Bad/Night/Wind Landing

[BlueRidgeDx]

I think ralfidude knows how an ILS works, and is simply pointing out that some ILSs in DCS erroneously lead to a point near midfield. I've heard this problem mentioned before, but I've never seen it myself.

 

But since we're already down in the weeds - and because it's always easier to nitpick others' posts - i'd like to point a few things out. ;)

 

The CAT I DA (not DH and not MDA), is actually predicated on several factors including glideslope angle, approach lighting system, and runway markings/lighting. CAT I minimums can be as low as 200ft and 1/2SM (or 1800 RVR), but are frequently higher due to nonstandard lighting or terrain considerations.

 

For your practical intents and purposes, you should be looking outside for the runway when the Inner Marker beacon sounds off and lights up.

 

Assuming 200-1/2 minimums, you would need to see the runway at the middle marker (sited about 2,500ft from the threshold), not the inner marker.

 

The middle marker (usually at the final approach fix) is generally in the vicinity of where you should intercept the glideslope after being established on the localizer.

 

The outer marker is usually about 5 miles from the threshold and, generally speaking, is within a few tenths of a mile from where you intercept the glideslope. The two points are not always coincident. Additionally, precision approaches don't actually have an FAF, they have a final segment which befins at the charted point of glideslope intercept. If an FAF is charted on a precision approach plate, it's because there is a nonprecision procedure contained therein - usually a LOC only approach, e.g. "ILS or LOC/DME".

 

In the region of the world currently represented in DCS, the markers are not sited as they are in the West, so don't plan on using the outer marker for GS intercept.

Edited August 28, 2012 by BlueRidgeDx
Multi-quoting on an iPhone is a pain in the ass.

[Headspace]

The outer marker is usually about 5 miles from the threshold and, generally speaking, is within a few tenths of a mile from where you intercept the glideslope. The two points are not always coincident. Additionally, precision approaches don't actually have an FAF, they have a final segment which befins at the charted point of glideslope intercept. If an FAF is charted on a precision approach plate, it's because there is a nonprecision procedure contained therein - usually a LOC only approach, e.g. "ILS or LOC/DME".

 

In the region of the world currently represented in DCS, the markers are not sited as they are in the West, so don't plan on using the outer marker for GS intercept.

You're right, I don't know why I put "middle" when I meant to put outer. Even though this is the internet, I am out of novel excuses to make.

 

O-M-I...

 

Since we're being pedants in this thread, yes, FAF would be non-precision and the final approach point would be represented by the little lightning bolt symbol where you intercept the GS. FAF for non-precision approaches is defined by a geographic fix whereas the final approach point would be identified as the point at which glideslope intercept occurs when established...not necessarily coincident but usually close to one another if there are both, and nearly always in the vicinity of the outer marker if one exists (in the USA, anyhow).

That ish wasn't on my Instrument written exam, thank God.

I felt that the instrument written was like a slightly harder version of the private exam with more flight planning thrown in. The electrical engineering part of radio nav is fascinating but almost entirely irrelevant to the procedural tasks of instrument flying.

Edited August 28, 2012 by Headspace

[BlueRidgeDx]

Not to pound on ralfidude, but what part of his post should indicate a working knowledge of ILS? My command of the information isn't by necessity airline pilot interview quality chapter and verse, but "middle of the runway" doesn't scream facility with the subject area. Just sayin'.

 

Like I said, I don't think he's describing how he believes a real ILS works; I think he was answering my query about what people think is wrong with the ILS in DCS, since several users have stated that ILS is "porked" in-game.

[Headspace]

As with most of these problems, the best thing that can be done is to get us a track of the bad ILS behavior.

[BlueRidgeDx]

You're right, I don't know why I put "middle" when I meant to put outer. Even though this is the internet, I am out of novel excuses to make.

 

O-M-I...

 

Lol...I write something boneheaded at least once a week. I attribute it mostly to making 4am posts on an iPhone. That's my story, and I'm sticking to it.

 

Since we're being pedants in this thread, yes, FAF would be non-precision and the final approach point would be represented by the little lightning bolt symbol where you intercept the GS.

 

Word of the day! Interestingly, I've been working with the TERPS manual and there are some nifty tools and calculators available for calculating FAF/PFAF, Final End Point, Missed Approach Point, and all of the required imaginary surfaces and gradients. Pretty neat stuff if you have the patience for it.

 

I felt that the instrument written was like a slightly harder version of the private exam with more flight planning thrown in. The electrical engineering part of radio nav is fascinating but almost entirely irrelevant to the procedural tasks of instrument flying.

 

This.

Edited August 28, 2012 by BlueRidgeDx
iPhone autocorrect sucks.

[BlueRidgeDx]

Mmmmmm....pork chops. Nom nom nom!

[Headspace]

Completely unrelated, I have pork chops marinating as we speak.

I'm headed to the bar.