I've recently bought the Aerosoft Madeira X package, and it's brilliant. I've been trying the famous Rwy 05 approach to Funchal airport at night, using the QW757 and the effects are amazing. It got me wondering though, why does the VOR DME approach keep traffic so close to the airport, thus making for that hairy turn? I would have thought that pushing aircraft further out and turning them later, would give more room to manoeuvre. I'm assuming it's to keep them in visual range of the runway in marginal conditions? Also, are airliners ever given vectors to help them line up, or do they always have to fly the VOR DME procedure from the Funchal beacon?If anyone is familar with this airport's operations I'd be very interested to know.ThanksIan

Seems like this isn't one of the easier approaches then (actually some sites still list it as one of the most dangerous ones around).

A320 to rw05

No answers to your questions of course but always nice to watch the Pros (and their difficulties).The outside views let the 757 look and behave like a toy plane in crosswinds.I fully agree to your opinion about the Aerosoft Madeira X package. Good and enjoyable buy there.

Here's a few links you might find interesting... Videos from someone tutoring FSX approaches for all of the History Channel's Top 10 Most Extreme Airports TV-show, and in this case, Madeira:

Great tutorial there.

Thanks for the links. I've got hooked on interesting and 'dangerous' approaches after watching some of those videos. I think Funchal is easier in the Wilco Airbus than the QW 757 though, thanks to the FBW.Ian

It got me wondering though, why does the VOR DME approach keep traffic so close to the airport, thus making for that hairy turn? I would have thought that pushing aircraft further out and turning them later, would give more room to manoeuvre. I'm assuming it's to keep them in visual range of the runway in marginal conditions? Also, are airliners ever given vectors to help them line up, or do they always have to fly the VOR DME procedure from the Funchal beacon?If anyone is familar with this airport's operations I'd be very interested to know.ThanksIan

My dad when he learned to fly with the USAF, was told that they were taught to cut the engine when abeam the numbers. (Someday I have to scan his basic training manual.) The mantra was "let's make the approach assuming we don't have an engine." It seem(s)(ed) (?) that engines experience problems at lower altitudes. Granted today, engines are much much more reliable. Put another way, when flying over water, we're taught to fly as high as practical, meaning if you lose your engine, you can at least glide and either get to an airport on land or at least land near the shore so you can swim to it.

Thanks for the links. I've got hooked on interesting and 'dangerous' approaches after watching some of those videos. I think Funchal is easier in the Wilco Airbus than the QW 757 though, thanks to the FBW.Ian

The smaller airbus is easier to maneuver than the mighty and powerful 757

Great vid's... here is the entry I thought of, Air Luxor A320-200, I watch the DVD from time to time and it is one of my favorites.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f-MSLkpdo1M

I find this approach more difficult than the old Stonecutter one at Kai Tak. At least with Kai Tak you had better visibility for the turn than this one.Must try it again with the Airbus see if viz is any better.