Ray Proudfoot 231 Posted March 25, 2006 Share Posted March 25, 2006 Can anyone please explain why the runways in the GA1 package for EDDM are 700ft wide? The standard width is 148ft. Surely some mistake? :roll: Cheers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Developer OPabst 2091 Posted March 26, 2006 Developer Share Posted March 26, 2006 Hi Ray, you mean the width in the AFCAD file, not the visual width. I am not the developer, but I think the idea behind this doing was, to give the pilot the chance to request the takeoff at the holdpoint. The holdpoint before the runway in EDDM are "far" away from the border of the runway. The FS will show the "request for takeoff" in the ATC Menue at a "relative" short distance to the Runway-Borderline. When you set the width in the AFCAD to the normal 148 feet, you don't get the request topic in the ATC menu, when you hold at the holdpoint line. I think this was the idea behind this change of width. brgds Oliver Pabst Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ray Proudfoot 231 Posted March 26, 2006 Author Share Posted March 26, 2006 Hi Oliver, Yes, I was referring to the AFCAD file. Thank you for explaining the probable reason it was done that way. I don't use the default ATC preferring Radar Contact but fortunately the wide runways don't cause a problem with that program. Knowing the excellence of the GA scenery I can understand that the developers would have done this for a good reason. The ISD developers have done a similar thing for LIRF. Cheers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aerosoft Aerosoft Team [Inactive Account] 51558 Posted March 26, 2006 Aerosoft Share Posted March 26, 2006 Hi Oliver, Yes, I was referring to the AFCAD file. Thank you for explaining the probable reason it was done that way. I don't use the default ATC preferring Radar Contact but fortunately the wide runways don't cause a problem with that program. Knowing the excellence of the GA scenery I can understand that the developers would have done this for a good reason. The ISD developers have done a similar thing for LIRF. Cheers. Indeed, thanks Oliver for helping us out here, this could have very well caused the support department to go on wild goose chase. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts