Jump to content

Archived

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

Fab10

Confused RNAV: SPZO RNAV RW28 CEMIL

Recommended Posts

Hi,

 

I am having difficulties with programming RNAV approaches into the FMC using a route from SPQT Iquitos to SPZO Cusco; the RNAV approach fixes and altitudes legs appear fine in the FMC but the ND fails to depict the route properly, 

 

There appears to be a number of different traces visible on the ND radiating outwards from the current waypoint; I don't know whether these represent the different IAF's of the various RNAV routes into Cusco (see JPG).

 

However, it is confusing to look at, and the aircraft unsurprisingly doesn't follow the expected path as depicted in the FMC flight plan (it seems to get lost and track elsewhere).

 

Solely for information, the NGX displays the route in both CDU and ND correctly, and it flies the horizontal profile just fine (vertical too though obviously this is not applicable to the CRJ).

 

I have not attempted other RNAV approaches in this particular aeroplane before.

 

I am using the latest CRJ version and Navigraph 1801.

 

You don't actually need to fly the route to see the problem: SPQT DCT OSORA UL300 ETEBA  CEMIL DCT SPZO

 

All help and advice is  welcome.

 

Thanks,

Fabio

 

CRJ RNAV RW28 SPZO.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for moving this post for me, I had considered posting this with this sub-forum, but it's not always obvious which is best. 

 

That said, have you any thoughts on this?

 

When you first create a route, looking at the ND with EFIS in route format already shows several lines radiating out from the closest waypoint (my route from SPQT has no SID's so it would be a left turn after TO onto track).

 

The company route was created using SimBrief, but amended as the IAF was given as LITOT which is to the south of SPZO, so for me CEMIL to the North East of SPZO was a better choice.

 

For the record, I tried entering the route manually, plus I restarted the aircraft as well as scenario several times just in case there was a problem with the Company Route.

 

Thanks,

Fabio

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We'll ask Hans to check on this. Keep in mind that even on the real aircraft things like this are not uncommon. That's when pilots smile, disable the AP and fly the damned aircraft as they were trained to do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for looking into it.

As you say, alternatives are available to pilots, in this case VOR instrument approaches. 

Hand flying is an option, though I suspect they’d be following flight director cues. 

Also, I suspect that pilots might not smile, rather more of a grimace is my guess! :-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Have you any news?

It cannot be right that an RNAV approach amongst mountains at high altitude would be displayed in such a hit or miss, imagine the law suits; it'd be interesting to know what Bombardier would say regarding this, or pilots of CRJ900's.

Anyway, the v-speeds in the attached photo are incorrect, I would think, with V2 being slower than V1.

Maybe not, but it would be a first for me.

Thanks,

Fabio

2018-1-23_19-47-10-200.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, I lately discovered that I had missed an iteration of the CRJ, and with this installed, the STAR and approach display properly and as expected.

I trust that this comes as news to you as well, otherwise I'd again be disappointed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...