Picking up ILS freq too far away

[Boeing or not going 578]

I'm picking up the ILS frequency way too far away. It shouldn't be active beyond around 25 miles, but I'm 40-50 miles away, and the ILS freq is active

[hopskip 253]

Radio frequency atmospheric ducting?

 

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

 

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

 

 

There's no computer enabled block on the reception of a Glideslope signal, However there is an intercept distance or height. It is unwise to use the Glideslope/Localizer frequency well beyond this location/altitude because of the increased risk of intercepting a false localizer or slope.

 

http://www.answers.com/topic/false-glide-slope

 

Not sure if this is an FSX thing or a Q400 thing. Does it happen at all airports or only some/one?
By any chance if it is only one, is it KLAX?

[Boeing or not going 578]

With other aircraft, the signal doesn't pick up until around 20-25 miles away. With this I get a DME miles away countdown up to 40-50 miles away

[Andydigital 93]

Ranges on the NAV radios are messed up, high altitude VOR's for example should work at more than 150 miles away in FSX, but with the MJC Q400 they don't work till you get to about 40 to 50 miles away. I don't know whether MJC are trying to do some extra radio wave propagation simulation with NAV radios or if its just a bug, but people have mentioned this to them via their forums a few times but they never seem to acknowledge anything in regard to this issue for some reason, nothing that I have read anyway.

[hopskip 253]

I don't see an issue with the ILS being available further out. I do however forsee an issue if the VOR is not available as far out as it should be. I haven't checked this myself because I have been in NAV (LNAV) modes for en-route and generally have only been using VOR's for Non Precision Approaches NPA's. Might have to look into that, because sometimes I like to use a good old fasioned VOR for a flight segment on occasion. Also, at one of the airports I frequent on occasion (YWYY) the VOR approach is based on the DME of a different airport (DPO Devonport) because the WYY navaid doesn't have DME. I think it gets out to about 38DME from DPO. If the VOR reception abruptly cuts out at 50 miles there may be an issue with using the DME for one of the sector entries, or reporting the outbound DME and Radial if you're a bit late on the radio.

[Boeing or not going 578]

I never noticed that, so apparently all nav radio frequencies are not working right. They all seem to have a 50 mile range, including ILS.

[spesimen 135]

i tried this yesterday and some extra info:

1. with an ils that had dme i would see the signal and vor light up at 50nm, but the DME kicked in at 30nm

2. i tried following the ils using loc mode from around 50nm out. as i got near the airport, at around 25nm the signal 'snapped' slightly to the side, as if it was less accurate outside of the intended range, and then moved to the correct direction when within range. just a small change of a degree or two.

 

cheers

-andy crosby

[Boeing or not going 578]

Well this is disappointing. Right now she's in the hanger until they can fix the navigation radio issues. Can't fly proper approaches without it.

[spesimen 135]

Well this is disappointing. Right now she's in the hanger until they can fix the navigation radio issues. Can't fly proper approaches without it.

why not? works fine within 25nm. not sure why you'd be on the approach from that far away anyhow

 

cheers

-andy crosby

[Boeing or not going 578]

Because the same problem happens with VOR navigation, can't pickup a station until 50 miles away

[Skysurfer7 34]

This just has to be fixed, picking up ILS from 50nm is unrealistic...VOR only working from 50nm....how realistic is that?...& there was a big fight about the "B" key for current altimeter setting, Majestic decided to leave it out because it wasn't "realistic".

 

So Majestic is anything being done about this unrealistic NAV issue?

[hopskip 253]

I'd consider it a 'bug' rather than an 'unrealistic feature'.

 

None of this will effect an "Approach" though. let's be clear. will NOT effect an approach.

 

It will however potentially be a problem when flying enroute on VOR radial/DME's. Obviously we havn't noticed it yet because everyone's been flying LNAV on the FMS... but I can see using a VOR for enroute (potentially over 100nm from a VOR transmitter) being used on occasion. Rare occasion to be sure, but it's a valid way of navigating.

 

I do wonder what caused it though, I'd have thought the reception range of a VOR was hardcoded into FSX or .bgl and/or other scenery files!

 

Again, though. This will not effect your APPROACH if you are following standard approach procedures. If you are 50nm from a navaid you are well out of the approach chart which typically defines MSA's only out to 25nm.

 

If you are intercepting LOC/GS in APP mode at 50 miles from an ILS, then you're doing something wrong.

If you are wandering 50+ miles from a VOR you are approaching, again you are doing something wrong.

 

If you are navigating to/from a VOR enroute at Flight Level something without the FMS or LNAV... then you may run into a bit of a problem.

[SAS443 1,721]

ADF receiving seems a bit sketchy as well, at least on my end.

I'm able to tune terminal, low power NDBs (these are 'locators' at the outer marker) from 50nm away.

When flying other complex add-ons the range are much more realistic, say around 20nm or so.

 

Not really sure if FS simulates power output from NDB's, but nevertheless the Q400 do seem to act weird in this regard.

 

Just my 2 cents.

[Andydigital 93]

Majestic has confirmed that Nav radio range issues are on the list for looking into and fixing in a future update.

 

http://majesticsoftware.com/forums/discussion/584/dme-picking-up-distance-signal-only-from-50nm#Item_6

[crosswind 825]

Thanks for pointing that out Andy.
 

 

This just has to be fixed, picking up ILS from 50nm is unrealistic...VOR only working from 50nm....how realistic is that?...& there was a big fight about the "B" key for current altimeter setting, Majestic decided to leave it out because it wasn't "realistic".

 

So Majestic is anything being done about this unrealistic NAV issue?

Rodd,

The "B" function was not a bug hence the reason for not needing to fix it, regrarding a fight over this....as far as I am concerened this was not an issue to fight over as it was a decision that we chose to stick with. 

 

The NAV/ILS issue is a bug and will be addressed in an upcoming patch.