Runway Direction Discussion

Moved from homepage quick chat. Feel free to add your 2 cents or even a nickel.

sycholic 1/12/2019 4:54
suggest adding directional arrows on runways so people stop driving against the norm, just had my first air collision in the whole time I been playing here, and 6 near misses in the past 2 days…

c0p0ut 2:32
@sycholic: Runways are typically bi-directional if they have pavement markings at both ends identifying the runway number. The direction used is based on wind direction, which I don’t think we utilize in Arma3.

sycholic 3:02
yeah what I mean so we drive on the rights as in the right runway… regardless of direction you going everyone following same direction. head on collision cuz someone decides to land on the left… then turn out right in front of someone taking off let alone 6 close calls in 2 days… cuz people going the other way. is all Im bringing up. could be new player why was asking if we can get a uniform standard with visual help on the map to indicate this.

VileAce 7:07
@sycholic: @c0p0ut: We should move this discussion to the forums, but when I first started playing on NAK is was common practice to take off one direction and land another, but over time the standard fell away. As all pilots are required to be on TeamSpeak, when there is no ATC, I ask pilot just to communicate their landings and take offs. If a NAK elite chooses not to be in TS, they will not have this information, but that is their choice.

I dont think we should add runways direction markers because avoiding air collisions should be relatively easy since this is something that both the pilots landing and taking off can avoid. for pilots taking off, a quick look at the map and it is easy to see if there is a plane that is lined up for landing, a glance at the air can confirm or decline if they are landing. for the pilot in the air checking the map is even easier since pilots will mostly be taking off from the fixed wing taxi way or the bobcat taxi way. If the landing plane does a pass by before landing which I think should always be done to check for debris it can also see a plane that is taxing or about to take off either line up on the other runway or do a swing around.

yeah Jim I used to think that… till within 2 days 1 collision (the first ever on the server in 2 years) and 6 near misses (all involved someone going head on…). and Im not gonna say nothing more then this ‘when I said something about it I was told to shut up and drop it’ in game… and half hour later the collision happened. so I came here. Im just saying its a lot easier to avoid someone if you both moving the same direction. head on it is a lot harder. esp in a jet cuz you lose the ability to turn over a certain speed. since we dont follow the common rule of wind defines which direction people land like how it is IRL and Im not suggesting that but a script that auto defines that based on wind direction would be actually cool… we just should have a defined standard.

Honestly Im surprised that Im getting this much resistance against it for a simple ‘always use the right or always use the left runway’ rule. which would require nothing more then picking a direction, then putting a couple map markers on the runways to indicate it. Im not saying only 1 runway… Im referring to how you looking at the pair always use the ‘left’ or ‘right’ I dont think people in europe would appreciate me doing200km/h down the autobaun going the wrong way down the road… let alone on Interstate 95 in the states, just because I ‘feel like it’ even the landing autopilot lands a specific direction every time (I believe)

If this has only happened once in two years I don’t think there should necessarily be a “fix” on a problem that isn’t really there. To put it in perspective think of it like this; you may obey all traffic laws on the road but there are still other people making illegal uturns and not following the arrows on the mall parking lots.

I think the key to fixing this recent issue you’re seeing is checking your map as well as voice/type chat in TS and in-game.

Being how vast and large the airspace is, i don’t understand how easy it is for planes to collide when they also have radar and positive communication.

It has happened to me sometime where another player will start taking off from the other side of the runway as I am rolling and have crashed into me. It is a real problem sometimes as most players dont even check their maps when taking off, but I dont really think direction arrows would really change anything at all, as there are players who even take off in the taxiways because they cant be bothered to taxi all the way to the runway.

Next time one of you are on sycholic, go ahead and place arrows on the map and see if it helps at all. The direction of landing/take off will not be required or enforced in any way, but it can be used as an experiment to; see how many people follow the suggestion; if it will help prevent crashes at the terminal.

ok real world rules are you take off into the wind and land against it. Since wind usually blows from the west to the east all take offs should be towards the west. similarly all landings should come from the east. This determines the active runway. Lets say the server had weather and the wind was from the south. Since the runways angle slightly from east to west take off and landing would remain the same. Now if it was from the north then we would land and take off the other way.

We had a Stealth Wasp parked on the end of 04R last night with no fuel and damaged gear which for some reason couldn’t be repaired by the scroll wheel option (gear was down). Golden and I used the map to mark runway 04R/22L closed, communicated in TS as well as side chat in game, and we diverted all aircraft until the tow vehicle to get it safely back to the repair area. Total runway closure was approx 5-7 minutes.

Zero mishaps due to great coordination through all communication channels. I think this speaks volumes and shows no changes are needed.

When there is a decent ATC online, providing pilots are in Teamspeak, it has been running like a well oiled machine. There has been great coordination, rotary and jets. Jets have been landing and taking off, rotary has been approaching parallel to 22R or intersecting both runways at a height as to not interfere with take off or landings.

The way the 2 runways are setup with bobcats, the only convenient and tendency of pilots is to land on 04R, which has ILS, go all the way to the end, circle around to 22R, rearm refuel at the bobcat at the end of the runway and then take off.

I don’t know if its possible, but i’d like to see a slight restructuring of the runways, adding a small tarmac on the outside of the runways to pull over and rearm / refuel at the bobcat and in addition, put a bobcat with tarmac on all 4 corners, or 2 corners of the opposing side of 22L & 04R of the outside of the runways.
Also I’d like to see a widened 22R just like 22L, and tarmac extensions. I think it would be great and wouldn’t take very much effort.

Please agree or disagree with me, I’m highly interested in this subject for some healthy debate.


actually editing the maps is not easy at all. Ace allows for adding more ILS but I&A I doubt ever will go ACE. another bobcat other end of the runway would be nice down by the helo’s end. we had a few days where we got some bobcats as rewards and thats where I parked them at since they cant be lifted and easily deployed anywhere. yeah ATC works but nak elite dont have to be in TS, I myself normally never am because its just too noisy typically.

As for vile’s suggestion I have drawn arrows a few times and some asked why i did then i said because if everyone goes the same direction is a lot easier to avoid collisions, and they agreed. this is why I have brought it up here because you get trolls who just delete markers because they feel like it and suggested it be just added into the mission so there a few arrows drawn on the map (Im not talking physically on the runway… which would require some custom objects or map editing)

At airports where there is no active ATC, it is the pilot’s responsibility to announce their intentions. I don’t think there needs to be any more markings placed on the map. People just need to communicate. The bobcat at the other end of the runway might be a good option.

I like Novix’s idea but I don’t believe this can be achieved with out making mods required to play on the server. But just as a wish list kind of thing I would love to see the airport upscale and many more taxi ways added maybe even make the runways intersect instead of parallel, I think this would add enjoyment to the atc role, of course this is just a wish and is probably impossible with out having a whole new map mod be required to play on the server

In General Aviation, whether the field is controlled or not, there are usually traffic patterns - Downwind, Base, and Final - and sometimes, Crosswind (called if you are taking off and remaining in the pattern to shoot a touch-and-go). The standard pattern is always a left-hand pattern. The runway-in-use is generally the one that is most facing into the wind - which usually has a prevailing general direction. Most of this is non-problematic if ATC is in control. You announce your inbound position and ATC directs you to enter the pattern for runway “X” A TRAFFIC PATTERN IS WHAT ALLOWS TRAFFIC TO MANAGEABLE.

When there is no ATC (tower) at a field, pilots are expected to dial in to the local frequency (found on aeronautical charts) and self-report their position and intentions. “Hellcat Bosco19 two clicks Southwest inbound for landing runway .” Or… “Black Wasp Bosco19 Downwind runway X” - when entering the pattern. This system works pretty well and it’s intention is to enable pilots to get a mental picture of where other aircraft are and what their intentions are. You can then try to visually locate the other traffic, and work with them to create a sequence in the traffic pattern - everyone in a known position and aware that they are #X for landing. This system relies on pilots giving continuing reports as to position and intention. Because pilots also report the aircraft type, you get a general idea of how fast they are and whether it might be prudent to sequence your slower home-built Experiment aircraft behind them in the pattern as “number two for landing behind the Cessna”.

As far as I can tell (not being a jet flyer), The main problem (perhaps not resolvable) is that in Arma, pilots just appear on final and land - chaos and destruction waiting in the wings. Most of the time that works, probably because the traffic density is not significant. As I see it, the main challenge here is just to get everyone to do the same thing, procedure-wise, all the time. Whether this means arrows on the runway, or whatever. On the surface this would seem to be a relatively simple problem, but it’s not…because the general nature of Arma on a public server is that most of the time people just do whatever they want, whenever they want to do it. It’s insanity…but at the same time, gloriously Democratic.

Good luck out there.

Hi, although Im relatively new to ARMA multiplayer gameplay and am just learning to fly helicopters in ARMA, before I have flown Ms Flight simulator X intensely on airbus a300 and Boeing 737-300 mainly local and European flights, and an occasional heavy here and there and some bush flying and spent 2 years flying for Virtual Croatian Squadron in DSC flaming cliffs 2 were I spent a lot of time in planning and executing CAS missions for ground troops with A-10s and Su-25s respectfully, including flying on other older “hard core” flying sims with limited knowledge in aircraft carrier operations.

I’m stating this so you can be aware from what background my comment comes from.

And after reading this discussion I can say I completely agree with wmetcalf. I believe that without ATC, designated traffic patterns always dictate air traffic, but all the airport maps I have worked with had plerola of data including flying patterns, specific VORs altitudes etc
which where used during our landing procedure in order to sucecfully land at a certain airport. I’m sure NAK pilots are more than aware than me on the technicalities of RL landing.

ARMA airspace size honestly does not facilitate the time for pilots to go through all required landing procedures in my opinion which leads to required “shortcuts” in air procedures (except maybe Altis map?) to have a fluent air traffic. So it really boils down to pilots practices and their willingness to obey some common sense approach procedures, and to state, I have observed similar pilot behaviourin the past in those games as well (e.g. directly landing with not giving any intention creating chaos in a highly time sensitive squedule.)

Even though ARMA air coordination is not that much time and plan bound, that sort of poor pilot habits should maybe be corrected verbaly by other players by educating pilots on common practices when they are observed.

I can say that whenever I was landing it was always a technical and procedural type of work (That is my feel, pls correct me if I’m wrong, I’m a layman after all in this topic) unless flying some ultralight or low flying UAV and it took decent amount of time and effort (of course I’m referring to manual landings).

So common unspoken rule of thumb to be shared amongst a pilot community as a common agreement would maybe be the easiest fix? E.g. veteran pilots agreeing on standard ways of aproach for when ATC is absent, and verbaly educate green pilots into common practice if error is sighted? Just my two cents.

Ok, I did a bit of digging and found some (hopefully) heplful links:

This is a 5yr old discussion on implementation of ATC functions in ARMA, some interesting systematisation was done on limits of ARMA 3 and ATC responsibility, worth a quick look:

And an image of standard civilian traffic pattern for Altis runway configuration.

Edit: be advised, helicopter pads need to be taken into account for the last schematic.

Hope that helps

Sadly arma and wind has no bearing to each other which is why the subject even came up.

the idea was to discuss why not just write in a rule (and some icons) for flight patterns for approach and takeoff since wind (as I was told directly has no bearing)…

even if you use autopilot landing you always will land a specific direction and that’s SW2NE on the main runway. so then wouldnt it make sense to just keep that standard (which is vanilla and built into the altis map data for what runways have ILS and autopilot support…) and have the smaller runway follow suit and be the landing runway for a NE2SW landing. which most dont even do because its a smaller target for landing and there is no repairs unless you backtrack.

I honestly gave up on the idea I thought the topic was dead.

Yas should try landing with papi lights @ night… :slight_smile:

Yeah, I read the discussion all the way through but nothing was concluded, so I figured it is something that is still being worked on.

How is the situation now I’m the air on servers? Did strandards kick in or is it still wild westish?

Yes I agree! Although I’m not an ARMA pilot (yet :wink: ) so my opinion does not hold much weight. But given prior expirience it makes perfect sense. When we would fly for practice, and when landings occur pilots naturally started to follow patterns that other plane already entered, so flight paths formed organically, e.g. a holding pattern line would form, just because pilots talked to each other and had the need to land at the same time.
In those kind of ad hock practice flights landing was declared, senior pilot would announce general approach to airfield and would state direction of holding pattern over runway ( left or right), pilots would announce fuel States and non landable ordinance would be safely jetissoned. And then on AF everybody already knows what will happen. Exactly what you are referring to.

You can always enforce practice of proper ATCless approaches via voice to new pilots, although that seems stresfull and time consuming in open servers I guess.

I have been researching some ATC AMRA gameplay and how people do it and am interested in giving a go. I would love to be apprentice ATC on NAK Altis sometimes to listen and observe the work. Then I will have a better understanding of ARMA airspace and pilot practices and will be able to give more practical conditions. I’m pinning this up on my to-do list next to FAC implementation :slight_smile:

Haha, yeah, I can imagine the stress :slight_smile:

In the end, because of the nature of this server and it’s players, I think only a VERY basic agreed-upon procedure could even have a hope of working. IMO, that would simply amount to dividing approach areas into simple North and South with 270-090 being the dividing line. Decide which runways serve the North and South directions. Establish the procedure in the rules-of-the-game for Altis pilots. There will be people who miss this, but if a common procedure is used daily by return players, they can inform Noobs if they are not following the crowd.Time and area factors would preclude people flying a “traffic pattern.” People wouldn’t have the faintest idea of WHERE the legs of the pattern should be flown and at what altitude. There are reasons relatively few people become real pilots. The knowledge and training (and expense!) required are serious and extensive. This AIN’t gonna happen on a game server - for many reasons.

That said, I think some form of standardization would serve well. Requiring players to always land on the same runway will help them to develop more skill through repetitive use of procedures - standard training method in real life. They would become more aware that there are simple areas where they can expect to encounter other aircraft doing the same thing they are doing, and it will require them to fit themselves into the procedure, if only by establishing their position on final - “Wipeout has the traffic on final and is number two for landing.” Or if ATC is being played, they would also have a simple, but relatively fixed pattern to work with, and a basic, standardized phraseology might be come used more - making it more fun to play that role. This comes about simply because there are some repetitive rules-and methods, simple though they may be. ATC players would then have the goal of trying to efficiently and properly inhabit the role, perhaps eventually becoming “favorites” of pilots, because they can trust them.

None of this can, or should be “hard core.” It’s a game, and all we need is enough structure and challenge to feel the satisfaction of doing it well. If these challenges have only a vague similarity to the real thing - that’s OK

umm you totally misreading what my intention/suggestion was. all you need to do is draw some map markers into the mission file showing arrows for direction on the main runway and alterative. do you land on carrier backwards? do you drive down a one way the wrong way in a car intentionally? not likely and if you did. you get in trouble. at the time of when I started this post there was about 3-4 new players who flat out would not land or take off following what the group of us were flying. so my suggestion was simple since wind is not a factor. one way airstrips problem solved anyone who dont follow breaking the rules then, thought it was simple idea. not sure why its getting so blown out of proportion beyond just putting 4 arrows down showing direction next to where the red runway marker #'s are (which are not vanilla only the # painted on the concrete are vanilla.)

and again the topic was dead not sure who started it back up think staff flat out saying they wont do it ended the convo.