale" is more critical to the future success of the company and it's reputation than telling the FS Marketplace that "we don't care any more" while spending time and effort engaging in questionable practices in an attempt to deal with pirates or torrent down-loaders.

I believe their customer base would rather Aerosoft instead put their time and effort into serving the primary activities of daily business that make the big difference in quality, consumer loyalty and patience while awaiting fixes, and which is conducive to ongoing repeat business ...and referrals for new business.

But, to be fair, although Aerosoft's FS Developers are incredibly talented, since there is often quite a bit of mind-numbing complexity involved in FS airports, especially when dealing with approaches, AI traffic etc., I can understand the challenges to building and fixing some airports and their functionality.

And in a precarious global economy, Aerosoft and individual 'freelance" developers working on speculation may have to prioritize their time commitments on projects that help generate timely cash flow that helps them stay in business (... perhaps while hoping to eventually get the time to go back and fix/enhance earlier projects).

I believe while awaiting further attention to this by Aerosoft, some help might be had in addressing these particular issues through one's own efforts, since the Airport BGLs are openly accessible via ADE.

So I'd suggest that you also pose a question in the ADE forum over at FSDeveloper.com; if we see a reply there by the very knowledgeable fellows in that forum ...we'd probably all learn something helpful about how to properly implement and fix the occasional obscure scenario such as the one being referred to in the OP for this thread:

http://www.fsdevelop...isplay.php?f=95

Hope this helps !

GaryGB

[Psybear 10]

Hi Gary,

Always excuses for us customers. As I stated earlier I'm not an FSX developer but am solution oriented and find your suggestion worth a shot. Thanks. I will follow up.

Not to go to war with anyone over this but to highlight the issue allow me to quote verbatim from the product manual copyrighted 2007.

From page 2 of the Aerosoft AspenX manual:

Introduction

Aspen-Pitkin County Airport is listed as a dangerous airport. Not only is it surrounded by high and

steep terrain on almost any side, it is also prone to severe weather, with strong winds and massive

snow falls, and to make matters worse it is located at 7,280 ft. Even when the weather is warm and

visibility is great, the combination of altitude and high Density Altitude (see appendix A will make

departures and arrivals even more dangerous. As the runway is only usable in one direction (RWY15

for landing, RWY 33 for departure) you might be forced to land with unfavorable winds.

A glance at the accident databases online shows how dangerous Aspen can be.

Einleitung

Aspen‐Pitkin County Airport steht in der Liste der gefährlichen Flugplätze; nicht nur weil er auf fast

allen Seiten von hohem und steilem Terrain umgeben ist, sondern auch weil er gerne von

schlechtem Wetter mit kräftigem Wind und heftigen Schneefällen heimgesucht wird. Was das ganze

noch schlimmer macht, ist die Lage in 7280 ft. Höhe. Selbst wenn das Wetter warm ist und tolle Sicht

herrscht, macht die Verbindung von Höhe und hoher Dichtehöhe (= Density Altitude; siehe Anhang

A) Starts und Landungen noch gefährlicher. Da die Start‐/Landenahn nur in einer Richtung benutzt

werden kann (rwy 15 für Landungen, rwy 33 für Abflug) kann es sein, dass man mit ungünstigem

Wind landen/starten muss. Ein kurzer Blick auf die Online‐Unfallstatistiken zeigt, wie gefährlich

Aspen sein kann.

It just seems to me a product that boasts this in the beginning of the manual should deliver the actual performance.

No excuses.

[psykie 1]

Hello

Gary GB, if I were paranoid I would swear that you are following me. You always add good info with strong writing skills. Just watch the wordiness. You seem to a show up for a good conversation. Psybear, I want to thank you for tracking this post and adding/asking relevant information. You asked questions that I would like to have answered. I unfortunately don't get to my comp as often as I would like. This is still a great scenery and I will continue to enjoy it! Hey GB, I'm pretty happy with my new system. Might be looking to upgrade my video card in the future.

Matthew

[Shaun Fletcher 570]

Hello Folks,

I'll ask if this can be checked out by the developers.

[GaryGB 0]

Hello again:

Good to see that there may be a fix for this situation (courtesy of the amazing knowledge of Jim Vile... also on the ADE team):

http://www.fsdevelop...ead.php?t=20107

http://library.avsim...=root&Go=Search

Hope this works... Aspen is a really fun airport to fly at, with a lot of nice scenery work by the developer.

Many thanks to Psybear for taking the initiative to advocate this inquiry for the betterment of the FS experience at KASE.

Happy Flying !

PS: Hi Psykie... glad to see you're expanding your "FS horizons" into some of the other forums I've enjoyed visiting for years; ...some great products, people and ideas around here.

Hope all goes well with your FS system tweaking !

GaryGB

[Psybear 10]

Hello All,

Tried that fix and it does indeed do landings AI, ATC at 15 but also takeoffs...so it just reverses the issue. Also it does not seem to play well with the magnificent scenery aspects of AspenX. Planes floating above the apron, taxi was confused, etc.

I could very well be installing it improperly so any knowledgeable instruction is welcome here. I have used airport scanner to passify conflicting .BGLs but I can't seem to get it to work the way we would like.

If this is doable, I'd like to do it. And will work with anyone offering interest and advice.

If this is not doable, I'd like to know as I (and others) have other things to do.

[ESzczesniak 25]

I too have the incorrect runway useage (I think we're done with the debate about this being an issue?). In addition, I noted a while ago in the forums that RWY 15 should have a VASI light system--not only is it realistic, but would also help judging your short final on this steep primarily visual approach.

[Psybear 10]

It would appear the developer, Matthew Dalton has no interest in his addon for Aspen ... or the people who paid for it.

I would hope we, as well as Aerosoft have no interest in any of his future projects.

[Shaun Fletcher 570]

Hello Folks,

I asked for Mats e-mail address and the reason why I wanted it, he actually copied Mat in on the reply so he should know about it.

If I haven't heard from him in a few days I will write again and get something definitive off him.

[MartinWizi 0]

Any results, as I just bought AspenX - I'll very much prefer to have upgrade fixing this issue !!

Hello Folks,

I asked for Mats e-mail address and the reason why I wanted it, he actually copied Mat in on the reply so he should know about it.

If I haven't heard from him in a few days I will write again and get something definitive off him.

[matted 93]

From memory (it's a while ago now!) this was a hardcoded bug in the way the FSX airport format deals with closed runways, which is why the issue exists in the scenery in the first place. I'm having another look at the problem now to see if there's a more satisfactory solution, so please bear with me a little longer and I'll post the results here soon as I can.

Cheers,

Mat