I'm aware MSFSX is 'only' a sim, but I find it hard to believe that I would be vectored to a non-ILS runway in near zero visibility with 24mph crosswind. That's exactly what played out, I filed an IFR flight plan for a 300 nm trip, I manually set the weather to less than 1/4 mile visibility, turbulence, overcast, with 24 mph crosswind. The target airport had but one runway, 27 was equipped with ILS, while 9 was not. I started getting vector instructions 86nm from the airport, and when I was about 30nm from it, the ATC directed me to flight straight in to runway 9. I could not see a thing and I missed the approach by some 300 feet to the left.So, could something like this really happen in real life?

I'm aware MSFSX is 'only' a sim, but I find it hard to believe that I would be vectored to a non-ILS runway in near zero visibility with 24mph crosswind. That's exactly what played out, I filed an IFR flight plan for a 300 nm trip, I manually set the weather to less than 1/4 mile visibility, turbulence, overcast, with 24 mph crosswind. The target airport had but one runway, 27 was equipped with ILS, while 9 was not. I started getting vector instructions 86nm from the airport, and when I was about 30nm from it, the ATC directed me to flight straight in to runway 9. I could not see a thing and I missed the approach by some 300 feet to the left.So, could something like this really happen in real life?

No. This would not happen in real life and the pilot would request another runway or divert to another airport. This has happened to me too frequently and you might look for an updated AFCAD for the airport or repair the airport yourself with an AFCAD program.Best regards,Jim Young

Yes, this can happen in real life. ..it's why WAAS was invented! You filed IFR. After that it's for the pilot to decide whether the landing is safe, not ATC. Your confusion is because you mention VFR when you filed IFR?Try flying the approach again, this time using a VFR flightplan - you won't even be allowed near the airport.That said, Jim is correct too. In real life no ATC would offer such an approach unless first verifying that no other course of action was available. ATC in FS is a bit coarse in its scenarios and a bit black/white when it should be varying shades of grey... but the diversion remains the pilots responsibility.

Yes, this can happen in real life. ..it's why WAAS was invented! You filed IFR. After that it's for the pilot to decide whether the landing is safe, not ATC. Your confusion is because you mention VFR when you filed IFR?

Sorry, probably I didn't use the correct terminology, by VFR, I meant no ILS. The entire trip was IFR which I created using the MSFSX flight planner, and I flew it from VOR to VOR. That's why I was expecting runway 27 with ILS approach instead of runway 9 without ILS. I'm a novice sim pilot, finally getting good understanding of VOR navigation and ILS approach, which is what I have been practicing the last couple of weeks, hence I do not have the experience nor knowledge regarding real life aviation procedures.BTW, the airport is Elkhart, IN. I won't be flying there anymore LOL.Also, what is WAAS?Can you also recommend a good flight planner third party app, if such exists?Thanks

I had a similar experience on my last flight. I chose a GPS approach to my ATC allocated non ILS runway. I caught sight of the runway just in time to correct and land. However, a large commercial aircraft had just taken off from the ILS runway (opposite end of the runway FSX ATC had allocated me) nearly had a Tenerife situation. Sometimes FSX ATC is certifiably insane. :(

ILS 27 approach, circle to land runway 9... at least thats what those crazy freight dogs do in real life. Within the rules of course. If vis is beyond minimums they divert. The MS ATC will open up the runway according to wind direction no matter what. you could also do a back course ILS landing

Sorry, probably I didn't use the correct terminology, by VFR, I meant no ILS. The entire trip was IFR which I created using the MSFSX flight planner, and I flew it from VOR to VOR. That's why I was expecting runway 27 with ILS approach instead of runway 9 without ILS. I'm a novice sim pilot, finally getting good understanding of VOR navigation and ILS approach, which is what I have been practicing the last couple of weeks, hence I do not have the experience nor knowledge regarding real life aviation procedures.BTW, the airport is Elkhart, IN. I won't be flying there anymore LOL.Also, what is WAAS?Can you also recommend a good flight planner third party app, if such exists?Thanks

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wide_Area_Augmentation_SystemGPS-derived NOT dependant on external radio navaids for precision approaches.Reality XP sell WAAS-equipped GPS addons for FSX.Flying a back course approach on the ILS was perfectly possible, especially if you know the MDA for the airport/runway in question as this can be displayed on the GPS to offer vertical guidance indicator (descent rate), even if it won't auto-fly the profile without WAAS.Sounds like you could spend a bit of time genning up on the procedural side of things, as well as the terminology..?The site you need is HERE

I have just dicovered a quirk. I use ASA for weather on the flight I just completed I was flying (ES Citation II) to KRVS. As usual the FSX ATC gave me an approach vector and landing on Runway 19R, this was the reciprocal runway to the only ILS runway 01L. Listening to ATIS the wind speed was given as 237 @ 71 Knots ( I was currently taking advantage of a rather nice tailwind). The only other runway available from ATC was 19L. So I planned to use the localiser back course for final approach 19R. After descending under ATC control to 2600' I again called up ATC and was now offered runways 01L & O1R. So I optioned the ILS runway 01L. On listening to ATIS the wind was now given as 357 @ 5 Knots. I succesfully landed on 01L. I hypothesize that the when ATC first gives an approach clearance it is using the prevailing weather conditions local to the aircraft and not the weather conditions at the arrival airport. This would account for the original runway allocation. When I was close to the arrival airport the runways available changed because the local weather conditons were used as the aircraft was inside the local weather zone. This would also account for aircraft that I have experienced taking off toward me when I am on approach to the runway originally allocated by FSX ATC. As AI aircraft would be allocated take off runways in accordance with airport's local weather conditions then reciprocal headings for arriving and departing aircraft are bound to occur. Can anyone abet or refute this hypothesis and are there any known solutions?

I have just dicovered a quirk. I use ASA for weather on the flight I just completed I was flying (ES Citation II) to KRVS. As usual the FSX ATC gave me an approach vector and landing on Runway 19R, this was the reciprocal runway to the only ILS runway 01L. Listening to ATIS the wind speed was given as 237 @ 71 Knots ( I was currently taking advantage of a rather nice tailwind). The only other runway available from ATC was 19L. So I planned to use the localiser back course for final approach 19R. After descending under ATC control to 2600' I again called up ATC and was now offered runways 01L & O1R. So I optioned the ILS runway 01L. On listening to ATIS the wind was now given as 357 @ 5 Knots. I succesfully landed on 01L. I hypothesize that the when ATC first gives an approach clearance it is using the prevailing weather conditions local to the aircraft and not the weather conditions at the arrival airport. This would account for the original runway allocation. When I was close to the arrival airport the runways available changed because the local weather conditons were used as the aircraft was inside the local weather zone. This would also account for aircraft that I have experienced taking off toward me when I am on approach to the runway originally allocated by FSX ATC. As AI aircraft would be allocated take off runways in accordance with airport's local weather conditions then reciprocal headings for arriving and departing aircraft are bound to occur. Can anyone abet or refute this hypothesis and are there any known solutions?

Interesting Yellowjack-not sure the answer...This thread piques my interest though because rw sometimes it is not that clear either.First, if there is any chance of getting a visual approach-even though on an ifr plan atc will usually try-after all-it takes a lot less time to do a visual. Which brings up a question I have not gotten a clear answer for-if on an ifr flight plan and given a visual approach which is an ifr clearance-can the visual approach be logged as a legal ifr approach to maintain currency?-I've gotten different answers from different cfi's...(I don't log them but some say you should). Re: circling to land-can be done for a lot of reasons. I've done Ils approaches-then when breaking out circled to land on a different runway. Why? In one case it was a 1000 ft. ceiling requiring an ils approach but the winds were 30 knts. 90 degrees to the ils runway-so once breaking out-a circle to a different runway aligned with the wind. I used to routinely do this at my old home airport because my hanger was located at the end of one of the runways. Take the approach down to visual then land on the runway that puts you right at your hangar.At my present home airport which has two parallel runways-one with a bc loc, it is routine to be given the bc approach-while on the approach atc asks where we are parking, then upon breaking out we are sidestepped to the other runway which has no approach but puts us closer to the hangar....and I just had breakfast with a pilot who was cleared to land on 27l-at the same time another plane was cleared to land on 9r. He questioned the clearance and won for the same reason-a plane taking off in the opposite direction on the runway he was landing on.FS atc isn't perfect-but neither is rw.

I have just dicovered a quirk. I use ASA for weather on the flight I just completed I was flying (ES Citation II) to KRVS. As usual the FSX ATC gave me an approach vector and landing on Runway 19R, this was the reciprocal runway to the only ILS runway 01L. Listening to ATIS the wind speed was given as 237 @ 71 Knots ( I was currently taking advantage of a rather nice tailwind). The only other runway available from ATC was 19L. So I planned to use the localiser back course for final approach 19R. After descending under ATC control to 2600' I again called up ATC and was now offered runways 01L & O1R. So I optioned the ILS runway 01L. On listening to ATIS the wind was now given as 357 @ 5 Knots. I succesfully landed on 01L. I hypothesize that the when ATC first gives an approach clearance it is using the prevailing weather conditions local to the aircraft and not the weather conditions at the arrival airport. This would account for the original runway allocation. When I was close to the arrival airport the runways available changed because the local weather conditons were used as the aircraft was inside the local weather zone. This would also account for aircraft that I have experienced taking off toward me when I am on approach to the runway originally allocated by FSX ATC. As AI aircraft would be allocated take off runways in accordance with airport's local weather conditions then reciprocal headings for arriving and departing aircraft are bound to occur. Can anyone abet or refute this hypothesis and are there any known solutions?

I used to experience the same problem with ASA. Turning off DWC (direct wind control) under ASA options solved the the problem for me.Chris,

Sorry, probably I didn't use the correct terminology, by VFR, I meant no ILS. The entire trip was IFR which I created using the MSFSX flight planner, and I flew it from VOR to VOR. That's why I was expecting runway 27 with ILS approach instead of runway 9 without ILS. I'm a novice sim pilot, finally getting good understanding of VOR navigation and ILS approach, which is what I have been practicing the last couple of weeks, hence I do not have the experience nor knowledge regarding real life aviation procedures.BTW, the airport is Elkhart, IN. I won't be flying there anymore LOL.Also, what is WAAS?Can you also recommend a good flight planner third party app, if such exists?Thanks

Once you reached the appropriate minima and weren't visual then you should have made a missed approach.

Quoted from SimNutt above "I used to experience the same problem with ASA. Turning off DWC (direct wind control) under ASA options solved the the problem for me."I just want to reiterate the statement. Heed this one if no others.

Snave, thanks for all your help. I'm looking at the Reality XP GNS 530 and it intrigues me so much that I will purchase it.The link at the bottom is a gem IMO, I can't believe I have not found it until now.

Yes turn off DWC in ASA, it gives some strange readings and messes with the ATC... but also check the "force destination wx" box in the options menu

Yes turn off DWC in ASA, it gives some strange readings and messes with the ATC... but also check the "force destination wx" box in the options menu

Thank you guys for the suggestion to turn of DWC in ASA. I will give it a go. I might also try turning off upper winds as a separate experiment. I already have the "Force destination WX checked". :(