Approach waypoints don't match up?

[CLE_AA-5B_GrummanTiger 168]

I've seen that I can enter in an approach vector in LNMP and that's great, except I'm noticing that the waypoints don't match up at all to the plate I'm looking at. I've only looked at one so far, KCLE, and the current ILS has DOORZ for intercept but LNMP is something else, DILYN, I think?

Is there a way I can update the approach info in LNMP to reflect current plates?

[Gason71 127]

1 hour ago, CLE_AA-5B_GrummanTiger said:

I've seen that I can enter in an approach vector in LNMP and that's great, except I'm noticing that the waypoints don't match up at all to the plate I'm looking at. I've only looked at one so far, KCLE, and the current ILS has DOORZ for intercept but LNMP is something else, DILYN, I think?

Is there a way I can update the approach info in LNMP to reflect current plates?

 

If you asked about this chart: https://skyvector.com/files/tpp/2103/pdf/00084IL6R.PDF or about this: https://skyvector.com/files/tpp/2103/pdf/00084I6RSAC2.PDF
I'm afraid you wrongly interpret/read these charts - DOORZ isn't point where ILS approach begins, DOORZ is Intermediate fix point.

If you need I can explain you all aspects of these approaches 🙂

Regards,
Piotr

 

[edit]

If someone is interested in this subject, here is the FAA  publication/guide about their TPP plates/charts:  https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/flight_info/aeronav/digital_products/aero_guide/media/editions/05Nov2020/cug-tpp-edition.pdf
FAA charts are different than Jeppesen (and similar publications), so it's necessary exactly study above manual to know how to read FAA charts.
 

 

Edited April 5, 2021 by ppgas

[CLE_AA-5B_GrummanTiger 168]

Ok I realize that, I was operating off memory.

The point remains, however, that the approach vectors/waypoints differ between FAA and LNMP. 

[Gason71 127]

1 hour ago, CLE_AA-5B_GrummanTiger said:

Ok I realize that, I was operating off memory.

The point remains, however, that the approach vectors/waypoints differ between FAA and LNMP. 

I suppose you mixed up vectorized approach that can be given only  by ATC (standard entry at 30deg angle enough early before FAF to catch a localizer) with the published IFR approach procedure that always  has to be performed _exactly_ as it was/is published 🙂

I've checked charts and the points in LNM/Navigraph and both are the same - on charts and at electronic Navigraph database.

If you look at LNM (exactly Navigraph database) you notice that there are 3 approach procedure's beginning points: HICKR, RUHSH , GROHL (that's because 3 initial approach segments exist at this approach procedure). These three points are IAFs where procedure should begin. Initial approach segments then  fly over DOORZ (Intermediate fix point) and end at POAST point that is FACF (this is not written on chart but you can read this from electronic coded procedure in Navigraph database).

There is also final approach segment that begins at POAST FACF point, then fly over DILYN FAF point and ends at MAPt (it's possible to  calculate where exactly is this point  -from glide slope and DH/DA values, but in general missed approach is called at DA/DH as lowest altitude). On one chart there is also marked VDP point but it's unimportant at this moment for this explanation.
This final approach segment is separately marked in NAvigraph database because in LNM/Navigraph database procedures are electronic coded, but FAA regulation based on TERPS procedures  differentiate initial approach segments (IAF-IF-FACF) from final approach segment (FACF-FAF-MAPt) according ARINC424 standard for electronic coded procedures.
Jeppesen (and Navigraph that takes procedures from Jeppesen) only rewrites what they got from FAA to own databases.
Probably that's why it seems the ILS approach can begin at POAST what isn't true. It's only beginning  fix of final approach segment.
At LNM/Navigraph database POAST point in procedure ILS-06R isn't marked  as IAF point (in LNM is marked as FACF point) - exactly like  on charts published by FAA.

 

In summary: when you want to perform ILS/LOC approach exactly as published you have to begin your ILS/LOC approach at one of IAF points (HICKR, RUHSH , GROHL). 
If you look at STAR procedures for this airport you notice no one STAR ends at DOORZ point but many of them ends at one of IAF points (what isn't strange).

Of course, if you are manually vectorized by ATC on duty, he can head you directly  to DOORZ point but this isn't part of published procedure but only vectors given by Traffic Controller 🙂

Regards,
Piotr

 

[edit]

In this FAA's publication you can find more how perform approaches in the US:  
https://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/handbooks_manuals/aviation/instrument_procedures_handbook/media/faa-h-8083-16b_chapter_4.pdf

 

Edited April 6, 2021 by ppgas

[CLE_AA-5B_GrummanTiger 168]

I should've been more clearer. Here's a more specific explanation of my confusion:

I've been educating myself on the art of IFR flying and I think, for the most part, I have it down. My only confusion thus far is the approach. On paper, I understand how it works with capturing the glidescope via autopilot approach function at X altitude at X DME.

The problem is that I'm seeing conflicting information between the approach procedure in Little NavMap vs. the approach plate for the airport/runway of my choice (KCLE RWY24L, in this instance).

The approach plate as shown in the attached PDF shows a starting point at ALOMR at 3000 ft. I then get my capture at FELLR at 2000 ft.

In Little NavMap, I get a completely different procedure that doesn't hew to the plate. Color me confused! If you look at the screenshot attached, you can see the highlighted waypoints for the approach in the flight plan table. Not only that, the fix is apparently at 3,000 ft.? I included the info on the right for the procedure in the event I'm missing something there that someone can educate me about.

I do see, however, that I can create my own approach, but I'm not exactly sure how to do that with the information from the plate. I'll set the entry threshold at where I see for FELLR at 3.7nm at an altitude of 2000 ft. as indicated on the plate, but then the glidescope is way more than 3 degrees!

Clearly I have a lot of learning to do, but I thought the two would be on the same page.

https://flightaware.com/resources/airport/CLE/IAP/ILS+OR+LOC+RWY+24L/pdf

[Gason71 127]

And all is clear ....

My question at this moment is - have you upgraded your Navigraph database in LNM to newest to get the same AIRAC as it's used in the plates that you use?

In my LNM/Navigraph ILS24L procedure is beginning at one of IASs: BUDRW, LLROY and THRTN, then it ends via final approach segment that begins at ALOMR FACF point.
Exactly as it's published on FAA approach charts 🙂

If you use old Navigraph database (default  LNM gives free Navigraph cycle 1801 or maybe 1802, I don't  remember exactly) you get old procedures - from 2018 year.

My second guess is - you use procedures taken from simulator that are also outdated/obsolete.

Go to the menu "Scenery library/2. Navigraph cycle", check which version of Navigraph is displayed. It should be 2103 because your KCLE ILS-24L plate is for this cycle. If it's 2103, then go into "2. Navigraph cycle" and choose option "Use NAvigraph for all features" or "Use Navigraph for Navaids and procedures".
Then all should be ok, if only your Navighraph database cycle is at the same version as your approach plates.

I hope it helps 😄

Regards,
Piotr

Edited April 6, 2021 by ppgas

[CLE_AA-5B_GrummanTiger 168]

Looked it up, it uses 1801. So, in order to update it, I have to get the latest AIRAC, which means I have to sign up with Navigraph...which means I'd have to pay for a subscription, correct?

[Gason71 127]

Yes, it means so 🙂
Except of this you can also manually edit navigation database files to get required procedures but it's very hard to do (but possible).

Regards,
Piotr

[CLE_AA-5B_GrummanTiger 168]

The big question, then, is will MSFS 2020 recognize AIRAC 1801 or do I need to update it?

[Gason71 127]

8 minutes ago, CLE_AA-5B_GrummanTiger said:

The big question, then, is will MSFS 2020 recognize AIRAC 1801 or do I need to update it?

I'm not a spec of FS2020 but I know that in last year was a beta testing (with free use) program of Navigraph database for FS2020**.
You have to search more on  Google (I've found only this discussion): https://www.reddit.com/r/MicrosoftFlightSim/comments/ipjnpy/navigraph_navdata_beta_for_msfs_is_now_available/

Regards,
Piotr

 

[edit]
**Sorry for mind shortcut 🙂

The trick is:
1)  upgrading of simulator for newest AIRAC (if free beta then it should be free?);
2) then synchronized LNM with simulator database  via "Load scenery library" function;
3) switch LNM navigation database to simulator's version (it means switch Navigraph completely off)

Then under LNM should be displayed exactly the same database version what in simulator 😄

 

Edited April 6, 2021 by ppgas

[CLE_AA-5B_GrummanTiger 168]

1 hour ago, ppgas said:

I'm not a spec of FS2020 but I know that in last year was a beta testing (with free use) program of Navigraph database for FS2020**.
You have to search more on  Google (I've found only this discussion): https://www.reddit.com/r/MicrosoftFlightSim/comments/ipjnpy/navigraph_navdata_beta_for_msfs_is_now_available/

Regards,
Piotr

 

[edit]
**Sorry for mind shortcut 🙂

The trick is:
1)  upgrading of simulator for newest AIRAC (if free beta then it should be free?);
2) then synchronized LNM with simulator database  via "Load scenery library" function;
3) switch LNM navigation database to simulator's version (it means switch Navigraph completely off)

Then under LNM should be displayed exactly the same database version what in simulator 😄

 

THANK YOU! Turning off Navigraph did the trick!

EDIT: So there's a new problem now. I can insert an approach in LNM now with accurate and up-to-date AIRAC from MSFS 2020, but...the SIDs/STARs are missing!

Did I miss a step somewhere or is this some other issue?

EDIT 2: Never mind, I see from the manual/FAQ for LNM that SIDs/STARs are not yet available for MSFS. Something to do with their weird file format? I'm patient, I can wait...still a lot to learn in the meantime!

Edited April 6, 2021 by CLE_AA-5B_GrummanTiger
Additional info/issue

[albar965 1,038]

@CLE_AA-5B_GrummanTiger Are you sure you use the right scenery mode? If you update the LNM database too with Navigraph (doesn't cost anything if you have a subscription anyway) you should see SID and STAR.  Quote from the manual:

Quote

43.1. Microsoft Flight Simulator 2020 Airports and Navdata

• If you use the Navigraph update for MSFS: Update the Little Navmap database with the FMS Data Manager as well to keep the program in sync with the MSFS scenery library. Use the scenery mode Use Navigraph for Navaids and Procedures in the menu Scenery Library to get access to all procedures in Little Navmap.
• If you do not use the Navigraph update for MSFS: Use the scenery mode Do not use Navigraph Database in the menu Scenery Library to avoid issues with missing or changed navaids. Keep in mind that SID and STAR are not available yet in Little Navmap.

Alex

[CLE_AA-5B_GrummanTiger 168]

4 hours ago, albar965 said:

@CLE_AA-5B_GrummanTiger Are you sure you use the right scenery mode? If you update the LNM database too with Navigraph (doesn't cost anything if you have a subscription anyway) you should see SID and STAR.  Quote from the manual:

Alex

Yeah, I figured it out with the help of ppgas and reading through your manual and FAQs. I don't have a subscription to Navigraph, so I disabled that and it worked.

I read about the SIDs/STARs not yet being available, but can you hazard a guess as to when it may become implemented? (Ballpark guess, that is, and I understand it may not even be close).

Thanks again for all your hard work. If I had even an iota of programming/coding knowledge, I'd offer my help.

[albar965 1,038]

19 hours ago, CLE_AA-5B_GrummanTiger said:

I read about the SIDs/STARs not yet being available, but can you hazard a guess as to when it may become implemented? (Ballpark guess, that is, and I understand it may not even be close).

Currently issues are piling up (procedure display, CRJ export and whatnot).😞  It may take a month or two. Maybe longer. I try to add more to the next release.

Keep in mind that developers are generally abysmal at estimating.🙃

Alex