Any ILS Airfields? Anderson?

[WytchCrypt]

Just fired up Marianas last night for a few minutes to fly around.  Very exciting map (especially since Hornet/carrier ops and some ground pounding are 95% of what I fly).  Looks like Anderson is TACAN 54X but doesn't seem to have an ILS channel.  Correct?  If so, is there a workaround to put some kind of object or unit on the base that transmits ILS so my Hornet can lock on for landing?  I know I technically don't need it, but it's so much more fun to land with both TCN & ILS locked on

 

Thanks!

Edited July 15, 2021 by WytchCrypt

[Northstar98]

Andersen AFB, Antonio B. Won Pat, Rota International and Saipan International all have ILS.

Though with the Hornet - it doesn't have land based ILS capability (contrary to what the UFC pushbutton says), only ICLS which is carrier only.

I'm not sure a land-based transmitter for ICLS exists, but assuming it does, there is no object for it.

Edited April 23, 2022 by Northstar98

[Recoil16]

10 minutes ago, Northstar98 said:

Andersen AFB, Antonio B. Won Pat, Rota International and Saipan International all have ILS on.

Correction: Rota does not have ILS.

But yes, Andersen has ILS on all runways, Guam Intl (Won Pat) on two and Saipan on one.

 

13 minutes ago, Northstar98 said:

I'm not sure a land-based transmitter for ICLS exists, but assuming it does, there is no object for it.

I'm not sure it does either, to my knowledge Navy aircraft do TACAN approaches at land bases and if the minimums don't suffice for that, they do PAR (precision approach radar) approaches.

[Ramsay]

1 hour ago, Recoil16 said:

I'm not sure it does either, to my knowledge Navy aircraft do TACAN approaches at land bases and if the minimums don't suffice for that, they do PAR (precision approach radar) approaches.

AFAIK the FAA consider ICLS as a "type" of ILS and list it as such on publicly available charts. The AN/TPN-22 (Iraq 2005) is a PAR that supports ACL (AFAIK it was decommissioned in 2014 in favour of a lighter / more mobile system). 

 

A 2018 FAA example for Cherry Point, RWY 26R

 

 

The AN/TPN-30 is (was?) also used for expeditionary fields, either singularly or as a linked LOC/GS pair.

 

 

Certainly lighter PAR systems are a better fit for the USMC's current mission statement/profile but I'm not sure what's being used at the "home" Naval Air Stations.

 

https://www.navair.navy.mil/node/21801

Edited July 15, 2021 by Ramsay

[Backy 51]

On 7/15/2021 at 3:48 PM, Ramsay said:

AFAIK the FAA consider ICLS as a "type" of ILS and list it as such on publicly available charts. The AN/TPN-22 (Iraq 2005) is a PAR that supports ACL (AFAIK it was decommissioned in 2014 in favour of a lighter / more mobile system). 

 

A 2018 FAA example for Cherry Point, RWY 26R

 

 

The AN/TPN-30 is (was?) also used for expeditionary fields, either singularly or as a linked LOC/GS pair.

 

 

Certainly lighter PAR systems are a better fit for the USMC's current mission statement/profile but I'm not sure what's being used at the "home" Naval Air Stations.

 

https://www.navair.navy.mil/node/21801

 

Been a while since I've had to take an Instrument Refresher Course, but I'm pretty sure that the above 2017/2020 Cherry Point instrument approach plates shown above do not reference ICLS or that ICLS equipment is installed at Cherry Point.  Perhaps one of our current active-duty USMC military pilots could further explain why the TACAN REQUIRED was dropped from the 2017 approach plate to the 2020 approach plate? I believe ICLS is only a ship-borne guidance system with unique certification requirements.

[Recoil16]

19 minutes ago, Backy 51 said:

Perhaps one of our current active-duty USMC military pilots could further explain why the TACAN REQUIRED was dropped from the 2017 approach plate to the 2020 approach plate?

It wasn't, it's still in the top left on the briefing strip.

[Backy 51]

2 minutes ago, Recoil16 said:

It wasn't, it's still in the top left on the briefing strip.

Missed it!  Format change I guess ... flew into NKT many times in the Herc.  

[Ramsay]

4 hours ago, Backy 51 said:

I believe ICLS is only a ship-borne guidance system with unique certification requirements.

It certainly seems to have been rare, for example IIRC the use of 2x AN/TPN-30 for field carrier landing practice was mentioned in a Congressional Procurement Report, so looks to have been unusual from a budgeting point of view.

 

The impression I have of the AN/TPN-30 is that it wouldn't meet "normal/civilian" certification requirements but that it didn't have to, it's strength was size and speed of setup, it's intended to help pilots find a temporary landing site at night or in poor visibility, not provide "precision"  approaches.

 

How the AN/TPN-22 was used IRL (i.e.  in Iraq 2005) is harder to judge as, although it supports ICLS, it's a fully featured PAR and at a mixed traffic expeditionary airfield, it may make sense to standardise/restrict ATC to use generic (non-ICLS) procedures (except for special circumstances/training), 

 

There are a few AN/TPN-30 and AN/TPN-22 photo's on the Bogue Rats MATCALS site, although some look to be from "open days",

 

http://boguerat.www4.50megs.com/Equipment.html

 

I believe the idea was to train both USMC pilots and ATC in their setup, use and procedures prior to deployment, etc.

 

AN/TPN-22 Automatic Carrier Landing System

 

Edited September 20, 2021 by Ramsay

[Backy 51]

That's pretty slick.  Did a JAATT out of NKT to YUM in the 80's carrying some sort of ATC gear but do not recall the nomenclature. Our CCT (Now STS) often set up portable TACANS similar to the TTS 3030 during exercises for guidance into the LZ.  Now, everybody does covert, blacked out NVG landings to austere LZs.

[WytchCrypt]

23 hours ago, Ramsay said:

It certainly seems to have been rare, for example IIRC the use of 2x AN/TPN-30 for field carrier landing practice was mentioned in a Congressional Procurement Report, so looks to have been unusual from a budgeting point of view.

 

That would be so cool to have as an object in the mission editor!  I would drop it on every runway I wanted to enable Hornet ICLS.  DCS did give us the mobile TACAN station, I wonder if they could also model a mobile ICLS station?

[Red Dog]

quick question about the Andersen ILS

 

I have no idea if the issue I am encountering right now is me, the F-16 or the marianas, so bear with me

 

When I take the instant action ready made mission with the F-16 at Andersen, I do have all 4 ILS working at Andersen AFB, no issue at all (except the nice weather  )

If I create my own basic mission with the mission editor just to fly the ILS at night and in different weather then I do not have any of the ILS active.

Once in pit, the procedure I apply is the same but neither the ILS ID are heard, and obviously all needles remains flagged and bars dashed.
TCN works fine and is ided correctly.

 

Is there anything special I missed we have to do to activate these ILS in the mission editor ? 

 

Side question, I wasn't able to get Inner and outer markers on these ILS, something else I missed or is that intended? I don't really expect outer markers on the 2 ILS from the sea, but are they supposed to be present at least on the 2 inland ILS? 

 

Any hints welcome

Thanks

 

 

Edited September 28, 2021 by Red Dog

[Northstar98]

6 hours ago, Red Dog said:

quick question about the Andersen ILS

 

I have no idea if the issue I am encountering right now is me, the F-16 or the marianas, so bear with me

 

When I take the instant action ready made mission with the F-16 at Andersen, I do have all 4 ILS working at Andersen AFB, no issue at all (except the nice weather  )

If I create my own basic mission with the mission editor just to fly the ILS at night and in different weather then I do not have any of the ILS active.

Once in pit, the procedure I apply is the same but neither the ILS ID are heard, and obviously all needles remains flagged and bars dashed.
TCN works fine and is ided correctly.

 

Is there anything special I missed we have to do to activate these ILS in the mission editor ? 

 

Side question, I wasn't able to get Inner and outer markers on these ILS, something else I missed or is that intended? I don't really expect outer markers on the 2 ILS from the sea, but are they supposed to be present at least on the 2 inland ILS? 

 

Any hints welcome

Thanks

 

What was the wind direction at speed?

[Red Dog]

Surface winds are 058° @6 kts

 

For reference all 4 ILS are working on the instant action F-16 mission on Andersen (Hot start)

(no markers though)

 

 

 

[Frederf]

At zero wind I get

 

24R 109.35, 24L 110.15

06L 109.30, 06R 110.10

 

At 058 6 knots

109.35 109.30 110.15 110.10 no signal

 

I think you've found a bug that instead of running ILS for 24L/24R but not 06L/06R under one wind condition and 06L/06R but not 24L/24R in another wind condition it's running all four sometimes and none other times.

 

Looking at PGUA in real life https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/atpubs/aip_html/part3_ad_2.0_guam.html There doesn't appear to be marker beacons at all.

[Red Dog]

Sure enough I put the winds to zero and all 4 ILS are back on in my custom mission.

Rgr on markers, that's what I thought as well. Just wanted a sort of confirmation

 

Thanks

 

PS: I'm surprised the ILS are activated/deactivated according to winds or active runway. Do they really do that IRL too? I rather thought they were all On no matter.

Especially when sharing the same frequency like real Andersen base (not in DCS for the limitation to have the same freq on both approach ends of the same runway)

 

[Northstar98]

2 hours ago, Red Dog said:

PS: I'm surprised the ILS are activated/deactivated according to winds or active runway. Do they really do that IRL too? I rather thought they were all On no matter.

 

They shouldn't, that's purely a DCS-ism.

 

AFAIK, unless it's broken, the ILS should be on for the active runway alone.

[drPhibes]

2 hours ago, Red Dog said:

I rather thought they were all On no matter.

Especially when sharing the same frequency like real Andersen base (not in DCS for the limitation to have the same freq on both approach ends of the same runway)

 

 

The short answer is no.

 

The longer answer:

Many/most runways with ILS in both directions are equipped with an interlock that prevents both systems from radiating at the same time. This is a requirement for CAT III (specified in ICAO Annex 10), and it is recommended for CAT I/II systems. If the ILS for both directions use the same frequency, the opposing beacons will interfere with each other, and cannot operate at the same time. The way the coverage sector of the Localizers shown in DCS is a bit misleading, as it indicates that the beacons radiate away from the runway (and thus the opposing beacons), but this is not the case IRL (see the pic below for an illustration). Simultaneous operation on the same frequency will cause erronious monitor readings on the opposing beacon, and the actual signal in space will be corrupted by the interference.

 

/drPhibes

Hardware engineer in the R&D dept. of the largest ILS manufacturer on the international market.

[Recoil16]

7 minutes ago, drPhibes said:

The way the coverage sector of the Localizers shown in DCS is a bit misleading, as it indicates that the beacons radiate away from the runway (and thus the opposing beacons), but this is not the case IRL (see the pic below for an illustration).

That is what is shown on the map in the mission editor, yes. Presumably to avoid clutter from having the localizers for opposite directions overlap on the runway. But actually, the localizer is modeled correctly at the respective end of each runway.

[drPhibes]

Yep. The "chartOffsetX = xyz" parameter in beacons.lua simply moves the showm sector xyz meters along the axis of the radaited signal. The beacons are located in the correct location (and radiate in the correct direction).

[Red Dog]

5 hours ago, drPhibes said:

 

The short answer is no.

 

The longer answer:

Many/most runways with ILS in both directions are equipped with an interlock that prevents both systems from radiating at the same time. This is a requirement for CAT III (specified in ICAO Annex 10), and it is recommended for CAT I/II systems. If the ILS for both directions use the same frequency, the opposing beacons will interfere with each other, and cannot operate at the same time. The way the coverage sector of the Localizers shown in DCS is a bit misleading, as it indicates that the beacons radiate away from the runway (and thus the opposing beacons), but this is not the case IRL (see the pic below for an illustration). Simultaneous operation on the same frequency will cause erronious monitor readings on the opposing beacon, and the actual signal in space will be corrupted by the interference.

 

/drPhibes

Hardware engineer in the R&D dept. of the largest ILS manufacturer on the international market.

 

 

Very interesting, thanks for that detailed technical answer - much appreciated

[TonyG]

I made a mod that adds some beacons throughout the MI as well as a couple of other maps. Adds ICLS to some of the land airports as well. 
 

GitHub link