I do all of my virtual flying in Alaska. As you can imagine, there are some challenging approaches in Alaska. Until recently, all of my flying was "VFR" with "flight following." Now that's not to say I never flew in IMC. I use ActiveSky wxRE, and take the weather as it comes. But in instrument meteorological conditions, I've been using my real world charts, maps, and plates to get around.Recently I've begun to "file" flight plans and fly vectored approaches. But on the last two flights, I've had ATC vector me into "unknown territory." Last night, on an approach to Valdez, certainly one of the more challenging approaches in Alaska, ATC ordered me to "descend and maintain 5,800'" well before this is called for on the published LDA/DME approach chart. While I don't doubt that there is a vectored route I could have flown safely at that altitude, is ATC in FS now smart enough to avoid vectoring a/c through mountains? It didn't used to be.-Basil

2002 had known deficiencies in terrain avoidance, so be careful. FS2004 is supposed to be much better in that regard. It still doesn't have knowledge of published procedures but I think it's less likely to clear you land on a mountaintop.

>is ATC in FS now smart>enough to avoid vectoring a/c through mountains? No. ATC will not vector you on published approaches. If you want to fly them, you need to ignore atc vectors. Also, in fs2002, atc was notorious for vectoring planes into terrain. This has been improved in fs2004.

>>is ATC in FS now smart>>enough to avoid vectoring a/c through mountains? >>No. ATC will not vector you on published approaches. If you>want to fly them, you need to ignore atc vectors. Also, in>fs2002, atc was notorious for vectoring planes into terrain. >This has been improved in fs2004. I knew they weren't using the published approaches. I guess I won't trust them when in mountainous terrain.Will they cancel your IFR flight plan if you ignore their vectors? I'm guessing so, because I'll be ignoring altitudes also, and I know they cancel for that.-Basil

Would suggest reading section 5-4-5 e. of the AIM on Minimum Vectoring Altitudes (mva). This may explain it...Section 2: Because of differences in the areas considered for MVA, and those applied to other minimum altitudes, and the ability to isolate specific obstacles, some MVAs may be lower than the nonradar Minimum En Route Altitudes (MEA), Minimum Obstruction Clearance Altitudes (MOCA) or other minimum altitudes depicted on charts for a given locatiion. While being radar vectored, IFR altitiude assignments by ATC will be at or above MVA.

Well, I wasn't questioning the ability of ATC to vector at minimum altitudes other than those depicted on approach plates. I was curious whether the ATC logic in FS can do so without vectoring me into a CFIT.-Basil

I just flew a flight from 0o5 to reno (beautiful flight by the way-all mountains). Fs did a fine job of descending me thru the mtns.I am sure there will be an occasional problem here or there-but for the most part it is supposed to work now. The mva comment was addressing the above posts as to why ms might put you at a lower altitude than on the charts. I believe fs might work off a database of mva's now.http://mywebpages.comcast.net/geofa/pages/Geofdog2.jpg

I have not been vectored into a mountain by FS9's ATC but I've come close. The problem that I notice is they don't seem to plan ahead. On a recent approach, I was cleared to descend to 3000' only to be told a few moments later to climb to 7000'. The reason, a 4000' (that elevation is a guess) mountain between me and the runway. Once ATC had issued the "climb to 7000" order, I had to comply. I passed over the obstruction at about 5000+' but had to continue the climb to 7000. That put me too high to successfully complete the approach.As an aside, I was flying a 737 and descending at the default 1800 fpm rate. After I knew that the mountain was there, I reflew (is that a word?) the flight and descended at 1000 fpm. That time, I crossed the mountain with room to spare, then steepened the descent and landed normally. ATC was happy with that rate of descent but if I reduced it to 800 fpm, they told me to expedite my descent. R-

How safe is FS2002 ATC?Not safe at all. FS2002 ATC has no knowledge of terrain elevation. During approach vectoring, all its vectors and altitude assignments are based solely on the airport elevation. Thus, if there is high terrain in the vicinity, chances are that you may be vectored into it.Best thing is to cancel IFR when approaching, and if wx is IMC follow the Airway/STAR as the case may be to the IAF and then fly the entire IAP as published. If wx is VMC you can fly a visual as soon as you make eye contact with the airport.Stamatis