gsumner 6 Posted November 17, 2016 Share Posted November 17, 2016 Just flew an ILS into Genoa and I was about 1 mile to the left of the runway. Anyone else having issues ? Graham Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fyase82 5 Posted November 17, 2016 Share Posted November 17, 2016 It's normal in Genoa. There's an offset of 2 degrees between the runway and the ILS. Ciao Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gsumner 6 Posted November 17, 2016 Author Share Posted November 17, 2016 2 degrees doesn't put me a mile to the left with a few miles to go surely. If I hadn't cancelled auto land I would have been in the sea. Even with an offset approach you do still land on the runway at touchdown. Its installed itself into P3D\ecosystem\aerosoft\GenoaX Is that correct Graham Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fyase82 5 Posted November 17, 2016 Share Posted November 17, 2016 I'm sorry man, I supposed some miles before the touch down, I think there are some problem with this release. I cannot even start from any gate close to the main building otherwise I get a crash. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaveCT2003 2553 Posted November 17, 2016 Share Posted November 17, 2016 14 minutes ago, fyase82 said: I cannot even start from any gate close to the main building otherwise I get a crash. Do you have crash detection turned off? If you're not already aware, you'll want to ensure you have crash detection turned off at many Payware Scenery. Sometimes these hidden objects are unavoidable in the design, thus the common recommendation to turn off crash detection. As for the ILS... I don't believe I've ever done an ILS approach into LIMJ - I've also performed visual approaches. I'll give it a peak this afternoon. Best wishes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marcon8122 58 Posted November 17, 2016 Share Posted November 17, 2016 The offset is correct you have to disengage ap near mininum and do a turn to align to the rw Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gsumner 6 Posted November 17, 2016 Author Share Posted November 17, 2016 You seem to be missing my point. I was nowhere near the threshold. Nowhere at all near the threshold. I'm familiar with offset approach methods but this seemed very extreme. Have you tried the ils approach on this release for P3D. Can you verify its correct for you or are you just telling me about the Genoa offset ils. Regards Graham Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ca210270 4 Posted November 17, 2016 Share Posted November 17, 2016 I don't have this scenery, yet, but I suppose that the correct position of the ILS can be easily checked (and corrected if not right) in the related AFCAD file. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kolman 8 Posted November 18, 2016 Share Posted November 18, 2016 What a disappointment! The second unusable aerosoft airport release in a row: LIMC unusable due to OOM issues LIMJ unusable due to crash detection And please don’t tell me to turn crash detection off – other addons work just fine with crash detection enabled! Regards, Gerhard Prepar3D v3 Professional 3.4.14.18870 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alehead 126 Posted November 18, 2016 Share Posted November 18, 2016 Just checked out the charts on Eurocontrols AIP site. YOu should not be attempting any autolands on a Cat I ILS. The runway is currently 104°/284° and the LOC is set at 286°. If my maths does not completely suck, that works out at an offset distance from the extended centre line of around 92 feet (just under 30m) per statute mile (not nautical mile). If the autopilot following the LOC in on approach to runway 28 has you 1 mile offset only a few miles out, then there is a problem. A Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Developer razgo 307 Posted November 18, 2016 Developer Share Posted November 18, 2016 49 minutes ago, kolman said: What a disappointment! The second unusable aerosoft airport release in a row: LIMC unusable due to OOM issues LIMJ unusable due to crash detection And please don’t tell me to turn crash detection off – other addons work just fine with crash detection enabled! Regards, Gerhard Prepar3D v3 Professional 3.4.14.18870 Hello Gerhard and thanks for your comment. We found the reason could cause you the crash problem and are making the hotfix for that asap so you could keep fly and enjoy Genoa X. Regards, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aerosoft Aerosoft Team [Inactive Account] 51558 Posted November 18, 2016 Aerosoft Share Posted November 18, 2016 We cannot confirm any issue with the ILS. Here you see it perfectly aligned with the ILS offset. Please login to display this image. A hotfix for the objects crash issue will be available right after lunch Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gsumner 6 Posted November 18, 2016 Author Share Posted November 18, 2016 I'm going to reinstall the scenery. Perhaps it's just my installation that's why I asked if anyone else could confirm alignment. I was careful not to blame scenery development. Regards to all Graham Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kolman 8 Posted November 18, 2016 Share Posted November 18, 2016 Thanks for the quick hotfix. The object crash is gone now. I just flew the ILS and I see now issue there - the offset seems to be very realistic. In addition the performance is great! (With 3D grass and static aircraft) The terminal looks fantastic with default textures, so no need to mess things up with 4K textures. Regards, Gerhard Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaveCT2003 2553 Posted November 18, 2016 Share Posted November 18, 2016 I went into validate the ILS approach, and realized that my Beta version is far different than the release version... so no dice. Great to know the items I reported in the Beta were fixed... excellent work/response by the developer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kolman 8 Posted November 19, 2016 Share Posted November 19, 2016 After some more flying I’m not sure anymore if the ILS is placed correctly. I used the Flight1 GTN750 for my test flight. It is based on the original Garmin Trainer with real world NAV-Data. The ADE and the Google Maps screenshots show the position of the ILS antenna. The stock airport and Google match up pretty good, the Aerosoft ILS is placed somewhere in extension of the runway even though the ILS building is placed correctly in the scenery (between runway and VOR). In addition there is a difference in the ILS course (286.8 to 287.4). This puts the ILS centerline too far to the south. It should actually cross the runway centerline close to the RWY 28 approach end. Please login to display this image. Please login to display this image. Please login to display this image. The inflight screenshot shows the aircraft at 10 NM and short final, dead-on the ILS course. As you can see the magenta GPS course is well to the right. About 0.2 NM abeam CI28 and still 300 feet at short final. Please login to display this image. Please login to display this image. This offset is way too much for my opinion. Maybe you can look into it one more time. Regards, Gerhard Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fyase82 5 Posted November 19, 2016 Share Posted November 19, 2016 Quote According to this great video looks a bit too on the left but not too much. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aerosoft Aerosoft Team [Inactive Account] 51558 Posted November 19, 2016 Aerosoft Share Posted November 19, 2016 We'll have a look at it again. But keep in mind that very close to the beacon the ILS of FS is not very accurate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kolman 8 Posted November 19, 2016 Share Posted November 19, 2016 Thanks for sharing this video. It shows exactly what I am saying. The aircraft on the ILS course intercepts the RWY centerline a few hundred feet short of the threshold. From there it takes only a small course correction to the left to line the aircraft up for landing. It’s just the other way around in the current scenery you end up left of the runway and it takes a rather big correction to the right to get the aircraft over the runway. Regards, Gerhard Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aerosoft Aerosoft Team [Inactive Account] 51558 Posted November 19, 2016 Aerosoft Share Posted November 19, 2016 So the issue is not the offset (meaning the approach heading is not the same as the runway heading) but the location. Okay, I'll have that checked. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ca210270 4 Posted November 19, 2016 Share Posted November 19, 2016 Hi, I do confirm that the ILS is 287.399 degrees. With 1 degree of difference, since the ILS is placed on the threshold of rwy 10, it will cause a considerable offset to the left at the threshold of rwy 28... I think the solution is simply to move the ILS localizer to its actual place, that is where the localizer antenna is placed in the scenery, and adjust the heading to about 286.8. Please login to display this image. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aerosoft Aerosoft Team [Inactive Account] 51558 Posted November 19, 2016 Aerosoft Share Posted November 19, 2016 I believe indeed that would be correct solution. Thanks very much for the fine posts and the research. Should have been picked up in testing but these days, with three platforms that is becoming an ever increasing problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FactionOne 20 Posted November 21, 2016 Share Posted November 21, 2016 Hi All, I found this thread a couple of nights ago having flown a pretty interesting first approach to ILS-Z 28 (I disconnected Otto the Pilot coming down the ILS and had quite a significant side-step to make or I would've been in the drink). I saw disussion above about the ILS needing to be tweaked, and decided to 'have a fiddle' pending any official update. This was done with educated guesswork based on what contributors to this thread had said, and trial & error flight testing (with several enjoyable flights in my trusty Aerosoft 319 from my EGCC base ). I set the ILS to 286.5°, and moved it around until it seemed right (or as we say around here, 'reet'). I won't share my modification of what of course remains Aerosoft's file, but for anyone looking to make a tweak until any official change... If you set it to 286.5° and position the ILS as in the ADE screenshot below, the landing is lovely. Please login to display this image. I came off the GIKUT transition to ILS-Z 28, and captured localiser & glide slope at comfortable height & distance; a good offset is present. Please login to display this image. To get the best test of accuracy, I decided to let the equipment take the a/c all the way to the tarmac. Alignment at the point of flare was pretty good Please login to display this image. Hope it's useful (remember folks, rename your original to LIMJ_ADE.bak before you drop-in any ADE tweaked version!). Regards, Rob. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Airbus339 129 Posted November 21, 2016 Share Posted November 21, 2016 I think you misplaced the ILS as well. IRL you cannot do an autoland at LIMJ and the ILS is much more offset. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FactionOne 20 Posted November 21, 2016 Share Posted November 21, 2016 I don't claim 100% real-world acccuracy (this was seat-of-the-pants, not by-the-charts), and I don't CATIII anywhere as a rule (I use ASN so can pick my weather, and I never choose pea soup!); but it's certainly better, more flyable, and actually I don't think *that* far off... At the crucial part of the approach (it's offset to avoid the cranes just in shot), it doesn't look too far out (particularly considering camera positions); maybe the localiser could come slightly more toward the centreline, but I think the glide slope would have to be moved back a little in that case, too. Please login to display this image. Please login to display this image. I'm sure Aerosoft will sort it out anyway (and it's just a suggestion for those who are interested) Regards, Rob. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.