Bad ATC vectors

[Guest kddescente]

I've been flying FS9 since it was released in 2003 and haven't had any weird glitches or anything the entire time until this week. It seems now that all of the sudden when Im running an IFR flight, ATC is not only vectoring me into TCAS alerts so close that you can see the interior seats of the AI planes, but have also vectored me into a few airports but given me approach altitudes that have had me fly right into a mountain face at 240 knots. I know I dont have to follow the ATC vectors, but when youre going for realism, not using ATC vectors is kinda lame. Ideas??

[onurksn 1]

Hello,You have been flying with FS9 since 2003 and you haven't noticed this until last week? You must be kidding!!:D I know exactly what you mean, every time I tried to land in Innsbruck, Austria FS ATC lead me into a mountain nearby. FS ATC is noting near it's RW counterpart, especially approach wise. You can use third party add-ons for better ATC and AI control such as Radar Contact for ATC or AI smooth for AI. However, if you are like me and you don't want to use an add-on ATC, you can use real world charts. It sticks to the realism part and you can get vectors after take off according to a real departure. As for approaches, select a transition as in the chart when cleared for the active runway. This will not always be the case but most of the time there will be a transition, a VOR or an NDB.You haven't specified the aircraft you fly, if you are using the default Garmin, you do have approaches in it too. You can acces them via the PROC button.I use FS ATC as much as possible, I mean I try to stay with it as much as I can. With the technique above it works fairly well.Happy landings

[hjwalter 25]

As far as the mountains are concerned you could change the wind direction at your destination airport so that you are vectored for an approach to the other end of the runway where hopefully there are no mountains getting in your way. However, your AI aircraft will now also approach from that direction and will therefore also keep getting in your way. To solve this second problem to a high degree use a program called AI Smooth.When you have opened your flight and have changed the wind direction at the destination airport you should re-save that flight so that this new wind situation is also saved for any future flights. Do the same for any other flights you may have to that problem airport.Some airports with mountains all around like Innsbruck (LOWI) in Austria will constantly cause your type of problems but an expert developer like Jim Vile has solved at least the ILS approach problems for a number of such (dangerous) airports including the now closed (but still very popular) Hong Kong Kai Tak airport (VHHX). However, the approach vectors to any such airports remain wind direction dependent.A problem which cannot as yet be solved (as far as I know) is that approaching AI aircraft which recieve "Go Around" instructions from the tower will actually fly through mountains without any problems which is not very realistic but ..... we'll just have to accept that not ALL problems can be solved. If you get a "Go Around" yourself well, just don't take the ATC instructions too literaly, climb away steeply first and only then follow their instructions. Hope this helps.Hans

[HoratioWondersocks 4]

HelloI am not completely sure that fs ATC is always at fault as far as mountain hitting.I used to blame ATC like everybody else,but i think (in my case anyway)i was descending at the wrong speeds and therefore being at the wrong altitude(either to high or low) when ATC might vector me into mountain sides.As i have now found out for me what seems to be the optimum descent rates i don't often have these problems with ATC giving me excursions into mountains,buildings,volcanoes etc another problem i had with ATC(actually me i suspect) was on approach where i would follow ATCs directions and wait to be turned onto my landing rwy and ATC would just go silent refusing to have anymore to do with me and i would fly into the distance never to return.In these cases it "seemed" to be something to do with approach to landing speeds ie i think i used to be slow to far out ie maybe 160 kts when i should have been 180 to 210 kts(till final of course)EHAM used to be a bugger for this,BUT! i can't remember when this last happened either.Any way my two pennies worth.cheers Andy

[kerosene31 349]

I usually just go VFR at the end and fly the landing myself. As a GA flyer, I really don't need an 80 nm approach to get my single engine Cessna lined up :)

[onurksn 1]

>Hello>I am not completely sure that fs ATC is always at fault as>far as mountain hitting.>I used to blame ATC like everybody else,but i think (in my>case anyway)i was descending at the wrong speeds and therefore>being at the wrong altitude(either to high or low) when ATC>might vector me into mountain sides.As i have now found out>for me what seems to be the optimum descent rates i don't>often have these problems with ATC giving me excursions into>mountains,buildings,volcanoes etc> another problem i had with ATC(actually me i suspect) was on>approach where i would follow ATCs directions and wait to be>turned onto my landing rwy and ATC would just go silent>refusing to have anymore to do with me and i would fly into>the distance never to return.In these cases it "seemed" to be>something to do with approach to landing speeds ie i think i>used to be slow to far out ie maybe 160 kts when i should have>been 180 to 210 kts(till final of course)EHAM used to be a>bugger for this,BUT! i can't remember when this last happened>either.Andy, let me tell you, ATC forgetting to give you final vectors has nothing to do with your speed, it only takes into consideration your location, so it's not your fault. It happened to me more than once. FS ATC doesn't give a toss about your descent or climb rates either. Approaching LOWI intially you get cleared to 11000 and suddenly short of the mountain you are instructed to climb to 13000, this is simply ridiculous. Not to mention getting instructed to descend several thousand feet at 10NM from the runway.That said, I agree with you when you say ATC isn't always to blame and that user faults are common too, no doubt about that. But just to see how far FS is to the reality, compare your approaches with a real chart, you will see the difference.BTW, without any intention of hijacking this thread, Andy, I was having random CTD's, did a search and I came up with one of your posts about deleting unused sceneries in the addon scenery folder. I did it and it solved my problems, so thanks :)

[Guest PARADISE]

You can also look here at Avsim for updated AFCAD's for the airports you fly into. Some of the authors of these afcads will close runways that conflict with FS terrain so that FS ATC will not vector you to them, or they will allow multiple runways to be open for both landings and takeoffs, giving you a wider choice of which runway you want to use.But, as stated before, your best bet is to get real life charts (available for free on several web sites) since they will show you the minimun altitudes that you can fly around your airports.John

[HoratioWondersocks 4]

>>Hello>>I am not completely sure that fs ATC is always at fault as>>far as mountain hitting.>>I used to blame ATC like everybody else,but i think (in my>>case anyway)i was descending at the wrong speeds and>therefore>>being at the wrong altitude(either to high or low) when ATC>>might vector me into mountain sides.As i have now found out>>for me what seems to be the optimum descent rates i don't>>often have these problems with ATC giving me excursions>into>>mountains,buildings,volcanoes etc>> another problem i had with ATC(actually me i suspect) was>on>>approach where i would follow ATCs directions and wait to be>>turned onto my landing rwy and ATC would just go silent>>refusing to have anymore to do with me and i would fly into>>the distance never to return.In these cases it "seemed" to>be>>something to do with approach to landing speeds ie i think i>>used to be slow to far out ie maybe 160 kts when i should>have>>been 180 to 210 kts(till final of course)EHAM used to be a>>bugger for this,BUT! i can't remember when this last>happened>>either.>>Andy, let me tell you, ATC forgetting to give you final>vectors has nothing to do with your speed, it only takes into>consideration your location, so it's not your fault. It>happened to me more than once. FS ATC doesn't give a toss>about your descent or climb rates either. Approaching LOWI>intially you get cleared to 11000 and suddenly short of the>mountain you are instructed to climb to 13000, this is simply>ridiculous. Not to mention getting instructed to descend>several thousand feet at 10NM from the runway.>That said, I agree with you when you say ATC isn't always to>blame and that user faults are common too, no doubt about>that. But just to see how far FS is to the reality, compare>your approaches with a real chart, you will see the>difference.>>BTW, without any intention of hijacking this thread, Andy, I>was having random CTD's, did a search and I came up with one>of your posts about deleting unused sceneries in the addon>scenery folder. I did it and it solved my problems, so thanks>:)No problemGlad i helped you out abeit in a roundabout way.cheers Andy

[scott967 62]

IIUC the ATC has a sort of MSA grid that is used to influence the step-down altitudes user is given, until you are set up for the approach (on intercept for the final approach course), then ATC will give you whatever the FAF altitude is in the approach code and tell you to "maintain until established". Sometimes it can help to ask ATC for the full approach. Then ATC will give you the initial altitude at the IAF from the approach code.scott s..

[Guest kddescente]

Thanks for all the help guys- I appreciate it! I already am flying with charts with MSAs. I looked into using RadarContact for ATC and think I will give that a shot and see if it helps. Any thoughts on the dangerously close traffic contacts Im having? Just tonight even, I was cleared to land on an ILS/IFR flight into Comox (CYQQ), touched down nicely and began braking when a B737 lands on top of me...

[onurksn 1]

>Thanks for all the help guys- I appreciate it! I already am>flying with charts with MSAs. I looked into using RadarContact>for ATC and think I will give that a shot and see if it helps.>Any thoughts on the dangerously close traffic contacts Im>having? Just tonight even, I was cleared to land on an ILS/IFR>flight into Comox (CYQQ), touched down nicely and began>braking when a B737 lands on top of me... I disabled crash detection for that very reason. AI taxing into you, landing on you, bumpy runways...If you know what you are doing you don't need it anyway.You can use AI Smooth for "taming" your AI, it is a good freeware add-on. You can get it here.http://www.sg-flightware.de/BTW, some time ago I was looking for a decent AI control add-on, to give you an idea on AI Smooth here is a thread of mine covering the issue:http://forums.avsim.net/dcboard.php?az=sho...48693&mode=fullHappy landings

[Guest kddescente]

So far so good with Radar Contact v4! Takes a bit of getting used to, but i think Im going to LOVE this particular addon, not only because Im getting good vectors again, but the expansive options to ATC with RadarContact are outstanding!! I wish I had bought this ages ago!Thanks again for all your input and thought everyone!

[Guest Hingham2008]

Good thought on the Radar Contact v4....but...doesn't the speed of the instructions/voice presentation drive you a bit nuts?

[BIGSKY 316]

As a side note,I recall our chief pilot showing us mechanics a DVD during a break in maintenance training, about a real life situation in South America,where ATC vectored a G-2 into a mountain.So I guess it is the PIC's duty to have total situational awareness,and even turn down a vector,if it goes against safety of flight.