Glad I could help.I notice -on some runways- if you do the same ILS two or three times, the slight offset left/right will vary. I think this is more to do with MS FS2k2 ILS allignment. Rnwy 05 at CYYZ is not the best, try 06R (CATIII) or 33L/R, they should be right on.You can do an ILS approach-autoland without the FMC, but you will need your performance charts to calc the Vref's, etc.Rob.

Nice solution to handling the departure. It is neat to see the different methods used as PIC presents so many options. It was also good to point out the double selection of the waypoint when the intercept heading is in excessive. And lastly, I agree that it does take more time to read about it that to do it.

I've noticed this "problem" as well. It's especially noticable at Simflyer's LAX. Not a problem though, gives me more motivation to land the PIC767 myself Ryan-Flightpro08 :-coolTaxiwaysigns.com

Matt,There is a mismatch between the 767 PIC FMC airport runway heading data and that used by Fs2002. You can see this if you first look in the Fs2002 Map data display for KAUS 35L. There you will see the ILS for runway 35L is 352 degrees. Now if you open WINDOWS EXPLORER to Fs2002/Fmcwp/Navdata then open the Navdata folder you will see a text document titled wpNAVAPT, open this in wordpad. Now Find: (use the binocular icon) KAUS 35L. When you have found it there will be a line of data that looks like:AUSTINBERGSTROMINTL KAUS35L12248353 30.179947-97.678474110.3035300542 The relavant information is found in two places in this data string. The first place is the 353 at the end of (KAUS35L12248353) It should be 352 as we saw in the Fs2002 map data. The second place is the 353 that is embedded 5 digits from the end of the entire string. Here again it should be 352. So if you carefully make the changes and save them you will find your aircraft will lineup exactly on the runway centerline next time you land on KAUS 35L with a PIC 767. At least that has been my experience.Mark

Mark,Thanks so very much for posting this information. I've had to learn a lot over the last week about this fabulous product and the information that you gave me was the final piece to the puzzle.the 767 did a perfect autoland at rwy 35L @ KAUS after updating that data.Instead of insisting that I do a manual landing (as some on this forum are prone to do), you helped me fix the problem that I had set out to correct. You've shown how a forum should work when honestly helpful simmers set out to help other simmers.Once again, thanks for the help.Matt

Hi,a thing that is not clear to me, yet: are there cat II and cat III runways in FS2002? I mean, does FS2002 recognize the difference between a cat II and a cat III ILS? If so, when I perform an approach to a cat III rwy, my 767 should be able to carry on an autoland, while that should not be possible with cat II rwys. Correct?Thanks,Luca

For me it solved the same problem at EGLL 09L. However, in many runway lines in the file I see a difference of 1 degree between the first and the second occurrence of the heading (in the original EGLL 09L it is 093 at the first and 094 at the second occurrence. Does anybody know if this difference is intentionally or that it means that there will be an ILS error for all these runways?The other question is of course how I can prevent that I need to do the update again after next month' AIRAC?Regards,Jan van Bekkum

>I mean, does FS2002 recognize the >difference between a cat II and a cat III ILS? Absolutely it does NOT.Michael J.

Hi all,hi Jan again!I have made an update of the 767PIC airport file to solve this problem. For short explaination:The problem is the differences between real an virtual datas. In example EGLL 09L has in real a mag-heading of 93 degrees, in FS2k2 the mag-heading/obs-heading is 94 degrees. Now the converter merge the real-datas with the FS2k2-datas. The mag-headings came from the real-world database and the ILS-obs headings from the FS2k2-databases for compatibility. That