A sreenshot of the ILS approach to runway 3 at KMKC, default scenery. The glidepath/slope does get you by the crane, but just barely. I hope the actual approach to this runway doesn't include these obstacles!Dale

A sreenshot of the ILS approach to runway 3 at KMKC, default scenery. The glidepath/slope does get you by the crane, but just barely. I hope the actual approach to this runway doesn't include these obstacles!

For the looks of it, it seems like if you were on the extended runway centerline you would cross between the two cranes! :( Seriously though, if there were such an obstacle to any runway (which I highly doubt, it's just too much), most likely the runway would be restricted to operations on one runway only (the opposite runway).

Intersting, I just looked at the chart for the approach, and it shows 2 towers on each side of the approach path about 100' high. Also the remarks for the airport in the AFD says: CRANE 98 FT AGL 3300 FT SOUTH AER TWY 3 DAYLIGHT HRS. MON-FRI. Check it out:http://www.airnav.com/airport/KMKC

Where's that plane from? Is it any good? POH, Sounde etc? thanks

A sreenshot of the ILS approach to runway 3 at KMKC, default scenery. The glidepath/slope does get you by the crane, but just barely. I hope the actual approach to this runway doesn't include these obstacles!Dale

lol.... uuuh yeah, that's only one of the BEST GA planes for FSX:RealAir's SF260:http://www.realairsimulations.com/flash.ph...e=sf26007_introAlso that approach looks like an offset localizer to me - according to your HSI you are a little left of course\edit: yep, it's an offset one... 2.23 degrees according to the NACO plate:http://naco.faa.gov/d-tpp/1004/00213IL3.PDF

Intersting, I just looked at the chart for the approach, and it shows 2 towers on each side of the approach path about 100' high. Also the remarks for the airport in the AFD says: CRANE 98 FT AGL 3300 FT SOUTH AER TWY 3 DAYLIGHT HRS. MON-FRI. Check it out:http://www.airnav.com/airport/KMKC

Looks like those cranes are actually there in real life too, but I would venture to be that those cranes in the screenshot are more than the published 100 ft tall. I've heard gripes over and over that MSFS has oversized ground scenery. I've never noticd it myself, but mostly fly heavy metal so not much of an oppurtunity to compare sizes. Perhaps this is an example of that though.

lol.... uuuh yeah, that's only one of the BEST GA planes for FSX:RealAir's SF260:http://www.realairsimulations.com/flash.ph...e=sf26007_introYep, it's the Realair 260. Great airplane, does slips, spins, really good frame rates, and just challenging enough to keep you on your toes.Also that approach looks like an offset localizer to me - according to your HSI you are a little left of course\edit: yep, it's an offset one... 2.23 degrees according to the NACO plate:http://naco.faa.gov/d-tpp/1004/00213IL3.PDF

Left of course? Man, you are tougher than my old flight instructor! I was flying manually and trying to snap screenshots at the same time, that's my excuse, anyway.Dale

.. and I will absolutely guarantee that either of those cranes in that proximity to the localizer/glideslope transmitters would bend your approach to the degree you're not going to land anywhere near that runway!!!This situation happened in 1966 (or 67?) at Heathrow of all places: I was a radio mech with British Eagle at the time, when a Britannia was forced to abort an ILS approach - as he was landing on the wrong runway. I seem to remember a couple of air tests being flown, a good amount of panic, lots of high-level 'phone conversations, and a resolution on that, or the next day. A construction crew indeed had a crane in the upright position, not too far from the localizer tx. When it was hauled down the issue disappeared.Anyway - after looking at all the 'photos on Google Earth - of that approach - the MS version looks pretty exaggerated.