ATC and Airport Approaches

[Guest Bud]

I've always used Radar Contact for ATC simming, but I decided to give the default a try for comparison purposes. Because I'm new to the default, it may be I'm doing something wrong, but this was what happened first flight. I'm approaching Frankfurt - all had gone well and I'm pleasantly surprised by FS9 ATC. I was given a good descent profile and at 9000ft, approach vectors were provided for the active runway. At this point, I went thro' the menus and selected an ILS approach with an appropriate transition to the same runway. This was ackowledged by ATC. I'm very impressed. Wrong - within a minute, ATC came on telling me to expedite my climb to 11000ft. I verified with the kneepad that no such instruction had been given. ATC persisted and I scrapped the IFR flight and landed manually.OK could be a glitch. I repeated the flight. This time my descent was to 12000ft. Again I requested the same runway and transition. Again acknowledged, but the instruction was to maintain 11000ft until established on the localiser. I don't think so.Anyone know if the prob lies with FS9 ATC or, more likely maybe, the pilot.Bud

[ronzie 21]

I wonder if the correct MSL airport height is in the database. If you flew according to the ATC instruction, did you intercept the localizer then GS at the instructed altitudes? What is the airport elevation in Frankfurt, obstacles in the approach, etc. Does the approach plate show the correct MSAs and vertical intercept path for comparison?

[Guest Bud]

A/port height is correct. As I mentioned, having been given an alt. of 11000, I decided to ditch the IFR plan and completed both flights by hand according to the approach plates, with no problem at all - other than dodgy piloting skills. I've since tried the same flight, this time accepting FS9 ATC's vectors to final. This worked OK. I've previously flown this route a number of times using Radar Contact, and never had a problem.Bud

[ronzie 21]

Radar Contact latest build 3.1 2205 uses an algorithm that sets an approach to intercept altitude at a set AGL above averaged MSA in the quad you are in. You can pick it I think in the Controller panel, options if not.

[Guest Blue Ridge Dx]

Hi Bud,If I may offer a suggestion...When using the default FS9 ATC and picking an approach other than the assigned one, choose 'vectors to final' instead of a published transition. In my experience, ATC will have you continue your descent to the previously cleared altitude, and usually give you a new vector to intercept the localizer. Give it a try and see if it works for you.Best Regards,Nick LandolfiBlue Ridge Dx

[Guest Bud]

Hello NickMany thanks. Yep - did that and it worked OK. Pity I can't seem to get the transition approaches to work as well.RegardsBud

[Guest Bud]

Yup. It's back to RC for me I think. Probably better to use something you really know anyway! Can't wait for v4.Bud

[MadDog 353]

Hi Bud,Why, exactly, did you request a transition? What were you expecting? As I understand it - a transition (at least in FS) is a request to fly through airspace with no intention to land. I'm thinking that you're confusing this with the transition from a STAR to an ILS (or another Instrument Approach Procedure). Microsoft's documentation clearly states that DPs and STARs are not recognized unless you specifically include the appropriate fixes in your flightplan... even then, the FS ATC will eventually vector you to join the final - which is TOTALLY realistic. I admit that I'm not really sure what a transition does when flying IFR in FS... I've never requested it and I'm curious what will happen after you exit the specified airspace - I'll look into that. As for RC - I think a lot of people have been duped into believing it is the "holy grail" of ATC... it ain't! Although RC has some very realistic features, I prefer the MS ATC because it recognizes the AI traffic. It's not perfect; but at least it tries to fit you into the traffic flow. RC acts like you're the only airplane in the sky - hopefully that will change with the next version.Regards,Marc

[ronzie 21]

Especially the feature that allows the new RC to control AI enroute and ground to allow avoidance vectoring for you and the AI, and to assist with the problem of AI taxiing onto the runway while you are on final.

[ronzie 21]

The current beta version RC 3.1 build 2205 available to the public to update the shipping product has been AI aware for quite some time. It will pass on traffic alerts. The next version will control AI so it can issue avoidance vectors to you and AI, and also help avoid AI from taxiing onto the runway when you are in close final. It will also currently issue a go-around if there is an aircraft on the runway when you are on close final.I'm not sure about this but it may also be able to speed up the rollout, taxi, and runway turnoff for the AI on the ground runway you are on final for. Check the announcements in the RC AVSIM forum.

[ronzie 21]

I've seen the term transistion describe three things:Transitioning to cross (transit) an authority's controlled airspace without landing as you describe.The term used to transition from enroute to a STAR, vectored approach, or combination thereof . . . hence the term transition altitude from high to low IFR routes (FL 180 in US).A layer in some other countries between the local controlled airspace and higher enroute airspace.