>You have to "bracket the heading" and adjust for the wind.>e.g.-start on the published heading-see where the needle>moves-and then adjust your heading to "crab" into the wind to>keep the needle centered.>http://mywebpages.comcast.net/geofa/pages/rxp-pilot.jpgI was hoping someone would make this point and Geofa finally did.:-)Shot a runway 29 localiser approach today and pattern altitude winds were nearly 90 degree crosswind at 25....my wind correction angle was 15 degrees left of 290 or 275....yet we tracked the localizer just fine. It was a hand full near the touchdown point but was a good learning experience:-)

Might try real approach charts, and see if you have any better success. They are pretty easy to find for most aiprorts. Here are the charts for CYYJ: http://charts.ivao.ca/CAP2/CYYJ.pdfThis won't help if the game is simply off, but it might help if the heading is off, but the localizer is tracking correctly. Also, as an earlier poster said, always good to study the flight plan (and approach plates) before you take off, so you have a better idea of what to expect, and correct if things aren't going right, upon approach and landing.

What Golf posted IS the major bug. And Im finding it more andmore. This has nothing to do with offsets or magnetic or true north.Its more like p-poor programming. But this is nothing new, itsbeen prevalent since the days of FS5. I used to fix 'em myselfbut havent done it in a while. Guess I'll have to figure it outagain. Its not a big deal if your flying a GA, youve got lotsof time to correct. But it sure is frustrating if your flyinga heavy and youve been following the gs/loc all the way down,finally break out of the soup 1200 AGL only to find yourself3 or 4 hundred feet left or right of the runway. As he saysyou can look at the map view. But thats not "as real as it gets"now is it ?

CYQQ doesn't have a rwy 20, just 18/36 &12/30. http://www.czvr.ca/_Pilot_Resources/_Chart...20AERODROME.pdfI see what you mean about Victoria 27 - odd http://forums.avsim.net/user_files/164572.jpg

My eyes may be going on me-but your hsi looks like it is showing you slightly to the right of course-about a half a needles width-which would position you right about where you are that close in where the needle is very sensitive?!http://mywebpages.comcast.net/geofa/pages/rxp-pilot.jpg

Yeah, I was expecting someone to pick that up!! I've checked again - I still say it's outhttp://forums.avsim.net/user_files/164608.jpg

This post has addressed many different issues such as bracket the headingoffset ILS beams magnetic drift of the pole Isogonic Lines etc I had to read the original problem several times before I realized what the issue was.The reason you see a slight difference in the headings is done purposly in FS9/FSX Heading values are read from different sources in FS9/FSX based on where you look. The MAP Mode and GPS read the ILS Approach code heading. USER AIRPLANE reads the RUNWAY and the ILS properties heading (excluding offsets, winds, etc.)I suppose the best exsmple is to show where the values are different then explain why.Here is a typical airport with a Runway 8 and the ILS properties for that same runwayRunway Heading="89.98"ILS says

I have no experience writing approach code for AI traffic, but...Assuming you mean 26L at Honolulu, the course of 304 is because the approach to that runway is an LDA/DME, ("localiser-type directional aid") and not an ILS. The approach has quite high minima with a late turn of 45 degrees onto the rwy: http://www.naco.faa.gov/d-tpp/0701/00754LDAD26L.PDF FSX accurately reproduces the published approach.The point about Victoria, is that the published approach is not an offset - even slightly (http://www.czvr.ca/_Pilot_Resources/_Charts/PDF/CYYJ/CYYJ%20ILS%20DME%20RWY%2027.pdf), yet the FSX ILS will take you down to a point to the right of the rwy. I have some difficulty accepting that this is deliberate.http://forums.avsim.net/user_files/164677.jpg

JeffThank you I did mean to say 26L but used that as a example. We are trying to answer the original post question of the 1 to 2 degree difference and not the problem that you see with CYYJ. The 26L LDA approach at PHNL is nothing but a way to help understand that the MAP MODE always reads the Approach data in FS9/FSX and not the Runway Property ILS data (heading). CYYJ is a total different problem and could be another post by itself. Now I don't know why Canada listed the RWY 27 ILS LAT/LON (see current Jepp chart) as being which is a 1.25 degree difference. Even if the LAT/LON is corrected for rwy 27, the ILS heading in MAP MODE and the Runway heading are still off which is what we are trying to explain based on the original post. Everything else I already said above on why this is done purposly still applies.

Attached to this post is the fix for ILS RWY 27 for CYYJ in FSX.Unzip and place the single small CYYJ_ILS_fix.bgl into the FSX SceneryGlobalscenery folder. Start FSX and sit on RWY 27. Open MAP MODE or the GPS and you will see the ILS is corrected using the proper LAT/LON values.I am also uploading to AVSIM so everyone can download the fix.

Sorry mate, you are entirely correct. I misunderstood (still don't exactly get) the 1-2 deg thing.Thanks for the update. BTW, how do you edit the bgl? Does afcad work for fsx??regards,jeff

>>Does afcad work for fsx??>yes but you have to strip out the parts that AFCAD does not understand before AFCAD will open the airport. >>BTW, how do you edit the bgl?>I edit using a xml editor called Cooktop. For CYYJ I copied out the runways from the 0101/1514 Airport scenery bgl and made all the corrections. I then told FSX to read my updated file for the Runways/ILS LAT LON only. All the other CYYJ is still being read from the default APX15140.bgl.This allows us to copy out and make changes to the original airport like AFCAD did but still keep a default APX.bgl in the database. It is never a good idea to tamper with any Airport Facility default bgl type file.

Jim.Is there any chance you could do a big favour and do a fix for CYQQ Comox?It has the same problem as CYYJ Victoria.I would have tried it myself, however, it looks to be a way over my head.Mac

>A couple of examples.>>CYYJ - Rwy 09 - the glide slope lines up directly onto the>runway.> Rwy 27 - the glide slope lines up about 300 feet>right side of same runway. >>CYQQ - Rwy 20 - the glide slope lines up about 300 feet>right side of runway.EDDF - RWY 26L... uhhh :-eekAh and by the way Geoff, I suspect it to be a tad more than 4 degrees but then again I do not know any exact number. Anyways, e. g. LOWI has a runway heading of 261 while the ILS is five degs offset - 256. Still considered as an ILS, not an LDA, AFAIK.Cheers, :-beerchugEtienne :-wave

MacYou caught me just in time. I was about to upload CYYJ ILS fix so I will bundle CYQQ also in the upload. Should be in the library by tomorrow.I noticed CYQQ LAT/LON ILS is just to the righside of the runway. but headings are parallel. Shame that FSX is like this when FS9 was OK.