Bad/Night/Wind Landing

[Yellow14]

So I've decided trying to practice landing in all weather conditions. I started with the weather less severe and made it progressively worse as I went. I'm now in the pitch black in a wind and rain storm with 500m visibility (you can't see the PAPI or the runway lights unless you're right above them under 200 ft).

 

My question is can you fly into a landing with absolutely no outside view? At first I was trying to look out of the cockpit for touchdown but I find I do much better if I trust the ILS needles. It's very hard to maintain the lateral ADI bar, especially when within a thousand feet of the runway.

 

I figure a military aircraft would only actually have to land under these conditions in the worst of circumstances i.e. fuel shortage or damage.

 

Has anyone tried using the TGP? haha. I figured I'd try that if all else fails.

 

Any pointers on IFR landings would be great. Thanks.

[Jona33]

The A-10 is only cleared to land if he can see the runway from decision altitude (200 feet usually), If that's impossible he should divert. The ILS system is pretty useless from then on so all you can do is aim the FPM at where you think the runway is and pray to be honest. If you're damaged then if you select the airport you're landing at in the CDU you get the waypoint marked in you're HUD, put the FPM short of that and you should reach the runway.

[Faelwolf]

You most likely know all this already, but for anyone reading this who doesn't:

 

The divert page in the CDU will give you the runway heading and TACAN/ILS info, but I also printed out a set of airfield charts as not all airfields have those, and the divert page only lists the nearest fields. In VFR, all I really need is the runway heading to go along with my HUD, and I'm golden. Even then, using TACAN I don't even need the HUD. It is good to practice using just TACAN and analog instruments, I once lost my HUD and it was no big deal to return to base and land without it since I had not grown dependent on it.

 

With your course set properly in your HSI, you have a virtual runway that you can use to plan your approach before you even arrive at the airfield. It is quite literally a "what you see is what you get" instrument. For example, if you have your aircraft pointed at the airfield, and your HSI shows a 40 degree relative angle, you will find the runway 40 degrees relative to you when you arrive if you continue to fly direct. It does not require TACAN or ILS beacons to work.

 

So use your HSI to determine where to offset your FPM in the HUD (or which side of the TACAN needle to fly to) to make life a lot easier. Obviously, for a true IFR landing, you will want to offset to the side opposite of where the arrow is pointing, so that when you turn on final, you will be lined up with the runway in the same direction that TACAN/ILS is set for. Also, offset enough to give yourself a bit of breathing room without getting crazy with it. It doesn't do you a lot of good to offset your course just to find yourself turning on final 1000 feet from the runway, but at the same time, you don't want to turn on final 50 miles away either :) I personally like to be 8-10 miles out so I can make lazy turns and take my time, but not have to hold glide slope all day. The bar closes on the HSI a lot slower when you are out a bit from the airfield.

 

Also, if there are no obstructions or threats between me and the airfield, I will have nudged nose-down while enroute so I will already be pretty much at the altitude I want when I arrive at my turn point. I will also have backed off of the throttle as I got close, so I will have the right airspeed.

 

A good number of airfields seem to only be set for landing IFR in one direction, so if the visibility is that poor, and the wind is working against you badly, you are going to have problems, and will have to pick another airfield.

 

For an airfield that has no ILS, if you have used your HSI to set your self up properly, you don't really need the ILS bars to do a landing by the numbers, but you will need some visibility. When visibility is limited, I prefer a shallow approach, running 2 deg. down instead of 3. But that's just my preference, not a rule.

 

I agree with Jona33, the ILS system in the A10c gets pretty useless once you are at the decision point, I have seen it lose it's mind near the runway threshold quite often, and would not trust it past getting me to the decision point, if quite that far. But it is not a precision landing system, and the A10 is not rated for full IFR landings.

 

Edit: I want to add some cautions. Not all CDU coordinates put the HUD marker over the runway, so if you don't have visibility, don't bet your virtual life on the HUD marker. Also some TACAN beacons are off to the side of the runway quite a bit, so the same applies with TACAN. Many, if not most, runways are also not true to numbered course so your HSI bar will show slightly open when you are properly aligned with the runway. So in bad visibility, don't assume that having the bar closed guarantees alignment. Frankly, it is most likely a sign you are slightly misaligned unless you have entered the true course, and allowed for other errors in declination. You can find the runway's true course on the charts, but it is only given as the runway number in the CDU divert page. It is a safe bet to assume the runway designator is a little wrong. It's not a bad habit to take a moment to align your HSI once you're lined up on the runway to take off, to make the return landing a little easier. You can always change it if you divert.

Edited August 23, 2012 by Faelwolf

[Britchot]

Landing with the TGP could be catastrophic. The widest field of view is exceptionally zoomed in compared to what you see out of the cockpit, or the "naked eye." All the movements of the aircraft would be exaggerated on the MFD.

 

ILS is a precision approach due to the glideslope indicator and landings in IMC is exactly what it is designed to assist with accomplishing. Landing with zero/zero is not advised for any aircraft, find an alternate as advised above. The lateral guide gets wonky near the airport, so don't chase the needle. Your best bet is to make gentle adjustments until you see the runway environment then make a landing or even circle to land if you're too high over the threshold.

 

A good set of approach plates for each airport would be nice; I'm not sure if these have been made, I haven't searched. It would help with the minimum altitudes on approach and give addtional terrain data and maybe a good circle to land altitude.

Edited August 23, 2012 by Britchot

[Faelwolf]

I don't know about IFR charts, but there are some good sets of VFR charts and airport diagrams here: http://www.virtual-jabog32.de/index.php?section=downloads&subcat=37

[Pyroflash]

The ILS system in DCS is broken to begin with, so it doesn't even work as it would IRL. To add onto that, it is possible to land using the ILS under 0-0 conditions, however the A-10C does not have CATIII certification. Nor do I think that any of these airports have CATIII approaches either, even if the system worked right to begin with.

[BlueRidgeDx]

Why do you think that ILSs don't work right in DCS?

[FreeFall]

Why do you think that ILSs don't work right in DCS?

 

Does it work OK with the latest DSC World A-10C version? I think that the latest standalone (v.1.1.1.1) still failed? :confused:

[BlueRidgeDx]

What do you mean by "failed"?

 

I don't recall the ILS working improperly in any DCS build, but I'm not sure that I've flown an instrument approach in every single build, so perhaps I'm wrong.

 

But still, I'm curious what you guys specifically think is wrong with the ILS.

[Yellow14]

Ok so I have been pretty lucky with the ILS approaches so far. If you cue everything in from 10+(I think I started at 15 NM in this scenario) you only have to make 5 degree lateral adjustments on the HSI and 1-2 degree adjustments on vertical.

 

I mainly focus on the HSI and ADI, but I have been using the HUD for my heading, although you can see you the high wind landing that the HUD becomes all but useless at the decision point because the wind throws you everywhere.

 

(I don't have TACAN dialed in on either landing)

 

Night/Rain/Sleet

Fog set to 500m visibility at 75% density.

15C

Full load of ordinance for calculated touchdown speed of 156 knots ideally(or so I think).

 

Thanks for the input guys. Took me about 4 tries to start nailing the high wind night landings.

IFR NIghtWind Landing.trk

IFR Night Landing(3).trk

[docfu]

Just a note about ILS systems. I'm not sure about the ones in Georgia but the ones we had in Wisconsin that my dad used to maintain were analog vacuum tube based models that were constantly going out of sync. He would go out to the local airports every month or so and retune them so that people wouldn't crash during bad weather...

 

Of course, the whole reason we knew they were out of sync in the first place is because the airport manager would call us after going out on a flight to let us know it was broken again.

 

Just an FYI of reality versus games.

 

P.S. I also remember the airports having these giant fog-buster lights for bad weather. I'm surprised those aren't in DCS, at least. I haven't seen anything like them.

[BlueRidgeDx]

There are several airfield in DCS where the "published" ILS course is off enough from extended centerline that you won't get a localizer deflection until you're over the fence. Are these set up that way deliberately so that you have to fly an offset to some non-standard mins for terrain avoidance, perhaps?

 

I'm out of town, so I can't test. Which airfields specifically have you noticed this? Are you sure they're not LDA approaches as opposed to an ILS?

[BlueRidgeDx]

Just a note about ILS systems...

 

Most ILS installations have a Far Field Monitor that...err...monitors the radiation pattern of the localizer and automatically shuts down the transmitter if it's out of tolerance. Also, every ILS is Flight Checked by the FAA on a recurring basis to ensure the facility and the approach are within limits.

 

What are fog buster lights? The Nevada theatre has realistic ALSF-1 Approach Lighting Systems that are high intensity, if that's what you mean.

[FreeFall]

What do you mean by "failed"?

 

I don't recall the ILS working improperly in any DCS build, but I'm not sure that I've flown an instrument approach in every single build, so perhaps I'm wrong.

 

But still, I'm curious what you guys specifically think is wrong with the ILS.

 

I was thinking of this thread:

http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?p=1366474#post1366474

[BlueRidgeDx]

Yeah, there is a known disparity between the real world and DCS with regard to runway heading, so I am not surprised that there are differences between various community generated materials such as approach plates and IFGs.

 

Obviously, It would be best if the DCS values were used in the various publications, but some seem to have been created using the Georgia and Russia AIP data.

 

It's unfortunate that the NGA restricted acces to the DoD FLIP and approach plates for OCONUS facilities. As it stands, we have to guess what approaches exist in real life, and what terminal fixes exist around the region. If we had that, we wouldn't have guess whether approaches are LOC vs LDA vs SDF, etc.

Edited August 24, 2012 by BlueRidgeDx

[BlueRidgeDx]

I was thinking of this thread:

http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?p=1366474#post1366474

 

That thread discusses the incorrect implementation of the Flight Director on the ADI. The FD is separate and distinct from the ILS itself which works correctly in DCS. Just turn off the FD and fly "raw data" until/if the FD gets fixed.

[FreeFall]

Thanks for the detailed info, BlueRidgeDx. I'm not a professional IRL pilot, so don't know every detail. Just thought there was something wrong with ILS. :)

[BlueRidgeDx]

No sweat. I miss the Flight Director myself; it used to work correctly, once upon a time. Having it makes flying an ILS approach much easier. Still, it can be flown without it.

[BlueRidgeDx]

I don't think that would work like you want it to, since GPS Vertical Error is never going to be less than at least several meters. You're probably better off setting ISA conditions in the ME and just reading the Baro Alt at 29.92 for each measurement.

 

Still, if you're intent on trying it (I don't know how DCS handles Vertical Error), the GPS FRPA is on top of the fuselage just aft of the canopy.

Edited August 25, 2012 by BlueRidgeDx

[Headspace]

How high is the GPS receiver off the ground? I want to use the POSINFO AAP page to plot true TDZE, but in order to do that I need to be able to subtract the receiver height from the GPS reported altitude. Then I can taxi to the captains bars and take a reading.

Why not just park over the touchdown zone and then use something like TacView to compute TDZE?

[Headspace]

GPS Vertical Error is never going to be less than at least several meters.

Not with WAAS. I wonder if there is a military equivalent. It seems unlikely due to the ground station requirement. Since WAAS is so new it seems unlikely that the vintage of A-10 as modeled in DCS would have had anything like it.

[BlueRidgeDx]

The (sometimes) incorrect relationship between regional Magnetic Variation, Mission Editor Heading, F10 View Heading, and CDU/HUD heading has been a thorn in the side for some time.

 

It is a twisted web of misaligned 3D models, variable Magnetic Variation (go figure), a non-conformal coordinate system due to the flat Earth model, and ambiguity whether the ME shows magnetic vs true heading.

 

I don't see it getting fixed any time soon, and the best bet would be to use approach plates created using data as it exists in DCS. My virtual squadron is undertaking just such a project; not to be confused with the "JaBoG" charts which are not instrument approach plates.

 

Speaking of which, do you have real plates for the region?

[ralfidude]

Havent there been threads criticizing DCS for the ILS because it guides the pilot to the middle of the runway instead of the beginning of it? Thats what it currently does.

 

I understand you are supposed to use it to get near until visual with runway and then not bother with ILS and just do a visual approach since the ILS gets "Too sensitive", but it still generally guides you to the middle of the runway.

[BlueRidgeDx]

I haven't methodically tested each ILS, but at the handful of airfields i regularly use, I've not observed that behavior. Can you duplicate that behavior at a specific airfield?

[Headspace]

Havent there been threads criticizing DCS for the ILS because it guides the pilot to the middle of the runway instead of the beginning of it? Thats what it currently does.

 

I understand you are supposed to use it to get near until visual with runway and then not bother with ILS and just do a visual approach since the ILS gets "Too sensitive", but it still generally guides you to the middle of the runway.

 

In addition to what others have been saying, not all ILS approaches have three marker beacons. Many only have two and some have less--Batumi has a runway right off of the ocean, for instance, so there is no place for a middle or outer marker. (EDIT) The outer 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.

Edited August 28, 2012 by Headspace