• Which the release of FS2020 we see an explosition of activity on the forun and of course we are very happy to see this. But having all questions about FS2020 in one forum becomes a bit messy. So therefore we would like to ask you all to use the following guidelines when posting your questions:

    • Tag FS2020 specific questions with the MSFS2020 tag.
    • Questions about making 3D assets can be posted in the 3D asset design forum. Either post them in the subforum of the modelling tool you use or in the general forum if they are general.
    • Questions about aircraft design can be posted in the Aircraft design forum
    • Questions about airport design can be posted in the FS2020 airport design forum. Once airport development tools have been updated for FS2020 you can post tool speciifc questions in the subforums of those tools as well of course.
    • Questions about terrain design can be posted in the FS2020 terrain design forum.
    • Questions about SimConnect can be posted in the SimConnect forum.

    Any other question that is not specific to an aspect of development or tool can be posted in the General chat forum.

    By following these guidelines we make sure that the forums remain easy to read for everybody and also that the right people can find your post to answer it.

Tutorial: Approaches

Messages
8
Country
denmark
I suppose my question will fit best in here:
Will the presence of an ADE file without approach data overwrite an older approach BGL file?

The reason I'm asking is that I installed a Samedan scenery and noticed that the AFCAD file was short a number of parking spots. So I opened up the afcad in ADE9, added the parking spots, compiled and removed the old AFCAD file. But as a result, aircraft are now flying straight in approaches (or trying to anyway), despite me still having the old Matthew Ministry approach BGL in the generic\scenery folder.

Edit: I swapped out the ADE for the original AFCAD file and they flew the approach just fine. That's the basis of my question.
 
Messages
1,465
Country
germany
if you have a look inside the ADE xml you will see there is a
"Delete all approaches" ...

normall you can load "stock approaches" and modify them if you like...

In your case you can go in ADE approach mode and import from bgl or xml
 
Messages
8
Country
denmark
Thanks, I ended up importing the approach XML from Matthew's original XML file (which he kindly uploaded with the BGL files), so that should take care of that :)
 

scruffyduck

Administrator
Staff member
FSDevConf team
Resource contributor
Messages
34,853
Country
unitedkingdom
The latest version of ADE will not exclude approaches if there are none in the project file.
 
Messages
8,893
thanks Jim,

that would be great,

(I am sure, I could learn a lot and testing is very fine job for me ..)

This is your LPMA I sent back to you. The AI Plane flys a downwind, curving base and final as per the long red lines. The downwind leg is a heading of 245 degree as per the ILS header.

Find the FAF05 Terminal_Waypoint. In the following picture you see I placed 2 small arrows at the FAF05. if you move the FAF05 up and to the right you shorten the final approach. Moving up and to the left you bring the downwind leg closer toward the airport.



Move the FAF05 using small increments. If the downwind gets too close to the island the AI Plane will start to climb on the base leg do to the altitude matrix. You have to move test and retest. You will know when you have moved the FAF05 too far. The Approach will break :eek:
 
Messages
1,465
Country
germany
thanks Jim,

you saved my weekend ... ;)

If I can tweak it significant, I will report here.

perhaps it is possible to reduce the "Appr Alt Feet" a little to avoid climbing on the base leg?

I will have to test it ...

FAF05 is a terminal waypoint type "named" (not type "FAF"),
is this correct?
 
Messages
1,465
Country
germany
indeed I could tweak the approach a little by moving (step by step) FAF05 (3.5nm west, 2.5nm north and reducing Appr Alt feet to 3000ft and Missed Alt Feet to 4000.

see attached picture ...

now I splitted the compile to get an "approach only" bgl.

If anybody could test this approach with fs9 default LPMA I would sent it by email...

(It is too difficult to uninstall Aerosoft's "Wonderful Madeira" only for this test).

gllni22mazio.jpg
[/URL][/IMG]

Thanks again Jim, for guiding me to this "impossible approach"

:)
 
Messages
1,465
Country
germany
equal named transitions for different approaches?

I am working on an airport update.

there are now 6 ILS approaches:

07L -> transition : KERAX ROLIS UNOKO PSA
07C
07R -> transition : KERAX ROLIS UNOKO PSA

25L -> transition : KERAX ROLIS UNOKO PSA
25C
25R -> transition : KERAX ROLIS UNOKO PSA

in the official charts and documents these are equal named transitions for
these approaches

(the transitions have the same name, but different waypoints)

I defined them as documented in the charts but the result looks very confusing. Can FS2004 handle these transitions?


11s3cdfvj67x.jpg
and

mvr2uqo6ewr.jpg


to explain it better ...

:confused:
 
Last edited:
Messages
8,893
hgschnell

Many airports use the same Transition name for multiple runways. This limits the amount of transitions needed for all runways that can use the same named terminal transition.

FS has no problem in replicating this.

This is CANUK for different runways. CANUK is used for runways 9R/27L, 9L/27R and 10/28 using different Terminal_Waypoints. If ATC says cleared ILS 27R then request CANUK arrival for runway 27R.



.
.

 
Last edited:
Messages
1,465
Country
germany
thanks Jim,

my confusion was caused by the fact that ATC offers only "VOR" or "NDB" transitions and no "Waypoint" transitions, if the waypoint is not part of the flightplan...

my other transition problem is the "altitude" of the transition legs.

When I am enroute at 9000 and request ILS07L with PSA transition,

ATC :
"Baron 8BE, you are 38 miles east. Cleared ILS runway 7L approach via PSA transition. Maintain 4000 until established on the localizer. Contact ...
when inbound on the approach"

(I had 4000 in PSA transition (just for testing), but when I use the real values (F080+) ATC tells me I should maintain 8000 until established... )
:eek:

PSA
DF436 L
DF437 L
DF439 F080+
DF444 L
DF454 L
NODGO A5000+
FINAL APPROACH 07L [ILS]
 
Messages
8,893
ATC tells me I should maintain 8000 until established... )

Listen to that again!!!

ATC will say maintain 8000 established but that is the altitude crossing the PSA fix and not the ILS. It is the pilots responsibility as per the charts to descend and cross all inbound fixes so the plane is at the FAF altitude when latching onto the GS.

or did I misunderstand what you are saying :eek:

If you look at my CANUK, ATC tells me cleared direct to CANUK and descend to 14,000 ft. Now it is up to me to descend to FAF as per the chart and where the fixes are set.

I do have one question. Did you add the TRansition to a ILS or to a RNAV approach because a ILS is a little different.
 
Last edited:
Messages
1,465
Country
germany
now I have got,

I will control the leg altitudes according to the charts ...
(there is no info in the GPS, I suppose)

"established on the localizer" was misleading

to your question:
I added the transition to an ILS approach
 
Last edited:
Messages
1,268
Country
us-hawaii
The altitudes (at or plus) you put on the legs are used in the gps to compute the "VSR" (vertical speed required) window on the bottom left (on the 500). But the way MS implemented it (unlike the real one) it gives feet per second rather than 100's of feet per min which would be more useful. However, for a user a value of eg -5 equates to -300 fpm so it isn't that hard to approximate. Note that if you leave an altitude off it will compute a descent rate to runway elevation.

scott s.
.
 
Messages
1,465
Country
germany
thanks a lot scott,

in between I realized the "VSR" part of the GPS too.
Its easy to reckon the ft/s ...

:)
 
Messages
56
Country
belgium
approach mode

euh , i want to observe the aproaches and transitions , but i only see the ils and runways and waypoint, on import bgl or xml i jus load the airport bgl i compiled. normaly on the right i can select wich app i want to observe but that side is blank. am i missing somthing? help


lol, 20 pages later in the manual they show how to look at your own made approach , so problem solved , lol
 
Last edited:
Messages
1,693
Country
unitedstates
Aged but well had

hello fellow simmers,
I am so sick of the 9 year old airports and approaches in FS2004/fs9 and I just cant find decent scenery with everything good to go and accurate (for free or a decent cost). So i started to play with ADE and updated the entire Tampa Tracon. All fields in Tampa Approaches airspace (B, C, D, G fields) were updated to reflect TODAY's information and layouts per the A/FD and Airnav.com for online diagrams. I am still adding all the fixes and waypoints on approach plates, but it should be done shortly, but before I take my time adding the 50 or so new waypoints, I wanted to make sure that I have the right idea and correct layout for the approaches. Eventually I want to add the STARS (KTPA's LZARD5 arrival for example) and SIDs (KTPA's BAYPO5 departure) to all the airfields within the tracon. I am a pilot and I am also a ZMA Vatsim controller so I have a pretty good bit of knowledge on the aviation side of things.

To illustrate my understanding, I used KVDF (Tampa Executive) to develope an RNAV approach to Rwy 18
http://155.178.201.160/d-tpp/1206/09241R18.PDF (Airnav.com/airports/kvdf)
I think I got it figured out. I had to add the following GPS waypoints to FS9 using ADE 1.46.2 (FSX is nice but system doesnt like it)

colud (Missed fix)
n27 56.93 w82 21.03
27.948833333
-82.3505

tocob (IF)
N28°11.92' W82°14.08
Latitude: 28.1986666666667
Longitude: -82.2346666666667

welup(IF/FAF)
N28°11.98' W82°20.89
Latitude: 28.1996666666667
Longitude: -82.3481666666667

sakgo(IF)
N28°12.03' W82°27.65
Latitude: 28.2005
Longitude: -82.4608333333333

After adding as terminal waypoints because GPS wp's isnt an option, I built the approach as follows
R18: RNAV
Apleg IF WELUP
APleg CF Rwy18
APLEG HM WELUP
MISLeg CF COLUD
MIDleg HM COLUD
>Transition TOCOB
tranleg IF TOCOB
tranleg CF WELUP
>transition SAKGO
tranleg IF SAKGO
tranleg CF WELUP

altitude, Turns and headings are based on charts.
Could someone have a look at the plate and see if the routing above matches up? The coordinates listed arent an issue, just want to make sure that i coded the legs correctly to match the approach. ty
Im hoping.

Also, if anyone could tell me the pros to using prokey in 1.50 vs the no prokey 1.50, that would be appreciated.
 

scruffyduck

Administrator
Staff member
FSDevConf team
Resource contributor
Messages
34,853
Country
unitedkingdom
Also, if anyone could tell me the pros to using prokey in 1.50 vs the no prokey 1.50, that would be appreciated.

You might like to ask that as a separate thread so that it does not get buried in the sticky on approaches
 
Messages
1,268
Country
us-hawaii
To illustrate my understanding, I used KVDF (Tampa Executive) to develope an RNAV approach to Rwy 18
http://155.178.201.160/d-tpp/1206/09241R18.PDF (Airnav.com/airports/kvdf)
I think I got it figured out. I had to add the following GPS waypoints to FS9 using ADE 1.46.2 (FSX is nice but system doesnt like it)

colud (Missed fix)
n27 56.93 w82 21.03
27.948833333
-82.3505

tocob (IF)
N28°11.92' W82°14.08
Latitude: 28.1986666666667
Longitude: -82.2346666666667

welup(IF/FAF)
N28°11.98' W82°20.89
Latitude: 28.1996666666667
Longitude: -82.3481666666667

sakgo(IF)
N28°12.03' W82°27.65
Latitude: 28.2005
Longitude: -82.4608333333333

After adding as terminal waypoints because GPS wp's isnt an option, I built the approach as follows
R18: RNAV
Apleg IF WELUP
APleg CF Rwy18
APLEG HM WELUP
MISLeg CF COLUD
MIDleg HM COLUD
>Transition TOCOB
tranleg IF TOCOB
tranleg CF WELUP
>transition SAKGO
tranleg IF SAKGO
tranleg CF WELUP

altitude, Turns and headings are based on charts.
Could someone have a look at the plate and see if the routing above matches up? The coordinates listed arent an issue, just want to make sure that i coded the legs correctly to match the approach. ty
Im hoping.

Also, if anyone could tell me the pros to using prokey in 1.50 vs the no prokey 1.50, that would be appreciated.

Generally we use TF legs from RNAV waypoint to waypoint. You need the FAF fix IGDUF and step-down fix JIGBO. The missed leg is direct to COLUD so I think DF instead of CF. The racetrack at WELUP is only if you are using WELUP as the IAP (transition) and approaching from the south. I don't think there is any way to code that though. Pilot would have to know there is NoPT if approaching from the north. And the racetrack should be an HF, not HM (make one loop to align with the final approach course) for the WELUP transition.

so the main approach is
IF WELUP
TF IGDUF
TF JIGBO
TF RWY18

missed is
DF COLUD
HM COLUD

WELUP transition is
IF WELUP
HF WELUP

SAKGO transition is
IF SAKGO
TF WELUP

TOCOB transition is
IF TOCOB
TF WELUP

Note that the RWY fix (like all RNAV RWY fixes AFAIK) is fly-over, but I don't think FS9/X does anything with flyby/flyover

scott s.
.
 
Last edited:
Top