however, this is not an approach that you could use as autoland vertical guidance

 

Not sure how "Autoland" became a part of this conversation...

 

 

it's still a non precision approach.

 

Actually... the AIM categorizes it as an APV (Approach with Vertical Guidance) as it does LNAV/VNAV and LPV approaches. Again... not sure the relevance to the Topic...

 

 

It should be noted that the signal radiated by an ILS localizer is determined by the physical arrangement of the radiating antenna elements - nothing else (most typical these days is that log-periodic elements are used). Now, of course the magnetic compass course associated with an ILS approach will change with changes in variation over time. But I think the idea is to align with the signal (so that "depth of modulation" is identical from both sides), that is, deviation indicator is centered.

 

Note that there is no requirement for the localizer to be aligned with the runway extended centerline for an ILS Cat I approach. I think the limit is 2.5 degrees offset (from the top of my head) if you really want to know I can punch the TERPS and PANS OPS and get chapter and verse. For example, please check out KJFK ILS 22R.

 

scott s.

.

Thanks to all who replied.

 

I didn't mean to cause any confusion and perhaps the title to this thread should be "ILS deviation" instead of "drift". Anyhow, the problem is simple. I tune my nav radio to the ILS frequency, set the course, and manually track the ils. On a clear day, I can see that on some runways the ils is leading me off the runway. If the weather was foggy and I could not see the runway, I would be landing in a grass strip parallel to the runway.

 

Here is a screenshot to illustrate what I am saying. This is taken at LBBG (Burgas), RWY 22. ILS course is 221. I used the default 737 for simplicity and slewed the aircraft into position where the localizer is aligned.

 

Now, its not just this airport. I have noticed it at many airports lately. The only ones I can remember is LGAV, and UHPP, where the ils literally has me 200 to the right of the runway landing into trees.

 

I know that IRL some runways have localizers which are not completely centered with the runway centerline, but this seems to be happening too often in FSX. I flew FS9 for many years before and haven't encountered this problem before, so I attribute it to FSX being as old as it is.

 

Some one mentioned ADE but I can't use it without an SDK, which I do not have. I was hoping the some good folks from the community have noticed this before me, and maybe made a file which contained an edited version of some of the worlds major international airports for download.

 

Thanks again!

In the real world there are very, very few ILS systems that are rated for autoland and those that are, are only available to crews that are certified to use them.

 

The intent of an ILS is to get you to a point where you can see the runway and land the plane.

 

Typically the Decision Height is going to be 200 feet AGL, if at that height you can't see the runway you perform a go-around and try again or divert to another airport.

 

The bottom line is that you have to land the plane, the AP should not do it for you. That means that you might have to make a course adjustment away from the localizer to land on the runway.

 

If you don't have the SDK you can buy AFX which, I believe, can adjust the ILS if that's what you want to do.

 

IMO your money is better spent buying a copy of FSX Gold, which will cost you about the same as AFX, which includes the SDK. Then you can get ADEX (free) which can not only adjust the ILS to your liking, ADEX can also edit the approach code to match the moved ILS.

 

Or you can learn to fly the plane the way it's supposed to be flown.

 

Your choice.

 

regards,

Joe

What about trying the Magvar and Navaid update tools here:

 

http://www.aero.sors.fr/navaids.html

Here is some good info on ILS and CAT 1 2 and 3 landings

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instrument_landing_system

 

A CAT 3 landing in zero vis with a qualified pilot can be flown to 0 minimum and in some cases the approach can be flown manually with the use of the HGS (heads up display)

OK I checked out LBBG, and in both FSX and FS9 Rwy 22 is 224.33 true. According to Bulgaria AIP it is 224.39. But I see in FSX the localizer is set to 225 true while in FS9 it is 224.33. Now it is hard to know which is correct, but looking at the charts my guess is FS9 version at 224.33 is correct. This has been the case since FSX was released -- it isn't date related. Using 224.33 works great:

 

 

@ Final Appr Fix OM22

 

 

 

@ Threshold Rwy 22

 

I put the file here if you want to take a look:

 

https://www.dropbox...._S1504402.BGL?m

 

scott s.

.

If you spend enough time with FSX you will realize it's really full of bugs. many very minor and some not so. When I first got FSX my computer was an old pentium later upgraded to a Core Duo and now an I-7 extreme and the same bugs have persisted through all three computers. The off line ILS is one of them at select airports. At some airports the glideslope doesn't function though the meter is there and working yet the plane doesn't respond. Also certain airports, at select runways the program crashes at the same point time after time. There are some issues that come out of the blue and persist for a while and then disappear. Right now my latest one, all of a sudden when flying into Dallas Love Field at some point between initial descent and maybe 30 miles from the airport FSX just crashes. The aircraft makes no difference. Very strange.

It may just be the old database. DB prolly from 2004-2005 - a ILS today could have been a localizer only approach that long ago.

 

As far as bugs... The main G3D.dll was fixed with FSUIPC.

 

OOM's still exist because of 32 bit code- not really a bug.

 

Other than those I really don't see other ones. What bugs are you seeing exactly?

 

 

and now an I-7 extreme

 

Thats a mean mother right there..

 

. Also certain airports, at select runways the program crashes at the same point time after time.

 

Any time ive encountered this it was due to having crash detection 'ON'. If you do, turn it off.

 

Right now my latest one, all of a sudden when flying into Dallas Love Field at some point between initial descent and maybe 30 miles from the airport FSX just crashes. The aircraft makes no difference. Very strange.

 

Again as above, off if on. But also this sounds like a classic case of the sim calling for something that isnt there..As the chioce of aircraft makes no diffrence, possibly scenery related...any scenery in the area?...All files present?..

Here is a screenshot to illustrate what I am saying. This is taken at LBBG (Burgas), RWY 22. ILS course is 221. I used the default 737 for simplicity and slewed the aircraft into position where the localizer is aligned.

 

Now, its not just this airport. I have noticed it at many airports lately. The only ones I can remember is LGAV, and UHPP, where the ils literally has me 200 to the right of the runway landing into trees.

 

Yeah ivo... this is just something to either "deal with" or fix as you come across. AFX was mentioned since you don't have the FSX SDK.

 

I tried 3 separate times... frapped once with the FSX Baron and once with the PMDG 748 using Autoland (see below youtubes).

 

Also, I tried UHPP (34R) and it would have stuck me in the trees on the right side of the runway.

 

This seems (to me) more of a problem with airports outside of the U.S. fwiw.

 

(if youtube says something about needing HTML5... you can just opt out of it to watch w/ Flash).

 

 

OK I checked out LBBG, and in both FSX and FS9 Rwy 22 is 224.33 true. According to Bulgaria AIP it is 224.39. But I see in FSX the localizer is set to 225 true while in FS9 it is 224.33. Now it is hard to know which is correct, but looking at the charts my guess is FS9 version at 224.33 is correct. This has been the case since FSX was released -- it isn't date related. Using 224.33 works great:

 

 

@ Final Appr Fix OM22

 

@ Threshold Rwy 22

 

scott s.

.

 

Scott, I am confused about where the 224.33 and 225 course comes from. When I check FSX, it tells me that the localizer course for runway 22 is 221. Please clarify.

 

Otherwise, it looks like your ils is right where it should be!

 

 

 

Yeah ivo... this is just something to either "deal with" or fix as you come across. AFX was mentioned since you don't have the FSX SDK.

 

I tried 3 separate times... frapped once with the FSX Baron and once with the PMDG 748 using Autoland (see below youtubes).

 

Also, I tried UHPP (34R) and it would have stuck me in the trees on the right side of the runway.

 

This seems (to me) more of a problem with airports outside of the U.S. fwiw.

 

 

Rob, thank you for making those videos! It correctly shows the exact problem I am dealing with. Perhaps I will look into AFX. Cheers!

There is a free tool to fix the magnetic alignment. Read this blog --

 

http://www.flaps2approach.com/journal/2013/1/16/magnetic-declination-fs9-fsx-navigation-datebase-update.html

to the OP: if you would like someone to take a look at the airports, and realign the ILS feathers for you, just let me know. I have the tools to be able to do that, and after I am done, would need your email address to send you the corrected files for your FSX.

 

 

upon inspection of UHPP, I found that the Glide slope for ILS 34R was off to the Right side of the runway by as much as 10 feet. I have corrected it to the end of the runway so that it should put a plane down about 20 feet past the 34R numbers.

 

LBBG: as you can see in the pic below, the green arrow is the Glideslope, which is putting you into the grass, like the video above shows. I have now relocated it to the middle of the runway again, about 20-25 feet past the numbers.

 

(I have also given UHHP, and LBBG runways new paint jobs to include Aiming Bars and Threshold stripes, as well as edge pavement and edge lines, and both are now "Precision" runways)