Tutorial: Approach Legtype Definitions and Attached Picture

[jvile]

If I understood you correctly and for my approach to 19R, the IF is Laugh and the IAF is BEEZY; therefore, my transitions (ALL) should simply end with a TF at either the IF OR IAF. This would certainly simplify things.

Look at you first "IF statement after your ILS Approach header. I used LAUGH in my example as the IAF, Not BEEZY. So my Transition ends with a TF and LAUGH. At that point the line draw will continue. Think of a Transition as an extension off what you wrote for the foundation ILS or RNAV approach. A Transition always ties into the foundation approach at the IAF you used in the first approach phase.

You do not write a Transition all the way to a runway since that is already written as your fundamental approach.

I did notice that in your EHAM approach for RW06 (the one I examined), there were TF T_Waypoint calls in the transitions that were missing in the list (and on the grid). Was this intentional? Are they located on another grid?

I am not sure what you are not seeing. I will have to review what I wrote since it was over a year ago. there is only one Grid but I did not do EHAM with ADE but did it all by hand. there was no ADE at that time so my approach code may be off somewhat.

 

[kagazi]

Be careful with a DF then a VI which when you load the approach in the GPS reciever you will get complete circles that should not be there.

Jim: I revised 19R and replaced the DF with a TF. I wanted to provide some observations in the event others have seen this...

My original RNAV missed at 19R was CA, DF, VI, CF, HM. I loaded the approach in the gps to test and witnessed the complete loop (circle) at the center of 19R just as you warned. When I reviewed the code I noticed that I was missing the "deg" in the CA leg. The default was zero. I changed this to the mag heading of the runway 191 reloaded the approach and the loop was gone. I flew the missed and all worked.

I reworked all of my transitions yesterday using your example so the TFs end at the IF or IAF. When I reloaded the approach to test 19R I noticed the loop was back! I reviewed the missed approach code at 19R and found that the "deg" in the CA leg was once again zero. As I did not work on the missed codes (only transitions) I found this change to be odd.

I experimented by changing the DF to a TF. The loop issue is gone but that could be more due to adding back in the "deg" in the CA; While experimenting, I noticed that as I go missed and climb to 5,000 towards OLIVR as directed (I fly the published approach choice), if I reach my destination altitude before reaching OLIVR ATC asks if I have reached the... (can't remember the exact wording) hold/destination? If I say yes I'm given a new vector back to the MRB/MRB1 VOR to 19R.

Q: First, is this typical behavior for ATC to intervene prior to my plane reaching OLIVR? Do you recommend the TF in lieu of the DF? Second, I was under the impression that the HM was manual? Wouldn't I first need to reach the hold and have it shown in the gps as active before I could manually ask for a new approach/vector?

Thank you for your thoughts.
kagazi

 

[scott967]

Without playing with it, I'm not sure why you need the VI leg? Just looking at the chart I would start out with

DF HIMRA
CF OLIVR course 280M
HM OLIVR course 092M

I didn't include the CA because I don't think you can actually achieve 5000 before HIMRA. I would try it both ways maybe it doesn't really matter in FSX.

Maybe something Jim can comment on, is that this chart has two "feeder routes" from DRUZZ and MULRR. I don't think these are part of the actual approach?

scott s.
.

 

[jvile]

While experimenting, I noticed that as I go missed and climb to 5,000 towards OLIVR as directed (I fly the published approach choice), if I reach my destination altitude before reaching OLIVR ATC asks if I have reached the... (can't remember the exact wording) hold/destination? If I say yes I'm given a new vector back to the MRB/MRB1 VOR to 19R.

ATC does say something during the published missed approach. Do not respond.

Go all the way to the hold and hold at least once then open the ATC menu and tell ATC you are manually done with the hold. ATC will vector you to MRB unless you ask them for something else. I always ask for a vectors to final so I do not have to fly the Transition a second time.

I noticed that I was missing the "deg" in the CA leg.

Are you saying we have a bug that is always dropping the degree heading in certain leg types? If so explain the bug so I can repeat it on my end.

Like Scott shows you can write missed approach instructions different ways. Try to use the least amount of legs to accomplish the proper draw for the missed approach.

 

[kagazi]

Scott: Thanks for the suggestion, I will give it a try. I'm beginning to realize that there may be more than one option but some options may be better than others. I used the VI as I'm new to this and was following another approach that used the VI.

Jim: I will continue to monitor the beta as I use it but I did observe that the magnetic heading of 191 in the CA missed leg was zeroed (reverted to default) on one occasion. Basically, I saved and successfully compiled and tested the missed approach - no loop. When I revisited to fix the transitions, I again saved and compiled. This time I noticed the loop was back. Checked the CA leg and the mag heading was zero.

Thank you both for your comments.
kagazi

 

[scott967]

Kagazi:

One thing I've seen is default approaches that look the same (more or less) on a chart might have a different sequence of legs. I think what's important (well, at least to me!) is that the GPS can provide good info to the pilot, or correctly drive the aircraft when coupled to the autopilot. Jim has done much more with watching the AI. I install flightplans and watch AI in good and bad weather, and if they seem to work OK (and I monitor ATC comms appr and tower while they come in) then I figure I'm good.

scott s.
.

 

[Helli]

Jim

I have told you elsewhere, how much I appreciate the Tutorial, which you present here in several steps.

Would it be too exorbitant to ask you for an additional installment, namely how to generate a transition for Rwy19R of KIAD?

Helli

 

[jvile]

Helli

Will add it to this post I will use additional pictures so you and Bob can get them for the ADE Documentation if needed.

 

[Helli]

Thank you, Jim

Helli

 

[Pyscen]

Helli

Will add it to this post I will use additional pictures so you and Bob can get them for the ADE Documentation if needed.

Jon/Jim:

I was just going to ask... I'm assuming this will be in some docmentation/Tutorial with v1.40? Especially for future references.

Thanks

 

[scruffyduck]

I was just going to ask... I'm assuming this will be in some docmentation/Tutorial with v1.40? Especially for future references.

We hope so

 

[Pyscen]

We hope so

Thanks,... I hope so too!

Ohhh Jon can I stop the drum roll... my arms are getting tired and also it makes it hard to Fly?

 

[dj natty d]

Hey Jim, lots of helpful info here, 1 question though. Can this same procedure be used for a visual approach? Specificly the curved approach at Madeira? I've noticed that Aerosofts scenery hasn't got the correct approach and ATC vectors you straight in, leaving you around 100 feet of ground clearance from the hillside.

 

[jvile]

Hey Jim, lots of helpful info here, 1 question though. Can this same procedure be used for a visual approach? Specificly the curved approach at Madeira? I've noticed that Aerosofts scenery hasn't got the correct approach and ATC vectors you straight in, leaving you around 100 feet of ground clearance from the hillside.

dj natty d

You can curve approach any runway using what I descibed in the Approach sticky for KLAS. The principal is for all curved approaches or LDA's that FSX uses in their default database.

My technique is the one I wrote for all the developers of Kai Tak that have the AI/User planes flying the IGS 13 checkerboard approach.

The term Visual Approach is misleading in the ATC engine of FS9/FSX. In the world of approaches per FS the curved approach is always associated with any type approach except a ILS. The problem is FS coded the ILS approach as both a visual approach and a precision approach in all kinds of weather. Without going into a lot of boring code we simply code any ILS approach as the curved approach. That means regardless of the weather (VMC or IMC) the AI plane will follow the heading path that we set regardless of runway heading.

Madeira does not have a ILS for either RWY 05 or 23. But that is not what AI Planes work with anyway. What could be done for LPMA is make a ILS Approach with the Approach Mode of ADE. I am not saying make a ILS for the runway but only make a ILS approach code for the runway such as 05.

Code the approach with a 3000 ft AGL FAF out over the water so the AI Plane flys on a 360 degree heading towards runway 05 and then turns to the right and aligns with 05 on short final.

Any Plane coming from the land side of the airport will hold a higher altitude then the land based on the MDA matrix that FS uses. ATC will vector the AI Planes out over the water and then a reversal back to heading 360.

Once you have a basic curved approach to RWY 05 that works then you start tweaking it to resemble some of the approach charts that are actually written for RWY 05.

 

[FlyingMasterChef]

Sorry if this seems out of place.. I am reading all this, and would LOVE if Jon or someone could make a video (I have watched the current tutorials) showing the creation of a totally new set of approaches for an airport.

This would be great for those of us creating our own NEW airports from scratch.

Showing how to place the fixes, the types of fixes that should or would be used, etc.. I know that not every approach is straight in, so this tutorial could show how to make these. And not just ILS, but vor, DME, etc... In the tutorial, if the person would show putting the fix, and tell WHY that particular type is used in this approach.

Just using real world examples doesn't help those of us creating out own airports at all.

And lastly, I see on here, and in the videos, the ring around the airport. I have 1.4 and there is NO ring around the airport in approach mode. Why not? (not like I need it, but curious since mine doesn't look like what you are showing.)

- Greg

PS: as many know, I am making a new NKL which is in northern florida close to Mary-Esther and Pensacola.. While the stock nkl is tiny and non used, mine will be a full international airport.. So I want to make realistic approaches into it...any help with this would be GREAT!!!

 

[jvile]

And lastly, I see on here, and in the videos, the ring around the airport. I have 1.4 and there is NO ring around the airport in approach mode. Why not? (not like I need it, but curious since mine doesn't look like what you are showing.)

Greg

The ring around a airport is called a test radius. FSX set it to 2000 Meters which is too small. ADE resets it to 5000M. Any Airport element not inside the ring when compiling will show a warning such as a runway, boundary fence, taxiway sign, etc.

At very large airports like KATL or EHAM the 5000 M radius is not large enough and we allow the ADE designer to increase the test radius to 7, 8, 9000 Meter if needed.

We do not show the ring in approach mode anymore because FSX does not throw a warning for any part of the approach. If it did there would be many warnings just for all the Navaids such as Terminal_Waypoints.

There is a lot of information between this sticky post/thread and the one called Approaches. I address most of the fundamentals on how the approach works for both a User plane and AI Plane.

You can also learn alot about approaches by opening a default FSX airport and comparing the Approach Mode Tree data to an Approach Chart that you download off of the Internet.

 

[FlyingMasterChef]

Thanks Jim!

Yeah, I am reading everything I can find on here about approaches. Have been for several days now. Most of it gets confusing to me, simply because I am creating from absolute scratch. While I can use the current navaids in the around around NKL, they all show up in the approach window, I am at a loss to figure out the hows and whys of approach making.. I hope that makes sense...

for example, plane coming in from the north. Active is rwy 22. I want to make a realistic approach for that. Altitudes, fixes, etc.. And I would like to do this for each rwy with approaches from each direction..

Again, hope that makes sense..

Still reading...and learning...

- Greg

 

[dj natty d]

dj natty d

You can curve approach any runway using what I descibed in the Approach sticky for KLAS.

Cheers for that Jim, i had a look in the Approach sticky a while back but couldn't make heads nor tail of what everything meant/did (my knowledge of aviation terminology is tiny at best). Thanks to the time you've spent explaining it in this thread, hopefully i can make a start on writing/re-writing some of the stock approaches.

 

[jvile]

Thanks Jim!

Yeah, I am reading everything I can find on here about approaches. Have been for several days now. Most of it gets confusing to me, simply because I am creating from absolute scratch. While I can use the current navaids in the around around NKL, they all show up in the approach window, I am at a loss to figure out the hows and whys of approach making.. I hope that makes sense...

for example, plane coming in from the north. Active is rwy 22. I want to make a realistic approach for that. Altitudes, fixes, etc.. And I would like to do this for each rwy with approaches from each direction..

Again, hope that makes sense..

Still reading...and learning...

- Greg

To simplify, every single approach to the runway is a standard format in the Mode Tree. It does not matter if you want a ILS Approach to the runway or a NDB Approach (if a NDB exist).

I added a ILS to runway 35 at NKL in the airport mode and checked the box that says create a ILS approach. I go to Approach Mode and choose the menu List | Approach and highlight ILS 35 choosing edit.

Every single approach must always have the Approach Header which is first in the tree. The header is for ATC and AI/User Plane behavior. ATC says to descend to 2100 ft and ATC will vector User/AI toward the FAF Terminal_Waypoint that ADE made which is the middle blue triangle (unnamed FF35N).

The header is for ATC and has nothing to do with drawing any lines!!!!

 

[FlyingMasterChef]

Jim...

I am beyond speechless... THIS is exactly how I learn things. I can read all day long and it is like greek. But I see it once and it is in my head forever. WOW!

You have made me a fan for life. I can't type thank you here enough..and I won't pretend I am 11 and copy/paste it 1000 times...hehe So just imagine that I did.

That you took the time to do this for me and for others that may learn from it.... Thanks!!!!!!!!!!!

Greg