I made an ILS approach (31) to VAGAR on Faero Islands. I fly the realair Cessna and made the approach with autopilot following the track.This glidepath should have lead me directly into a hill. I had to manually make steep climb over the hill and then I could land.But glidepatchs are supposed to take you over and not into obstacles.

>But glidepatchs are supposed to take you over and not into>obstacles.In reality yes, some would e steeper etc.. to avoid buildings (London City is a good example) but in FS.... yeah right :) Ive done that very approach in the Dreamfleet 737 and just cleared the hill and had to do a very severe drop the other side to get back on it. In fact last night coming into an airport in south america in the same 737 I am on the path and suddenly the GPWS is going nuts... its pitch black outside and I suddenly see my landing lights... not good. Thankfully I was light and when i gunned it I made it.Ive been in the last week alone told to descend to 8000 then climb back to 14000 then back down to 8000 by ATC to avoid hills, but once they clear you for ILS its down to you to look out.

>But glidepatchs are supposed to take you over and not into>obstacles.Does this look familiar? :)I took this shot a few legs ago in my round the world trip and, as it turned out, about fifteen seconds after the visibility cleared from 1/4 SM to what you see here. Sorry about the poor image quality, as my best image resizing app is down at the moment.KevinEDIT: Oops, forgot to mention that this is on approach to Vagar.http://forums.avsim.net/user_files/62564.jpg

Well this is wrong. Vagar (EKVG) have no ILS at all, only LLZ/DME approach to RWY 13. the LLZ is offset 14 degrees from the centerline to avoid terrain.here's the REAL appraoch plate: http://www.slv.dk/Dokumenter/dscgi/ds.py/G..._LLZ_DME_13.pdfFrom the other direction (RWY 31): LLZ/DME approach only. LLZ 2 degrees offset from centerline. The descendt profile on the app.plate must be flown very accurate to avoid terrain: http://www.slv.dk/Dokumenter/dscgi/ds.py/G..._LLZ_DME_31.pdfJan Roar R

According to my FS9 Vagar info has ILS freq 110.3 306 deg to rwy 31.I was following this path on autopilot and was precisely on thepath according to the needles. And I was heading straight into the path.

Vagar in FS2004 is pure fiction. MS got it wrong. The app. plates that I've linked to, are the real stuff.Jan Roar Rod

Jan has it right, MS got it wrong. Get AFCAD2, copies of the real approach plates, and set up the LOC ONLY approach (no glideslope/glidepath) the way it should be. Simple to do, easy to correct misplaced approach aids, approach courses runway alignments and so forth. Then use the approach plates rather than the info in FS9. CheersPaul

I don't think MS has it wrong with VAGAR. The thing is, that the Map view of FS does not show you whether an ILS has or has not a glidescope. When you use FSNavigator you however can see the difference. FSNav shows ILS/GS or ILS. In the last case there is no glidescope. At VAGAR FSNavigator does NOT show a glidescope. In FS there is no glidescope at VAGAR. And the ILS in FS has an off set to the center line of runway 31, just like the approach plate shows.So tell me what is wrong with Vagar in FS?I am wondering which glidepath the first poster was following with the autopilot, as there is no glidescope to follow. When you fly the approach at Vagar strictly according to the instrument approach chart, you'll get it rather well.BTW Vagar does in fact not have a ILS but a LLZ. FS does however not make any difference between these type of systems.Jozef http://pluizig.ath.cx/signature.jpg

JozefAre you saying that FS9 does not make any distinction between an ILS and a LOC/LLZ type approach? I have not found it that way, doing my sim flying in the US. In the ATC menu, approaches are very carefully differentiated between ILS approaches (which have a GS) and LOC type approaches (which do not). Or do you mean just in the listing on Mapview? Since I have a full set of pubs for the US, I do not use mapview, so am not familiar with what it shows. AFCAD seems to confirm that there is only a LOC+DME approach at Vagar in FS9. For airports that have a GS, AFCAD lists that as a component. LOC (or LLZ--same meaning) will only list the Localizer (and DME if that is included) as a component (and it does it that way for Vagar).I was not very clear when I said that MS got it wrong. I was basing my comments on the original posters assertion he was in fact tuned to and using an ILS (which is defined as localizer AND glideslope) I believe Jan was also basing his comments on the same premise (at least, that is the way I took it). So you are right when you question what glidepath (glideslope) signal the original poster was following on autopilot--there should have been none and the indicator should have not given any information that he was following one.Confusing, isn't it?? :-)Paul

Paul"Or do you mean just in the listing on Mapview?"Yes, I mean no difference in Mapview only. In FSNavigator there you can see the difference. All confusion comes from the FS Mapview by calling both LOC and ILS approaches as ILS. FSNavigator also confirms only LOC+DME at Vagar. So it is in FS2004 and there is nothing wrong with it I think.Jozef http://pluizig.ath.cx/signature.jpg

>I am wondering which glidepath the first poster was following>with the autopilot, as there is no glidescope to follow. >A good question. If there is no glidepath to follow how can theautopilot know how to descend?But I have noticed one thing. The glideslope indicator was always in the middle (i.e on the glidepath) position. If there was a glideslope it should have started in upper position before being intercepted. So it's clearly correct there was no glidescope to follow.

What is AFCAD2 and where can I find it?

What is FSNavigator and where can I find it?

The autopilot can't do automatic descends into runway using LLZ only. If you look at my first post in this thread, I have linked the approachplates (real world plates). Look very carefully on them. They will show you minimum safe altitudes for your approach based on DME from the LLZ. LLZ approaches are hands on the stick, old fasion way of flying :) If your using realweather/ 3rd party weather addons: pay attention to the minimas listed on the plates. It's very often bad weather over Vagar :-)If you want to do some more LLZ approach training, you should download my teams scenery (Norap2004_1.zip) from avsim library. This scenery covers 53 airports in Norway. If you really want to test your LLZ approach skills, try flying into ENHV (Honningsvaag, Valan). Jan Roar Rod

MS has it right, as far as I can see. The approach is supposed to be LLZ-only. I can't find any sign of a g/s when I fly it.Jeff