Details about approaches based on reality

[Deolindo Baptista 4]

Good morning

I have been a user of Flight Simulator for many years and of course with the possibility of a new simulator being presented I have been reading very carefully everything that has been written about the new Flight Simulator 2020, but there is a detail that I have not yet seen and that I think is extremely important for a simulator that wants to be a representation of reality.

In my opinion, one of the biggest gaps that has always existed in Flight Simulator was the ILS and VFR approaches based on reality.
there are hundreds of airports with curved approaches, which were never implemented in the simulator for example in the case of my country LPMA (Madeira), being one of the most irrialistic approaches that exists.

In the same way, there are airports that, despite having runways with ILS, the most active runway is not this one, again i can give an example from my country LPPR (Porto) 90% of flights land on runway 35, but the airport is served as ILS on runway 17. It should be possible at least to have the possibility to create parameters to select which runway active most of the time, at the airports we use.

Also more realistic communication between pilot, tower, ground services like push back, etc, it could be fantastic.
Personally I am excited with everything I have seen about the FS2020, but these details, like many others that seem to be small, translate into a possible great simulator

it could be fantastic that the team of programmers, had a page of suggestions to increase reality by themes, in order to understand what could be improved before the FS2020 was launched on the market

best regards

Deolindo Baptista

[DaveCT2003 1,820]

Actually, I and many others fly Circle to Land, Radius to Fix and all other types of approaches every day.  It's simply a matter of updating your NavData and using charts.

Best wishes my friend.

 

[jpc55 185]

11 minutes ago, DaveCT2003 said:

Actually, I and many others fly Circle to Land

Back  In my flying days are club had a Learjet, and this was a standard procedure for landing it.

Edited January 26, 2020 by jpc55

[Noooch 1,084]

35 minutes ago, DaveCT2003 said:

Actually, I and many others fly Circle to Land, Radius to Fix and all other types of approaches every day.  It's simply a matter of updating your NavData and using charts.

Best wishes my friend.

 

I think the OP was suggesting to be instructed by ATC to perform such approaches.

[Dominique_K 10,133]

3 hours ago, Deolindo Baptista said:

 

In my opinion, one of the biggest gaps that has always existed in Flight Simulator was the ILS and VFR approaches based on reality.
there are hundreds of airports with curved approaches, which were never implemented in the simulator for example in the case of my country LPMA (Madeira), being one of the most irrialistic approaches that exists.

In the same way, there are airports that, despite having runways with ILS, the most active runway is not this one, again i can give an example from my country LPPR (Porto) 90% of flights land on runway 35, but the airport is served as ILS on runway 17. It should be possible at least to have the possibility to create parameters to select which runway active most of the time, at the airports we use.

 

I hope that the new sim will be open enough to allow addons  like ADE if it has not all the functionalities to modify airport parameters

Edited January 26, 2020 by domkle

[DaveCT2003 1,820]

16 minutes ago, Noooch said:

I think the OP was suggesting to be instructed by ATC to perform such approaches.

That makes sense. Good call!

[Deolindo Baptista 4]

1 hour ago, Noooch said:

I think the OP was suggesting to be instructed by ATC to perform such approaches.

That's exactly what I mean. by default, Flight Simulator does not understand this type of instruction for our flights and for AI flights. It should be a stand because each airport is a reality and if Microsoft wants, as it says, a true simulator even for real pilots, they can use it as training, the careful with the level of realism regarding approach procedures and take off  flight by ATC , should be more realistic.

[Deolindo Baptista 4]

1 hour ago, DaveCT2003 said:

That makes sense. Good call!

Likewise, by default the Flight Simulator ATC when we fly and use AI traffic, to increase realism, it cannot manage the minimum safety distances between two planes approaching an airport, although it is ridiculous to have two aircraft sometimes with meters of distance between them .....

[DaveCT2003 1,820]

46 minutes ago, Deolindo Baptista said:

Likewise, by default the Flight Simulator ATC when we fly and use AI traffic, to increase realism, it cannot manage the minimum safety distances between two planes approaching an airport, although it is ridiculous to have two aircraft sometimes with meters of distance between them .....

To be honest, it sounds like you've reached the point where you're ready to fly Connected Flight Deck / Shared Cockpit on VATSIM!!!   It's an incredible experience, and done during a VATSIM event it's something you'll never forget and only want to do more and more!  word not allowed.... did I just compare that to sex?  LOL!

 

 

 

[andyjohnston.net 617]

1 hour ago, Deolindo Baptista said:

That's exactly what I mean. by default, Flight Simulator does not understand this type of instruction for our flights and for AI flights. It should be a stand because each airport is a reality and if Microsoft wants, as it says, a true simulator even for real pilots, they can use it as training, the careful with the level of realism regarding approach procedures and take off  flight by ATC , should be more realistic.

The new sim is going to have 40,000+ airfields, I can't speak for others, but I don't expect them to go through each and create the approaches as you've detailed.

[DaveCT2003 1,820]

21 minutes ago, andyjohnston.net said:

The new sim is going to have 40,000+ airfields, I can't speak for others, but I don't expect them to go through each and create the approaches as you've detailed.

It's actually easier to do than you might think.  So long as they have the ATC framework, they can tie it in to taking the supplemental data directly from the approach chart data.  We already do this with FMC/FMGS in higher end aircraft, it's just that we output it visually instead of via audio.

So... maybe, but it will never be even close to as realistic as VATSIM/IVAO already is (human ATC) and with POSCON, fa-get-about it!  🙂

 

Best wishes all. 

[Deolindo Baptista 4]

1 hour ago, andyjohnston.net said:

The new sim is going to have 40,000+ airfields, I can't speak for others, but I don't expect them to go through each and create the approaches as you've detailed.

I fully understand the difficulty of what I am talking about, but from what I have realized the new FS2020 will be very much based on an online experience, well if so, Microsoft and its team of developers if they think about it have a whole world team (alpha testers) available to assist in the improvement of this task. Just create a parameter in the FS2020 options only accessible to these alpha testers to indicate which runways are active at airports, among many other options. when saving this information it is sent to microsoft, and just like in Windows updates (for example) put updates available to users.

As for the curve approximations, it is enough that Microsoft relies on the jeppesen charts, and create a way for the software to understand this. I believe they have already made things much more difficult.

[Deolindo Baptista 4]

1 hour ago, DaveCT2003 said:

It's actually easier to do than you might think.  So long as they have the ATC framework, they can tie it in to taking the supplemental data directly from the approach chart data.  We already do this with FMC/FMGS in higher end aircraft, it's just that we output it visually instead of via audio.

So... maybe, but it will never be even close to as realistic as VATSIM/IVAO already is (human ATC) and with POSCON, fa-get-about it!  🙂

 

Best wishes all. 

This is what I also think, even though it is visual, it is clearly preferable to, as I mentioned in the opening post in my country LPMA (Madeira) a completely unrealistic approach

Edited January 26, 2020 by Deolindo Baptista

[DaveCT2003 1,820]

31 minutes ago, Deolindo Baptista said:

This is what I also think, even though it is visual, it is clearly preferable to, as I mentioned in the opening post in my country LPMA (Madeira) a completely unrealistic approach

Well, the problem there is that the approaches into 05/23 are either essentially RNAV Radius to Fix (which many aircraft in flight sim can't do, though I don't see any harm in adding it anyway so long as someone is hand flying it) or visual approach which would just be ATC clearing you for a visual approach.  It's more than doable though.

 

[Deolindo Baptista 4]

1 hour ago, DaveCT2003 said:

Well, the problem there is that the approaches into 05/23 are either essentially RNAV Radius to Fix (which many aircraft in flight sim can't do, though I don't see any harm in adding it anyway so long as someone is hand flying it) or visual approach which would just be ATC clearing you for a visual approach.  It's more than doable though.

 

Well! the final approach in LPMA is always a visual approach, the problem is that in Flight Simulator ATC it does not recognize the actual approach route, and therefore not releasing a real visual approach.
As for planes in Flight Simulator, they are unable to do ..... we have to agree that it is just and only a programming problem, it is not necessarily an obligation to be flying the plane, and can and should also be applied to AI traffic. Just like in reality just flying planes through waypoints.

I continue to say that Microsoft and its team have already programmed far more complex things.
 

Edited January 26, 2020 by Deolindo Baptista