• 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

Nice but how

:confused:
tgibson said:
Hi,

Where did you place the 6800 ft value? It must be in the main ILS header, not in any IF, CF, etc. leg.

If there is no approach path that lets the planes reduce altitude before they get to within a few miles of the airport (around 1-4 miles, depending on aircraft type), then there is nothing you can do. They won't do things like make 360 circles.

If the valley is round or L shaped, one thing you can try is to have them make a perpendicular approach from the side of the valley, make a 90 degree turn back to the airport (from the far side of the valley), descend down the valley, and then land. I.e. try to find a way to maximize their approach path in the valley.
Click to expand...

Yes, but how :confused:
I've the same problem with SPJR aproach 8900 ft and mountains and mountains.

Help please:)
 
Help please

;)
jvile said:
In some cases why you won't see the lines is because the IAF and the FAF are not listed properly in correct order.

The ILS header gets the FAF
The first IF leg gets the IAF
The first CF leg that follows gets the FAF again
The second CF leg gets the runway.
Click to expand...

Hi Jim,

I was read twice your posts about Approaches and Approach Legtype Definitions and Attached Picture, and I’m in progress but I’ve difficulties with the approaches between mountains in the Peru’s airports and I don’t know how to solve this.

For instance in SPJR the AI lands well when it comes from SPIM, but when it comes from SPNC no landing alike in SPNC, when the AI comes from SPJR landing not well but lands and when it comes from SPIM no landing

This is my xml to SPJR and thanks a lot:)




<Approach
type="ILS"
runway="34"
designator="NONE"
suffix="0"
gpsOverlay="FALSE"
fixType="TERMINAL_WAYPOINT"
fixRegion="SP"
fixIdent="FF34N"
altitude="10800.0F"
heading="337.279999"
missedAltitude="11800.0F">
<ApproachLegs>
<Leg
type="IF"
fixType="TERMINAL_WAYPOINT"
fixRegion="SP"
fixIdent="IF34N"
altitudeDescriptor="+"
altitude1="10800.0F"
/>
<Leg
type="CF"
fixType="TERMINAL_WAYPOINT"
fixRegion="SP"
fixIdent="FF34N"
flyOver="FALSE"
theta="0"
rho="0.0N"
magneticCourse="336.28"
distance="9.0N"
altitudeDescriptor="+"
altitude1="10800.0F"
/>
<Leg
type="CF"
fixType="RUNWAY"
fixRegion="SP"
fixIdent="RW34"
flyOver="FALSE"
theta="0"
rho="0.0N"
magneticCourse="336.28"
distance="18.0N"
altitudeDescriptor="A"
altitude1="8830.997F"
/>
</ApproachLegs>
<MissedApproachLegs>
<Leg
type="CF"
fixType="TERMINAL_WAYPOINT"
fixRegion="SP"
fixIdent="HH34N"
flyOver="FALSE"
theta="0"
rho="0.0N"
magneticCourse="336.28"
distance="10.0N"
/>
<Leg
type="HM"
fixType="TERMINAL_WAYPOINT"
fixRegion="SP"
fixIdent="HH34N"
turnDirection="R"
magneticCourse="336.28"
time="1"
/>
</MissedApproachLegs>
<Transition
transitionType="FULL"
fixType="WAYPOINT"
fixRegion="SP"
fixIdent="MARCA"
altitude="15800.0F">
<TransitionLegs>
<Leg
type="IF"
fixType="WAYPOINT"
fixRegion="SP"
fixIdent="MARCA"
/>
<Leg
type="TF"
fixType="WAYPOINT"
fixRegion="SP"
fixIdent="VATES"
magneticCourse="0"
/>
<Leg
type="TF"
fixType="TERMINAL_WAYPOINT"
fixRegion="SP"
fixIdent="WPA1"
magneticCourse="0"
/>
<Leg
type="TF"
fixType="TERMINAL_WAYPOINT"
fixRegion="SP"
fixIdent="WPA"
magneticCourse="336.28"
/>
<Leg
type="TF"
fixType="TERMINAL_WAYPOINT"
fixRegion="SP"
fixIdent="IF34N"
magneticCourse="336.28"
/>
</TransitionLegs>
</Transition>
<Transition
transitionType="FULL"
fixType="WAYPOINT"
fixRegion="SP"
fixIdent="LIVUS"
altitude="15800.0F">
<TransitionLegs>
<Leg
type="IF"
fixType="WAYPOINT"
fixRegion="SP"
fixIdent="LIVUS"
/>
<Leg
type="TF"
fixType="TERMINAL_WAYPOINT"
fixRegion="SP"
fixIdent="WPA4"
magneticCourse="0"
/>
<Leg
type="TF"
fixType="TERMINAL_WAYPOINT"
fixRegion="SP"
fixIdent="WPA3"
magneticCourse="0"
/>
<Leg
type="TF"
fixType="TERMINAL_WAYPOINT"
fixRegion="SP"
fixIdent="WPA2"
magneticCourse="0"
/>
<Leg
type="TF"
fixType="TERMINAL_WAYPOINT"
fixRegion="SP"
fixIdent="WPA1"
magneticCourse="336.28"
/>
<Leg
type="TF"
fixType="TERMINAL_WAYPOINT"
fixRegion="SP"
fixIdent="WPA"
magneticCourse="336.28"
/>
<Leg
type="TF"
fixType="TERMINAL_WAYPOINT"
fixRegion="SP"
fixIdent="IF34N"
magneticCourse="336.28"
/>
</TransitionLegs>
</Transition>
</Approach>
 
Davicho

This is what the AI Planes understand


<Approach
type="ILS"
runway="34"
designator="NONE"
suffix="0"
gpsOverlay="FALSE"
fixType="TERMINAL_WAYPOINT"
fixRegion="SP"
fixIdent="FF34N"
altitude="10800.0F"
heading="337.279999"
missedAltitude="11800.0F">
<ApproachLegs>

You have the AI Planes coming over top the mountains on almost a straight line to runway 34. The mountains can cause ATC to hold the Ai Plane higher then 10800 ft causing them to not land.

You could set the heading to 300 degrees and line up the IAF, FAF on that same heading. The AI Plane will make a right turn curved approach to runway 34.

You listed your XML but that does not do me any good unless you list all your new Terminal_Waypoints (Lat/Lon) so I can run it in ADE.
 
Thanks

Hi Jim,

Thank you very much for your response. To tell you the truth I’m very, very, very newbie but I would like to learn how to use ADE a little more in order to solve these problems.

First of all I don’t know how to do the suggestions of your second paragraph:[/QUOTE]You could set the heading to 300 degrees and line up the IAF, FAF on that same heading. The AI Plane will make a right turn curved approach to runway 34.[/QUOTE]

And I’ll send you, if I understood my TW (Lat/Lon) in the attach file .bgl.

Thank you very much for your help:).
 

Attachments

Thanks

jvile said:
You could set the heading to 300 degrees and line up the IAF, FAF on that same heading. The AI Plane will make a right turn curved approach to runway 34.
Click to expand...
I did it, but the AI cut the trees and it lands on the beam, but thanks anyway. Is this the only way to AI lands and for every airport surrounded with the mountains?:confused::o
 
Your seeing the limitations of AI. You also need to look at AI on VFR flight plans because they will try to enter the pattern.

When you have approaches that try to get AI to follow a curve, the performance of the specific AI makes a difference. I see sometimes an AI will make a turn and get down OK, and others always land alongside the runway or miss it all together. Try the default Baron, Maule (if you have deluxe), and Caravan at the smaller airports. Also try some of the popular addons if it looks like it might be a problem, like DJC or TFS (if there are real-world flightplans available that's what most people will use).

scott s.
.
 
Davicho said:
Thanks, but is possible to erase the trees and others things with ADEX:confused: in order to see the runway:confused:
Click to expand...

ADE removes trees from the ends of runways. You create a poly that gives you a .cvx file with the proper ground texture.
 
That's true if you are using ADE for FSX. If you are creating for FS9, use the program ExcBuilder2 to create an exclude rectangle and choose Exclude All to remove the autogen. Avoid other objects you want to keep, unless they are in your ADE file (you can make more than one BGL if you like). Place this exclude BGL file(s) in the same folder as your ADE BGL file.

Hope this helps,
 
Oups!
a few hours later i finish reading this 6 pages and begin to understand why my first attempts to get realistic my AI landings on LFMT were totally disappointing!

Perhaps have i now in my little head the main concepts?
Probably, I have to talk you about my progress (and difficulties??)

In any case, many thanks to Jim and others for their lessons and sharing their expertise!

Philippe
 
Davicho said:
I did it, but the AI cut the trees and it lands on the beam, but thanks anyway. Is this the only way to AI lands and for every airport surrounded with the mountains?:confused::o
Click to expand...
Thanks a lot Jim and folks I did it in SPJR, but still the same problem in SPNC:confused:
I've to do it the same as SPJR, I mean set the heading to 50 degrees or more and line up the IAF, FAF on that same heading? :confused:

Thanks for your help:)
 
Jim: If you take a look at the VOR approach at LERS, fsx automatically draws a "tear drop" when the IAF is the VOR. I've noticed this especially when the fixed and rec point is the VOR. The chart shows IAF as the VOR with a HF loop back to the VOR and intersecting the runway GS. Is there a way to prevent the tear drop from showing in the GPS without changing what the approach chart shows? Thanks for your help.
 
kagazi said:
Jim: If you take a look at the VOR approach at LERS, fsx automatically draws a "tear drop" when the IAF is the VOR. I've noticed this especially when the fixed and rec point is the VOR. The chart shows IAF as the VOR with a HF loop back to the VOR and intersecting the runway GS. Is there a way to prevent the tear drop from showing in the GPS without changing what the approach chart shows? Thanks for your help.
Click to expand...

I don't have the chart but the FS ingame GPS says to fly direct to the RES VOR and then execute a right hand hold on the outbound 071 radial. After the hold is complete on the outbound side (071 heading) we fly to the FD25 and then execute the righthand teardrop which is the VORDME final approach phase for that RES transition.

ADE is drawing it the proper way but the ingame GPS is having problems with the line draw. This is a common error when FS says it is using ARINC 424 but then decides to sidetrack from the standard.

In ADE select the RES Transition so you see the hold and the tear drop procedure turn. Now go back to the top of the approach txt and in the box that says R25: VORDME mouse click the IF CF CF ONLY and you will see each arrow at each turn in the tear drop change color. The Teardrop is actually coming from the R25: VORDME approach IF CF CF and not the RES Transition.

That is because FS decided to use a different Transition fix in the VORDME RES then what is in the R25: VORDME "IF" legtype.

I would delete the RES Transition and make a seperate vectors to fiinal VORDME approach just for RES which would then eliminate the teardrop if that is your goal.
 
Davicho said:
Thanks a lot Jim and folks I did it in SPJR, but still the same problem in SPNC:confused:
I've to do it the same as SPJR, I mean set the heading to 50 degrees or more and line up the IAF, FAF on that same heading? :confused:

Thanks for your help:)
Click to expand...

Select any inbound heading degree needed to give you a curved clear approach to the runway. Yes, we make the curved approach the same way but you have to decide what degree heading gives you a clear path to the airport for the turn to final.
 
The Teardrop is actually coming from the R25: VORDME approach IF CF CF and not the RES Transition.

That is because FS decided to use a different Transition fix in the VORDME RES then what is in the R25: VORDME "IF" legtype.
Click to expand...

I see it now. Thanks for pointing it out.
 
jvile said:
Select any inbound heading degree needed to give you a curved clear approach to the runway. Yes, we make the curved approach the same way but you have to decide what degree heading gives you a clear path to the airport for the turn to final.
Click to expand...
Thank you very much Jim, you're the master;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top