Afcads - a few questions

[Ford Friendly]

Just for the sake of curiosity.

Most of us have downloaded other people's afcads - from various places and authors. at various times and for both military and civilian or mixed-use purposes. Quite a few of us have also created our own afcads or modified those we downloaded.

So, my questions are (you might want to read all the questions before actually thinking up any answers to any specific question):

1. What makes a good afcad on your system? For instance, does it need to have 100% accurate taxiway lableling - whether you intend to fly there in your plane or not? How about real-world ILD/comms freqs? Where do you draw the line between "acceptable" and "I have to change this to bring it up to snuff"?

2. Does your answer to #1 change if we are talking about an afcad that you are primarily using for AI aircraft? for AI military aircraft? for only an auxiliary field to give your "primary base" AI aircraft a destination to bounce?

3. If you intend to release an afcad for whatever purpose, do you absolutely have to include all the bells and whistles possible considering the answers you came up with for #1 and 2? For example, KPAM.... it's a mixed use base with separate areas for military and civilian terminals. Would you have to include - or would you expect if you were downloading - moving jetways for the civilian terminal if it was an FSX afcad?

4. For those of you who use FSX, are you consciously moving to an FSX-feature set set of afcads? What's your percentage of FS9 afcads still in use in your setup (in active use, not just what you have installed [including the MSFS defaults would render any number useless])?

Lastly, do the answers change for various parts of the AI world?

Like I said, I'm curious.

[GrahamS]

1. As near to realistic layout as is manageable given that generally AI aircraft require more space than the real world, you cannot move an aircraft out of the way to get another out of its parking spot. If the real world frequencies are available in FS then, Yes they should be used. Also with taxi signs, they should be as near to real world as is possible. There is no line to be drawn, most downloaded afcads will require some modification, even if it is only parking codes.

2. No.

3. No.

4. Yes - Zero Fs9 afcads.

5? No.

[davidbernard]

1. For me it depends on the use and the time that I have. There are main bases that I fly from and fields only to give the AI traffic a proper destination. Those main bases need to be as detailed as possible, but sometimes it's hard or impossible to find all the information. There's a lot you can find on Worldaerodata.com and Google Earth really helps with runway markings and hangar- and shelter positions. Taxiway labeling is often a problem (although for example I did find a website of the Afghan government with quite detailed information and military airfield layout plans). I think all parking spots (civil and mil) need to be as close to the real thing as possible.

2. On the less imported fields I take care of at least a correct runway system (including all lights and markings) and taxiways, aprons, and some but not all parking spots.

3. The more bells and whistles the better, as long as it's accurate. If I'm not satisfied I will edit the file.

4. I don't use FSX.

Last answer: my thoughts about afcads are the same, wherever I may roam

David

[sprocky]

I use FS9 only. Therefore I cannot comment on FSX.

In the past I simply added some parking spots where missing. About two weeks ago I started to create AFCAD files using satellite images and airport sources for com/navaid. This led to new parking area, changing surfaces, moving rwy/tw to correct positions correcting frequencies. The first result was KCLL I released at avsim. Well, it was my first work and do not expect too much The good thing about it was the feedback I received and offerings for support to bring it to better quality. Now the file is back in work for crosswind rwys and moving signs to the accurate position (received a tutorial on this but it may take a while to understand it). The only thing I did not care about is assigning parking spots to airlines. There is no need for the small regional airports with less than 10 daily commercial services. There is a difference on the KDHN I also work on as it has military/civil areas.

[Ford Friendly]

Intersting answers fellas. Thanks for the rresponses.

Anyone else?

[kungfuman]

1. The most important feature is how tidy it looks, this aspect being the most time consuming to correct. A good likeness to a google or flashearth image is definitely sought by me.

Runway links generally need all their lines and lights deselected (to avoid random messiness), and they must also be accurately placed along the centre line to prevent one of my pet hates: Taxiway texture gaps at the edge of runways! Deselection of edge lines and lights will also be necessary for most parking links to avoid messy squiggles on the aprons. I usually have to resort to CTRL+A, then I deselect the edge lines and lights on EVERYTHING, before re-adding them in a more purposeful manner. If in doubt, go without any edgelines, as they are most prone to glitches in the way FS draws them. Otherwise, the result is just plain shoddy! So I rate highly any AF2 file where this has been taken care of by the designer.

Good planning and positioning of parking is particularly essential for AFX files as many of us cannot edit them. Designers who remember to incorporate spaces for unforeseen appearances of outsized aircraft (who knows where those an-225 plans will go) get an extra thumbs up from me! Thus AF2 files are much more versatile for the user without an AFX editor. I am happy to accept compromises, but fantasy layouts are of no interest either.

Definitely correct comms freqs are important, especially where APP/DEP is concerned. You may never visit, but you'll probably pass through the airspace at some point. Nothing worse than being handed off to the wrong freq in the case where one has flown a route in the real world - and thus anything other than the real freqs is a complete turn off! This also applies to those of us with large photographic sceneries (ie Just Flight UK VFR) and a proper aeronautical chart. Also, research here prevents one from inadvertently assigning a freq already in use (although allowances must be made here for uk military tower VHF freqs - setting many of them correctly on 122.1 causes chaos).

Of far less importance are taxiway names: But either correct ones or none at all is my preference. However, a good tip: If short sections at a certain hold are named after the hold, then this creates a better effect when routes are given by ATC (ie. the hold names being called as part of the route).

What I end up editing on pretty much every download, incl. MAIW, is finding the largest parking spot and increasing radius to at least 54m, making sure there are no texture gaps on any links (especially runway and parking links), deselecting edge-lines (and lights) that draw as random squiggles, and deleting incorrectly placed apron edge lights. So this is where I draw my line.

2 & 5. As I never know where I might fly in the future, this standard applies to all AFD files, although I might temporarily put up with lower standards at a field I don't currently intend to visit if it will facilitate an ai package that I will see elsewhere.

3. If you're going to release an AFD, then it will ideally incorporate all these points and more. Let's break those boundaries! However, I am happy to find anything that is an improvement on what's already out there. If it's out there then at least I can edit it to my own liking.

4. FS9 only, I'm afraid. But I've found that if one uses certain FSX files, opens them in afcad, edits parking radii if needed, and saves as an AF2 file (so the file doesn't overwrite the original), then on placement of this AF2 file in the same folder as the original one may enjoy the benefits of the original FSX file with included flattens and placements etc. along with the FS9 appropriate parking radii etc. of the new AF2 file.
Has anyone else tried this? Or come across problems?

Hope a bit of this is of interest to somebody...

[Jumpshot724]

I don't use FSX but for AFCADs that are joint airports as you said, I always make it "complete". IE, I'll take care of the military side as best I can and then I will add the airline area's gates with real-world assignments from that airport's website, then I add the cargo ramp and parking codes as best I can do to real world etc etc....