How do I get assigned, or request a VOR / VORDME approach? I want to practice these approaches, but I keep getting assigned ILS approaches by ATC. If I press "0" to select my own approach, I only get a choice of either visual or ILS approaches.The particular airport I have been trying it on is Southampton (EGHI) as I know I have been assigned a VORDME approach there before. I have just upgraded to VOXATC 6, (although I'm not sure whether this is relevant as I have not tried to do this on version 5.63 which I used previously).If I open the stock airport data for EGHI on Airport Design Editor X it shows 2 different VORDME approaches in the list of approaches on the database. Am I doing something obviously wrong?I have downloaded and installed the NavData from Navigraph (although I gather this is only for SIDs / STARS anyway, not approaches). I have also re run the indexer etc but I still don't seem to be able to chose any approach other than ILS / visual. I have tried it on various other airports too with the same outcome.Any ideas gratefully received.Rich

Hi Rich,I thought VoxATC used Navigraph data for instrument approaches but I may be wrong. The latest AIRAC has a VOR/D approach for runway 02 - VOR/D 20 isn't present - but you're correct in that VoxATC doesn't allow it as a selection.There's an 11 degree offset from the runway heading for VOR/D 02, but I don't know if that would matter.

I haven't checked that special airport you've mentioned, but did you guys run the "RunwayNumberUpdate" tool in the VoxATC folder of version 6?Maybe this helps on the offset and therefor enables the approach.

I haven't checked that special airport you've mentioned, but did you guys run the "RunwayNumberUpdate" tool in the VoxATC folder of version 6?Maybe this helps on the offset and therefor enables the approach.

Hey CoolP!I've not used that utility yet. I'd think it would only affect the runway numbers in the BGL files and not any of the other attributes.Besides the BGL IDs match the Navigraph IDs, so I wouldn't be surprised if it were to skip over Southampton.Doubly besides, I'm using uk2000 scenery and I'd rather leave payware BGLs alone... or at least hand-edit them with ADE if necessary.Triply besides, I prefer the alternate method of tracking mismatches between BGL and Navigraph data in a separate file. For example to signal that the EDDK 07/25 runway in FSX matches the Navigraph 06/24 runway:

EDDK 07 06EDDK 25 24

Guys - thanks for your replies. I tried running the Runway Number Update, but EGHI wasn't one of the airports affected. I think I have made some progress on the issue, but I am meddling with things I don't really understand!!I have Traffix X and UK2000 Scenery installed. The only reason I have Traffix X is because it brings different airlines into the sim which VOXATC recognises. There was an "ADFSWAP" application which came with Traffix X which I used to disable Traffix X AFD files for all airport. This meant I was able to select alternative approaches for all airports outside the UK within VOXATC. I then disabled UK2000 scenery which I have for the south of England. Following this I was able to select VOR approaches to EGHI within VOXATC.I am not sure what is going on here and how FSX decides which airport files take priority, but I was able to request VORDME approaches from the default FSX atc with UK2000 scenery installed, but not from VOXATC. I have found a temporary work around for this by opening the UK Scenery 2000 EGHI within Airport Design Editor, then importing the approaches for the default EGHI and compiling a new airport i.e. combining default approaches with addon scenery. The pain is that this takes some time to do and there are loads of airports in the UK 2000 Scenery package. Whether UK2000 have been a bit lazy with the way they handle their approaches or whether VOXATC is not picking up the detail it should I don't know, but the two packages don't seem to work together without a little human intervention.Fenric, you mentioned you thought VOXATC used the Navigraph data for approaches. I am only speculating, but from my experience above and having messed around with things a bit, I don't think it does. I have no idea why not though as the Navigraph approach data looks much more comprehensive (I have found far more approaches in there than are on the default airport files e.g. for YMAV there are no default approaches other than visual and ILS while Navigraph includes VORDME approaches too). If VOXATC uses Navigraph for SIDs / STARS then why not utilise the approaches too?

Guys - thanks for your replies. I tried running the Runway Number Update, but EGHI wasn't one of the airports affected. I think I have made some progress on the issue, but I am meddling with things I don't really understand!!I have Traffix X and UK2000 Scenery installed. The only reason I have Traffix X is because it brings different airlines into the sim which VOXATC recognises. There was an "ADFSWAP" application which came with Traffix X which I used to disable Traffix X AFD files for all airport. This meant I was able to select alternative approaches for all airports outside the UK within VOXATC. I then disabled UK2000 scenery which I have for the south of England. Following this I was able to select VOR approaches to EGHI within VOXATC.I am not sure what is going on here and how FSX decides which airport files take priority, but I was able to request VORDME approaches from the default FSX atc with UK2000 scenery installed, but not from VOXATC. I have found a temporary work around for this by opening the UK Scenery 2000 EGHI within Airport Design Editor, then importing the approaches for the default EGHI and compiling a new airport i.e. combining default approaches with addon scenery. The pain is that this takes some time to do and there are loads of airports in the UK 2000 Scenery package. Whether UK2000 have been a bit lazy with the way they handle their approaches or whether VOXATC is not picking up the detail it should I don't know, but the two packages don't seem to work together without a little human intervention.Fenric, you mentioned you thought VOXATC used the Navigraph data for approaches. I am only speculating, but from my experience above and having messed around with things a bit, I don't think it does. I have no idea why not though as the Navigraph approach data looks much more comprehensive (I have found far more approaches in there than are on the default airport files e.g. for YMAV there are no default approaches other than visual and ILS while Navigraph includes VORDME approaches too). If VOXATC uses Navigraph for SIDs / STARS then why not utilise the approaches too?

The problem is most likely that VoxATC does not 'read' the AFCAD for EGHI correctly. Designers use a lot of ways to create AFCAD files even multiple for the same airport.If you have an AFCAD program you may be able to see how EGHI is 'layered', when UK2000 is enabled.Correct, Navigraph data is not used by VoxATC when assigning approaches, only AFCAD data.

Whether UK2000 have been a bit lazy with the way they handle their approaches or whether VOXATC is not picking up the detail it should I don't know, but the two packages don't seem to work together without a little human intervention.Fenric, you mentioned you thought VOXATC used the Navigraph data for approaches. I am only speculating, but from my experience above and having messed around with things a bit, I don't think it does. I have no idea why not though as the Navigraph approach data looks much more comprehensive (I have found far more approaches in there than are on the default airport files e.g. for YMAV there are no default approaches other than visual and ILS while Navigraph includes VORDME approaches too). If VOXATC uses Navigraph for SIDs / STARS then why not utilise the approaches too?

I stand corrected. I've read where (some of) the uk2000 team de-emphasized instrument procedures for their BGLs, I'm not sure why. But the process you describe of using ADE to make a new airport BGL makes sense.I agree that the Navigraph procedures offer more - just sometimes not better :( - approach procedures. I hope that a future version of VoxATC could offer the choice to the user.

The problem is most likely that VoxATC does not 'read' the AFCAD for EGHI correctly. Designers use a lot of ways to create AFCAD files even multiple for the same airport.If you have an AFCAD program you may be able to see how EGHI is 'layered', when UK2000 is enabled.Correct, Navigraph data is not used by VoxATC when assigning approaches, only AFCAD data.

I guess that explains these "missing" approaches, plus why VoxATC controllers ask me to "report xxxxxxx" on some other approaches and I literally can't find the waypoint on my charts... it has since been replaced with a newer/different one.In those cases I just assume they want the Initial Fix or Final Fix and so I report that.