KCLT Runway 5/23

[DNICE]

Hello,

I have a question about KCLT runways 5/23. Is it a way to disable the runways? I notice when I use atc without filing a flight plan atc always defaults to runway 23. Any help would be appreciated.

[virtuali]

I don't think it would be a very good idea to disable a runway that has a proper ILS procedures on both ends, meaning it surely used in real life, at least for landings.

Normally, unless the headwind component is too high for a certain direction, the default ATC should assign the longest runway with an ILS, and 5/23 are the shortest ones, and all the others have an ILS, so there shouldn't be any reason for choosing 23 over the others.

[DNICE]

I don't think it would be a very good idea to disable a runway that proper ILS procedures on both ends, meaning it surely used in real life, at least for landings.

Normally, unless the headwind component is too high for a certain direction, the default ATC should assign the longest runway with an ILS, and 5/23 are the shortest ones, and all the others have an ILS, so there shouldn't be any reason for choosing 23 over the others.

Thank you for your reply. The runway is not nearly used as it was back in the day. In fact, it has been buzz that the runway will be decommissioned in the near future for a fourth parallel runway. The only problem that I have when using the default atc with no weather, winds, etc... atc always defaults to runway 23 for takeoffs. Let's say once I get airborne and I make a request to land via ATC then I have an option to land at any of the parallel runways given the weather conditions. This is only the case if I'm just jumping in the sim for a free flight, doing touch and go's, etc...  If I file a flight plan I do not have this problem. Thanks for your time.

[MPDuex]

Hey Umberto,

I was wondering the same thing.  How would one deactivate 23 if a user accepted responsibility they’d lose out on 23?

Both AIG and FTL aircraft flock, almost exclusively, to 23.  It destroys the realism of this wonderful airport.

The real runway 23 is typically closed on ATIS for so long I can’t remember when it was open.

From my experience as a passenger, of late, it’s mostly used as a taxiway to get American aircraft to 36C for takeoff during departure waves.

It is slated to be permanently closed when KCLT terminal B and C concourses are expanded.  See link below.

The new terminal/ramp expansion will cross over 23.  The future capacity will be met with the planned fourth parallel runway and taxiway config that allows more simultaneous parallel operations and avoids the possibility of runway incursions (but provides a wonderfully long taxi to the gate a la 17L at KDFW). 

It also, unfortunately, gives you with another mega airport whose layout is fluid.

https://cltairport.mediaroom.com/destination-clt

Respectfully,

[virtuali]

We'll might disabling landing/takeoff there but, the AI system in MSFS is weird.

If you look a the Basel forum, there's a small grass runway there, which we defined (because it *is* an official runway), but it's completely closed for everything, takeoffs and landings, on both sides, yet in some cases AI use it, even when there are other proper runways, open and with ILSs, and in that case it's even more absurd, since the grass runway is parallel to the main one, so wind is not even a factor there.

[Flic1]

Just adding to this thread....would also like to see Runways 23/5 deactivated.  Now that I am back to using AI, it seems they nearly always use this runway.  Hope that can be part of any future KCLT updates.  I see similar issue on other 3rd party airports as well.  I wish we had some of the old tools from the FSX days to modify the airport runways/parking, etc.

[virtuali]

Just adding to this thread....would also like to see Runways 23/5 deactivated.

Have you read my previous post, with the example at LFSB ? We have a very small runway that is completely disabled for both take off and landings, and yet for some reason, sometimes, AIs still try to use it.

While we could possibly "fix" that case by completely remove that small grass runway at LFSB, clearly this cannot be a solution for a proper runway like 5/23 at KCLT.

[Dave_YVR]

 Fix the AI, that is where the problem lies. PSXT Traffic for instance uses only the runways that are actually in use and there's no go arounds unless the aircraft actually missed irl.

[virtuali]

Fix the AI, that is where the problem lies. PSXT Traffic for instance uses only the runways that are actually in use and there's no go arounds unless the aircraft actually missed irl.

Is the "Fix the AI" comment directed to us, for some reason ? We know only MS/Asobo can fix the default AI.

Of course, a 3rd party program that does AI Injection, has more control over the runway in use, that's why they do custom AI injection to begin with, so they can control AI with more flexibility than we can possibly do from the scenery, unless we tried to intentionally cripple it for normal user and/or ground vehicles operations, like removing a runway altogether, or isolating it from the rest of the airport layout, which is not really feasible with 5/23 at KCLT, since it basically crosses the whole airport and so many taxiways.

[Dave_YVR]

Is the "Fix the AI" comment directed to us, for some reason ? We know only MS/Asobo can fix the default AI.

 Lol no no, that is aimed right asobo. The scenery isn't broken, no need to "fix" it. It's the AI that needs to be addressed and that only Asobo can do.

[N405GJ]

While I understand that the Asobo AI can be a bit wonky at times, there are those of us who use other AI products like FSLTL and Runway 5/23 is the only runway the AI ever uses at FSDT's rendition of KCLT. Many developers offer the option to disable runways in their configuration tools so I dont see why this cant be an option for KCLT. If its realism you are after, Runway 5/23 has effectively been closed permenantly and is open only for taxiing. Below are several IRL NOTAMS to this affect.


05/427 (A2948/22)  May 26, 2022 15:18 LT
KCLT

RWY 05/23 SW 6646FT AND NE 180FT CLSD EXC TAX. 26 MAY 15:20 2022 UNTIL 26 MAY
23:59 2023. CREATED: 26 MAY 15:18 2022


06/231 (A3405/22)  Jun 17, 2022 16:00 LT
KCLT

RWY 05 PAPI U/S. 17 JUN 16:00 2022 UNTIL 30 DEC 23:59 2022. CREATED: 17 JUN 16:00
2022


06/232 (A3406/22)  Jun 17, 2022 16:01 LT
KCLT

RWY 23 PAPI U/S. 17 JUN 16:01 2022 UNTIL 30 DEC 23:59 2022. CREATED: 17 JUN 16:01
2022


06/234 (A3407/22)  Jun 17, 2022 16:02 LT
KCLT

RWY 23 RWY END ID LGT U/S. 17 JUN 16:02 2022 UNTIL 30 DEC 23:59 2022. CREATED:
17 JUN 16:02 2022


06/233 (A3408/22)  Jun 17, 2022 16:02 LT
KCLT

RWY 05 ALS U/S. 17 JUN 16:02 2022 UNTIL 30 DEC 23:59 2022. CREATED: 17 JUN 16:02
2022

[virtuali]

While I understand that the Asobo AI can be a bit wonky at times, there are those of us who use other AI products like FSLTL and Runway 5/23 is the only runway the AI ever uses at FSDT's rendition of KCLT.

I'm not entirely sure how FSLTL affects of possibly changes the runway assignment but, there are two possible options:

- If FSLTL CAN affect the runway assignment, using a different strategy of the default AI that might eventually overcome some issues with it, then ( assuming it can do that ), it should be able to recognize there are other runways available there.

- If FSLTL CAN'T affect the runway assignment, then the argument "the Asobo AI can be a bit wonky at times, there are those of us who use other AI products like FSLTL" is no longer valid, if both falls back and depends by issues with the default AI.

Many developers offer the option to disable runways in their configuration tools so I dont see why this cant be an option for KCLT.

Are you sure many developers offer such options and configurators, for MSFS ?

While it was a common practice with FSX/P3D, it's not as common or practical in MSFS, mostly because of the existence of the Marketplace, both because such external configurators are not allowed there, and even if the developers made them available separately, they couldn't affect a Marketplace installation anyway, because the airport .BGL there would be encrypted, so it couldn't be modified, and I doubt a developer would offer a "better" version on its own site, if he selling the same airport on the Marketplace. But maybe I missed something, and there are plenty of this out there...

If its realism you are after, Runway 5/23 has effectively been closed permenantly and is open only for taxiing. Below are several IRL NOTAMS to this affect.

If i understood correctly, the first one only covers portions of the runway, and the others all expire in a few days, but that's besides the point.

Users surely pay way more attention to charts than Notams, and if you check the current charts, nothing there ever suggests 5/23 has been closed. The Approaches are all there, the runways are all there listed with their stopping distances, lights, etc. the ILS is still there.

So yes, we might well deprecated 05/23 to be a taxiway, but then most users will look at the charts, and complain the scenery is completely wrong, because it misses a whole runway that is still listed as an available runway, with all its procedures, on all chart products everybody uses.

[Dave_YVR]

 FSLTL has no effect on runway selection at all, it is all done by the AI engine of the sim.

[N405GJ]

I am not trying to be difficult, but NOTAM's always take precedence over any charts or approaches. And as you mention, the first NOTAM may state that only a portion of Rwy 5/23 is closed, its only 7502 ft long to begin with so the remaining 500 ft or so is certainly not usable for takeoff or landing. Lastly, I am basing what I know from what I am being told by people from my VA that are either IRL pilots that frequent KCLT, or ATC with intimate knowledge of operations at KCLT. Would it be possible to offer a different BGL file for CLT with 5/23 inactive?

[virtuali]

I am not trying to be difficult, but NOTAM's always take precedence over any charts or approaches.

And again, since there's nothing in the charts everybody uses that suggests the runway has being closed, and no NOTAM to read, that's why disabling the runway entirely is not a good idea, because the number of people using Navigraph or similar charts is way higher than the number of people that also read real-life NOTAMs.

The ONLY thing we can do, is just flag the runways as closed in the .BGL, hoping the AI system will oblige to it. That's the correct way of doing it, intentionally feeding wrong data (= transforming the runway into a taxiway ) to the sim is not the correct way to deal with bugs in simulator, which might eventually be fixed.

The update is already online now.