absolutely right, the scale is very sensitive! look at my ground based picture with the 2D HUD. There you can see what looks like a pronounced localiser deviation, yet my nosewheel is pretty close to centreline. It allows for very precise calibration to the localiser path

Thanks JR! Much appreciated!

absolutely right, the scale is very sensitive! look at my ground based picture with the 2D HUD. There you can see what looks like a pronounced localiser deviation, yet my nosewheel is pretty close to centreline. It allows for very precise calibration to the localiser path

Thanks. But let me still remain slightly in doubt about this whole sensitivity part. There is a well known video on youtube shot from a real HUD-equipped 737, ILS landing at LAX and this vertical bar doesn't display any ultra sensitive behaviour (despite some changing crosswind, overall shaky conditions, etc.) and in fact when getting real close to the runway it behaves quite smoothly and it aligns itself perfectly with the centerline. But thanks for all the info.

Thanks. But let me still remain slightly in doubt about this whole sensitivity part. There is a well known video on youtube shot from a real HUD-equipped 737, ILS landing at LAX and this vertical bar doesn't display any ultra sensitive behaviour (despite some changing crosswind, overall shaky conditions, etc.) and in fact when getting real close to the runway it behaves quite smoothly and it aligns itself perfectly with the centerline. But thanks for all the info.

I know the video you are talking about. But keep in mind, this wasn't used in IMC or IIIA modes. It was used in PRI mode, and that might be less sensitive.

There is more than one such video. The one I am talking about is ILS Cat 1/AIII. Whether the conditions where actualy IMC has no impact on instrumentation.Only the video shot from within this PMDG could tell us more about how the deviations actually work..

There is more than one such video. The one I am talking about is ILS Cat 1/AIII. Whether the conditions where actualy IMC has no impact on instrumentation.

I was talking about the modes of the HGS. I'm not sure if the instrumentation is more sensitive when the HGS is in IMC of IIIA mode than when it is in PRI mode. Maybe a Tech Team/Beta Team member can comment.

There is more than one such video. The one I am talking about is ILS Cat 1/AIII. Whether the conditions where actualy IMC has no impact on instrumentation.

Well, the mode obviously has an influence on the items shown. The video you mean is primary all the way down, not AIII. Primary doesn't show the deviation. IMC and AIII do. Check

out. Transition from primary to IMC occurs at around 800' RA or 3:00 minutes into the video.BTW I suppose you mean

one? Since you say a bar aligns with the centerline when getting close to the runway, maybe we're talking about different bars altogether. The one that appears right after touchdown is also a loc deviation, but I'm unsure about its sensitivity. Might very well be "normal" sensitivity without gain, unlike in IMC/AIII modes.

Yes, there is transition and horizontal deviation (vertical bar) is very smooth all the way down. There is no need to multiply those posts, like I said only a true video and not still shots would show us behaviour.

I can't keep this bottled up anymore. I love you JR! You complete me! Without you, my pre NGX excitement would be nothing!

Well, the mode obviously has an influence on the items shown. The video you mean is primary all the way down, not AIII. Primary doesn't show the deviation. IMC and AIII do. Check

out. Transition from primary to IMC occurs at around 800' RA or 3:00 minutes into the video.BTW I suppose you mean

one? Since you say a bar aligns with the centerline when getting close to the runway, maybe we're talking about different bars altogether. The one that appears right after touchdown is also a loc deviation, but I'm unsure about its sensitivity. Might very well be "normal" sensitivity without gain, unlike in IMC/AIII modes.

I will try and do a FRAPS video and link it at some point, but the behaviour you see on the NGX HUD is absolutely accurate to the real aircraft and yes there are mode differences :)JR

I will try and do a FRAPS video and link it at some point, but the behaviour you see on the NGX HUD is absolutely accurate to the real aircraft and yes there are mode differences :)

Thanks JR, no rush. I believe you it's totally accurate. In fact I can't see a difference between your shots and the Youtube videos. Looks like it should to me.

Thanks for the writeup Jane. I appreciate your using a popular approach in your example, as I have flown into the 27's at Heathrow in real and virtual life plenty of times, so I basically have the STARS and the interim transition routes from the four holding points to the ILS glideslope capture altitude memorized, so it was easy to relate to the importance of the NGX's proper LNAV/VNAV guidance when it comes to complex approaches. Per real life at Heathrow, I often "pretend" to receive radar vectors from the EGLL holding points to the runway IAFs using heading select, and use FLCH or V/S to perform a CDA (constant descent approach). I do this in part because I'm a realism junkie, having seen this approach used in flight tracker websites and pilot reports of EGLL approaches, but also in part because most Flight simulator FMCs/autopilots are not capable of adhering to the defined procedures accurately. As a matter of fact, I often turn off VNAV (and maybe LNAV) once I am below 10,000 feet at most airports as I believe most of the time IRL ATC will command heading vectors or speed/altitude requests contrary to the STAR due to traffic density. But I will say that when I was new to flight simulator, I followed the prescribed STAR procedures to a T, with LNAV/VNAV active until glidescope capture, and I do remember having a difficult time with most addon aircraft on accurately following the FMC commanded lateral and vertical path and adjusting airspeed accordingly.I can't wait to finally have an accurate VNAV implementation in FS. I own that other FSX NG, and even though it's not the worse I've seen when it comes to VNAV performance, it often requires me to intervene with throttle because it has a hard time keeping the glidepath on descent or going to fast or too slow without the autothrottle compensating to correct in time, and it also suffered from capturing the next waypoint speed constraint too soon (the latest SP for it fixes that issue though). I think a good test is to see how the NGX performs with the CDA approach into KLAX with the many step down heights.

The problem with the deviation indicator on the HGS has been found and fixed - stupid FSX magnetic variation vs. real world course stuff again...

The problem with the deviation indicator on the HGS has been found and fixed - stupid FSX magnetic variation vs. real world course stuff again...

Aaaaa.. interesting, perhaps I was onto something after all, great to be of service. :(

I'd noticed it weeks ago actually, just reminded Alex and EV after seeing this thread though - thanks!

How exactly is ANP calculated fluidly/realistically when all nav sources are 100% accurate in FS?