Jump to content

Genoa ILS approach P3D


gsumner

Recommended Posts

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

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

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

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

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

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

  • Developer
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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Privacy Policy & Terms of Use