[ATC] - SXM Runway Exit Behavior

Feature requests Gameplay
1

:bullseye: What is your suggestion?
At SXM, all aircraft larger than ICAO B (or B planes that behave like C) currently miss the first runway exit. They then have to taxi all the way down the runway, make a U-turn, and taxi back up to the gates. This awkward maneuver is a major inefficiency.

My suggestion is to implement a new taxi logic where all ICAO B-class aircraft are programmed to use the first runway exit. This would simplify the current logic and significantly improve realism and gameplay efficiency, as it would apply to a wide range of planes.

:hammer_and_wrench: How would it work in the game?
This change would be a backend adjustment to the game’s taxi pathing logic. The taxi route for all aircraft classified as ICAO B would be updated to automatically use the first available exit after landing, regardless of the specific model or its individual weight.

:balance_scale: Why is this a good idea?
This brings several key improvements to the game:

  • Realism: Many of these aircraft, especially when landing with a light load, would naturally take an early exit in real life. While individual weight logic could be complex, making a blanket rule for all ICAO B planes is a great way to improve realism and consistency.
  • Efficiency: It eliminates the need for planes to perform the slow and awkward U-turn at the end of the runway. This speeds up ground operations and reduces congestion, which is a big win for everyone.
  • Gameplay: This change would allow players to use a much wider variety of aircraft for connections to other player’s airports from SXM, which is currently very limited.

Typical Weights of Regional and Narrow-body Aircraft

The following table shows the typical weights of the aircraft families in question, which highlights the size differences and why this change makes sense for efficiency and realism.

Aircraft Family Typical Operating Empty Weight (OEW)
CRJ-200 ~ 14,000 kg (31,000 lbs)
CRJ-700 ~ 20,500 kg (45,000 lbs)
CRJ-900 ~ 21,800 kg (48,000 lbs)
CRJ-1000 ~ 23,200 kg (51,100 lbs)
F70 ~ 22,700 kg (50,000 lbs)
F100 ~ 24,400 kg (53,700 lbs)
E170 ~ 21,100 kg (46,600 lbs)
E175 ~ 21,900 kg (48,300 lbs)
E190 ~ 27,800 kg (61,400 lbs)
E195 ~ 28,900 kg (63,700 lbs)
B737-800 ~ 41,400 kg (91,300 lbs)
A320 ~ 42,400 kg (93,500 lbs)
2

Sorry but that’s HIGHLY unrealistic
Jet planes need longer runway distances to land
Maybe a small private jet could make it to intersection E but anything like a CRJ or ERJ can’t really do that
The way the CRJ700/900 land is perfectly realistic and they even exit on the first available intersection (E) which doesn’t take that long to clear the runway. And how salt I feel the E170/175, F70 and CRJ200 should do as well.
And it’s more realistic, especially for SXM than having them exit at E immediately after landing.
And that “awkward maneuver” that’s apparently a major inefficiency is exactly the peak of SXM’s realism

Even turboprops need some extra distance and don’t always manage to exit at that intersection

Here just a few examples

IMG_1898
IMG_18981920×1261 268 KB

IMG_1895
IMG_18951920×1261 267 KB

IMG_1899
IMG_18991920×1261 279 KB

Having C planes exit at E is more efficient than limiting jet aircraft’s RL performance to not backtrack

2 Likes
3

Aircraft up to the 757 should get off at the taxiway the S aircraft get off at.

3 Likes
4

I agree
But B jets like the F70 and ERJ and CRJ200 should backtrack like the CRJ700/900/1000 do

1 Like
5

Sorry to say this, but then SXM is dead. I can’t imagine a scenario in which anyone would enjoy that.

6 Likes
6

Maybe just a faster taxi speed in current situation can solve some issue? I do think we don’t have actual high taxi speed (usually US airport can taxi up to 28knots, which is much faster than what the game is having now).

6 Likes
7

That I agree

But that’s the challenge of SXM, it’s not supposed to be easy, but it can be adjusted I believe. But if you’re trying to play realistically, you’re going against the day time that goes by in an instant and you still have planes needing to land and that’s a bit overwhelming, I get that.

That’s why I’ve been begging the devs to adjust the speed of a day in the game slightly so that it won’t go by so quickly, let’s not even talk about the night the that once the sun sets, it’s already rising again. That’s super inaccurate.

And adjusting the taxiways for certain planes will help, but changing certain plane’s performances to match unrealistic standards is more killing of a game that’s aiming at matching realism.

And I’m saying this as someone’s who’s from SXM. I LOVE seeing the, backtrack, but seeing a F70 for example exit at E without backtracking just looks wrong.

4 Likes
8

I agree, the aircraft have the capabilities of course, but would look odd to see them get off at the same exit as ‘twotters’

1 Like
9

In my opinion another thing SXM would really benefit from is if we as players were able to choose between normal roundtrip-times or, as currently, roundtrip-times x3. We might then wouldn’t see the same twin-otters all the time ^^

3 Likes
10

Exactly, cause that def ruins realism

I do think a version of the game with different modes like real time, x3 time, or choose a specific time of day to play like Infinite Flight

I’m hoping with the new scheduling system they reconsider changing the speed of how fast 24 hours go

3 Likes