HUD mode for ILS and stpt to SPI

[EtherealN]

Mmmm and not a smiley in sight.

Know much about flying big jets do we????? :music_whistling:

 

I just want to freak out some passengers by doing unannounced fingertip training on an airliner that is on final... :D

(Yes, I know the wingtip vortices would probably end up killing me when I slip up, but it would almost be worth it. :P )

Edited January 6, 2012 by EtherealN

[Ratfink]

but hey, we're Hog drivers and not lazy airline captains :-).

 

:lol:

[Lane]

I just want to freak out some passengers by doing unannounced fingertip training on an airliner that is on final... :D

(Yes, I know the wingtip vortices would probably end up killing me when I slip up, but it would almost be worth it. :P )

 

lol.... poor passengers...

 

@Zenga, yes i love too this view, remind me a lot the switzerland too .... And a big thanks to the guy who have done this skin, this is one of the most pefect i have seen.

Edited January 6, 2012 by Lane

[Zenga]

@effte: Understood now, I just oversaw the post you reffered to. Thanks for enlightening me :)

 

Since there are some issues still with the command bars on the ADI (which in fact act as a sort of repeaters for the ILS, but works fine in EGI-NAV-mode), I'm thinking of creating some RNAV approaches for some bases I usually operate from. Although there are none published IRL for any of the Georgian airports, it shouldn't be too difficult to calculate and design a simple straight in approach with vertical guidance. As you know, in the CDU you can define a vertical angle to be flown to a waypoint (WP subpage 2/2). So all we have to do is create a fix at the threshold position with an altitude of 50 ft above the threshold elevation (TCH) and with a 3° angle on it. For enhanced usuability I will also create a final approach fix at 5-10NM on the extended runway centerline with the corresponding (electronic) glide path interception altitude on it.

 

This could especially be usefull for those bases/runways where you don't have an ILS approach available but still want to have some instrument approach "procedure" (it's actually not really a procedure but just two waypoints).

 

For now, I have to determine all threshold coordinates and elevations for my major bases. I have all this data available from the Georgian AIP, but I doubt they match 100% with those in the simulation. I'll do some trials later and - if anyone is interested - can provide feedback to the community.

 

Cheers, Zenga

Edited January 9, 2012 by Zenga

[effte]

Naaaah, you can punch in the NDB coordinates and fly faux NDB approaches on steerpoints. Much more fun. ;)

[Zenga]

Yeah, what really would be fun is if we could really shoot an NDB approach with its inaccurate and "jumping" needle... Replicating the NDB with a waypoint is basically nothing else than creating an "RNAV overlay" for the NDB approach. But the technique and accuracy in the guidance is of course the very same as for an RNAV approach itself.

 

Flying raw-data ("chasing the needles") is of course more tricky and may provide more joy. But from an operational standpoint, I just want to have an instrument approach procedure that allows me to access any airport and any runway end in IMC (at least down to a reasonable minimum...).

[Elnocho3]

I'm thinking of creating some RNAV approaches for some bases I usually operate from. Although there are none published IRL for any of the Georgian airports, it shouldn't be too difficult to calculate and design a simple straight in approach with vertical guidance.

 

I had this idea too!! Was thinking of producing some quick faux arrival charts. I would be interested in hearing your progress.....

 

Having come from flying STARs all over the place in the Level-D on FSX+VATSIM, I now miss the strict arrival procedures. I often fly in IMC conditions in DCS and terrain clearance is a real worry in some areas!!

Edited January 9, 2012 by Elnocho3

[Zenga]

Hi Elnocho3,

 

seems we got a very similar background...:)

[effte]

The big iron flies NDB procedures off the INS or even GPS these days, with raw data monitoring (at least in theory - legend has it a B744 skipper got in trouble for flying a hold on a non-operational and NOTAMed NDB). The joy of trying to establish on local thunderstorms is becoming a GA thing, so we can happily cheat in DCS I think.

 

IIRC, you're even allowed to use GNSS in lieu of markers on approaches in the US these days - maybe even in lieu of DME, can't really recall the regs there.

[Zenga]

The big iron flies NDB procedures off the INS or even GPS these days, with raw data monitoring ...

 

That's what I meant with my earlier post. All VOR and NDB approaches today are practically flown by using the RNAV overlay stored in the FMS. So in fact the INS/GPS is the primary sensor in use although the prodedure title indicates this would be a ground based Navaid. Of course they have to crosscheck against raw data and one is not supposed to fly the procedure when the required ground based Navaid is U/S. Needless to say there are good reasons why they use the FMS overlay... just in case anybody feels I'm trying to say they should do better :smilewink:

 

But I hesitate to say "fly an NDB approach by hammering in an NDB-substitute waypoint and steer towards it"...simply because I can't crosscheck with raw data. I just don't see the difference to a pure RNAV approach then - in our simulation, I have to add:)