PMDG and RNAV

[simsuper80 12]

I recently read that the crashed 747 at Halifax did not have GPS and was incapable of RNAV procedures.  this was rather confusing to hear since I though all variants of the pmdg 747 have an FMC and are capable of doing RNAV procedures. Is this something that PMDG did not impliment in there 747? 

Edited November 15, 2018 by simsuper80

[scandinavian13 5,192]

37 minutes ago, simsuper80 said:

I recently read that the crashed 747 at Halifax did not have GPS and was incapable of RNAV procedures.  this was rather confusing to hear since I though all variants of the pmdg 747 have an FMC and are capable of doing RNAV procedures. Is this something that PMDG did not impliment in there 747? 

Be careful what you believe, and what you repeat, particularly with aviation...and especially when making an allusion to something that we overlooked.

It sounds a lot like whoever told you that didn't fully understand the issue, or explain it to you very well.

The 747-400 has RNAV capability (to include GPS). RNAV is not GPS, though. GPS is a type of RNAV. It's a similar thing to a square is always a type of rectangle, but not all rectangles are squares.

Looking at all of the approaches, each runway had an option for a "normal" ILS/LOC-type approach, with the exception of Runway 32. Every runway has the option of an RNAV (GNSS)* with LNAV-only minimums, which any 747-400 can fly (you can fly LNAV minimums with any IFR-approved GPS, actually, so you could even do it in a Cessna 172). So, I'm at a loss as to what the person was claiming the issue was. Perhaps they were claiming that Runway 32 didn't have an ILS/LOC approach, and had to fly a GPS approach, but was claiming - incorrectly - that it didn't have the appropriate GPS equipment to fly the GPS approach to the wind-favored runway?

To be honest, the claim, in its entirety, is irresponsible - particularly in light of the fact that no real reasoning was provided with it. Moreover, to take that (lack of) evidence and use it to question our own modeling of the 747-400 is quite the stretch, and equally irresponsible.

 

*GNSS is the ICAO term for GPS, since GPS is technically a type/product of GNSS (from the US), with the others being GLONASS (Russia), Galileo (EU), and BeiDou (China).

Edited November 15, 2018 by scandinavian13

[vc10man 732]

747 crash at Halifax? A search brings up that it happened in 2004. Is this correct, Kyle, or is the OP referring to something very recent, which I have not read about on the 'wires'.

[scandinavian13 5,192]

1 minute ago, vc10man said:

747 crash at Halifax? A search brings up that it happened in 2004. Is this correct, Kyle, or is the OP referring to something very recent, which I have not read about on the 'wires'.

Newer one - a SkyLease 400F.

 

-----------

 

FWIW: In general, we nuke crash discussions, but since this one had a reference to our product and specific feature modeling, I've left it in to clear the air.

As soon as people take a turn into speculation, and all of that, this goes away.

[simsuper80 12]

I do apologize if it appeared that I was questioning the modeling of the pmdg 747, when I intended to ask if there was a feature that was or was not included (such as choosing to model the 747-400m)

I just remember reading comments (which might end up being misinformation) such as "Likely they were not approved for rnav approaches which is not uncommon in some of those older airliners"

[vc10man 732]

12 minutes ago, scandinavian13 said:

a SkyLease 400F.

Thanks for that,Kyle. Just reading up on it. Hope the 5 crew are okay.

[scandinavian13 5,192]

7 minutes ago, simsuper80 said:

I just remember reading comments (which might end up being misinformation) such as "Likely they were not approved for rnav approaches which is not uncommon in some of those older airliners"

Yeah. Never read the comments. They're full of a bunch of guys who have not the slightest clue of what they're talking about.

10 minutes ago, simsuper80 said:

"Likely they were not approved for rnav approaches which is not uncommon in some of those older airliners"

Yeah...no idea what this person is talking about. They probably think it's an old 100, 200, or 300.

Again...I rarely ever state things in black or white terms, but...NEVER read internet comments on news articles. If you do and find an intelligent one, go buy a lottery ticket, too.

[Captain Kevin 586]

11 hours ago, simsuper80 said:

I recently read that the crashed 747 at Halifax did not have GPS and was incapable of RNAV procedures.  this was rather confusing to hear since I though all variants of the pmdg 747 have an FMC and are capable of doing RNAV procedures. Is this something that PMDG did not impliment in there 747? 

I wasn't aware that PMDG built the 747 that crashed.

[cavaricooper 2,613]

11 hours ago, Captain Kevin said:

I wasn't aware that PMDG built the 747 that crashed.

Now THAT was a worthwhile posting!  Bravo Zulu- I spilled my morning coffee!

🙂

C

Edited November 16, 2018 by cavaricooper

[Fabo 213]

On 11/16/2018 at 4:34 AM, Captain Kevin said:

I wasn't aware that PMDG built the 747 that crashed.

My 747 crashed a lot of times, but never in Halifax I don't think.

 

 @scandinavian13 Kyle, Halifax has RNAV RNP approaches as well. I guess it's possible the commenter was thinking of that not being available for that 74F.

Of that, the PMDG bird is not capable on account of navdata format which is not ARINC 424 compatibile.

Edited November 19, 2018 by Fabo