I've done several flights from San Juan (TJSJ) to St Maartens, NL Antilles (TNCM) in the PMDG MD11.St Maartens has no ILS and RC tells me to expect vectors to RW 09 which is the norm, with the approach from the sea. However, RCs vectors seem all wrong and I do'nt know where I'd end up if I didn't intervene. From a point where I'm heading about 110 degrees (from memory) with the runway at about 085 degrees (again from memory) RC instructs me to go to a heading of 185. This is in the opposite direction from the runway and is taking me further out to sea.As it is always my aim to reach my destination I wait to see if another correcting instruction comes but after a few minutes I intervene, cancel IFR and fly the approach and landing visually.I might do another flight and see just where RC takes me and I'll make a log for JD as this seems to be a repeatable problem.I might add that, having added St Maartens as a payware airport recently I have re-run the scenery db and makerwys and I have the latest versions of FSUIPC and Makerunways installed.This was in FSX but I'll try it in FS9 as I have the same scenery there and see if the same happens.Iain Smith

I've done several flights from San Juan (TJSJ) to St Maartens, NL Antilles (TNCM) in the PMDG MD11.St Maartens has no ILS and RC tells me to expect vectors to RW 09 which is the norm, with the approach from the sea. However, RCs vectors seem all wrong and I do'nt know where I'd end up if I didn't intervene. From a point where I'm heading about 110 degrees (from memory) with the runway at about 085 degrees (again from memory) RC instructs me to go to a heading of 185. This is in the opposite direction from the runway and is taking me further out to sea.As it is always my aim to reach my destination I wait to see if another correcting instruction comes but after a few minutes I intervene, cancel IFR and fly the approach and landing visually.I might do another flight and see just where RC takes me and I'll make a log for JD as this seems to be a repeatable problem.I might add that, having added St Maartens as a payware airport recently I have re-run the scenery db and makerwys and I have the latest versions of FSUIPC and Makerunways installed.This was in FSX but I'll try it in FS9 as I have the same scenery there and see if the same happens.Iain Smith

are you missing your crossing restriction? FL or ALT? local pressure or standard pressure?jd

are you missing your crossing restriction? FL or ALT? local pressure or standard pressure?jd

Not missing the crossing restriction jd but your question on pressure is a good one. San Juan (TJSJ) has a TA of 18000 while St Maartens has a TA of 5000. I'm pretty sure that at the point I'm talking about I'm still on standard pressure but I'm not sure.I'll do the flight again with debug on and see what happens.Iain Smith

If RC commands an altitude in feet then local pressure applies for your altitude goal. If RC commands a flight level altitude then standard pressure applies.Since you have both FS versions you should have two folders of RC installed. Be sure you have for each a shortcut named for RC or RCX pointing to the correct folder for each version and do the scenery rebuild for each including the appropriate FS path for each as well so each version has the correct data for the specific FS scenery installed for each FS version.

Hi IainOut of curiosity(never having flown there in real life or FS) I've just done this flight but in an ATR as it is such a short hop.I planned it at 12000 feet ASL and took the vectors for 09 as you did.I had set the aircraft up for a VOR RW09 Approach as per some oldish charts I have.The vectors I was given were pretty much as yours but the turn to 185 degrees is at right angles to the runway center line not opposite direction as you say.I was given the clearance to turn towards the VOR at about 35 miles and just in time not to overshoot the centerline so I was established on the 096 radial well ahead.At the time I flew this(a few minutes ago)the barometer settings were pretty close to the standard 2991mb and I'm not excatly sure where the FIR boundary is anyway.In other words this flight was fine and RC4 did exactly what was expected.

Hi IainOut of curiosity(never having flown there in real life or FS) I've just done this flight but in an ATR as it is such a short hop.I planned it at 12000 feet ASL and took the vectors for 09 as you did.I had set the aircraft up for a VOR RW09 Approach as per some oldish charts I have.The vectors I was given were pretty much as yours but the turn to 185 degrees is at right angles to the runway center line not opposite direction as you say.I was given the clearance to turn towards the VOR at about 35 miles and just in time not to overshoot the centerline so I was established on the 096 radial well ahead.At the time I flew this(a few minutes ago)the barometer settings were pretty close to the standard 2991mb and I'm not excatly sure where the FIR boundary is anyway.In other words this flight was fine and RC4 did exactly what was expected.

Hi Chris,Since posting I did the flight again. Just before I was turned on to hdg 185 I was on a hdg of 100 degrees and moving towards the airport. I was expecting a turn to the left of say 20 degrees or so to take me over the runway centre line and then a turn to 090 for a straight-in approach. Instead I was turned to 185 which is more or less in the opposite direction, hence my comment.After being put on hdg 185 I was then turned to hdg 125. I can't remember the exact wording of the instruction to go to hdg 125 but it seemed clear to me that I wasn't going to get any more vectors. At that point I was heading about 35 degrees off the direction to the airport and from my moving map in FSNav I could see, after a few minutes that I wasn't going to be turned in time. So after a few minutes I requested a visual approach but had forgotten that wouldn't get me more vectors and I was telling RC that I could see the field which I couldn't at that point.So I intervened and manually turned the aircraft around using the FMC map display and eventually positioned it so I could re-engage LNAV from which it got me lined up for a manual approach and landing.However, in view of your experience, it's probably me. You are, no doubt, more procedurally correct. I wasn't aware there was a VOR to home in on although I should have expected some directional aid as there is no ILS. Thanks for your response.Iain

If RC commands an altitude in feet then local pressure applies for your altitude goal. If RC commands a flight level altitude then standard pressure applies.

Understood Ron

Since you have both FS versions you should have two folders of RC installed. Be sure you have for each a shortcut named for RC or RCX pointing to the correct folder for each version and do the scenery rebuild for each including the appropriate FS path for each as well so each version has the correct data for the specific FS scenery installed for each FS version.

Yes, all present and correct Ron! ^_^Thanks for your response.Iain

Hi again IainIt sounds as if I got the same instructions as you.I was on a roughly easterly heading but the ATC instruction to turn to 185 (approx)was quite correct as the next instruction to turn to 125 was just about right to intercept the 096 radial to the VOR.The VOR approach is based on the 096 radial to the PJM VOR on 113.00.The joining procedure is to be overhead the VOR at 3500 feet and take an outbound heading of 288(CAT A and B aircraft)for 3 mins descending to 1500 for the turn back inbound on 096.IN RC4 they vector you to the final approach path but you could ask for the VOR procedure of course.There are charts at http://www.fscharts.com/?action=search&type=icao&term=TNCM These are similar to mine which are part of a FAA book of Carribean and S.American charts and are 10 years old.The new VOR procedure I have found via Google is outbound on 276R at 2600 feet to 4.8 miles followed by a procedure turn inbound at 1600 feet.

Hi again IainIt sounds as if I got the same instructions as you.I was on a roughly easterly heading but the ATC instruction to turn to 185 (approx)was quite correct as the next instruction to turn to 125 was just about right to intercept the 096 radial to the VOR.The VOR approach is based on the 096 radial to the PJM VOR on 113.00.The joining procedure is to be overhead the VOR at 3500 feet and take an outbound heading of 288(CAT A and B aircraft)for 3 mins descending to 1500 for the turn back inbound on 096.IN RC4 they vector you to the final approach path but you could ask for the VOR procedure of course.There are charts at http://www.fscharts....=icao&term=TNCM These are similar to mine which are part of a FAA book of Carribean and S.American charts and are 10 years old.The new VOR procedure I have found via Google is outbound on 276R at 2600 feet to 4.8 miles followed by a procedure turn inbound at 1600 feet.

Hi Chris,Thanks for that useful info. I realised after my last post that I'd had a "brain malfunction". The hdg of 185 is not in the opposite direction but, as you said, at 95 degrees to the runway.I shall try the flight again following the charts and procedures. I'm sure you're right - RC4 is behaving as it should.:blush:Iain