Current State of "How To" for Rnav Approaches?

[mikeklimek 151]

31 minutes ago, hangar said:

@mikeklimek the vertical guidance is working at your kyts waas approach. But it intercepts at the Xizmo intersection @ the published altitude of1840msl instead of the FAF...which means for this particular approach that vertically speaking you're on your own to get down to the published 1840msl alt at XISMO, then upon passing Xizmo your glideslope indicator in the plane should begin dropping so youll have the vertical guidance to the runway at that point (visually speaking on your g/s needle...i never use autopilots for approaches as my preference so icant say your autopilot will be useful or not).

Since the RNAV approaches in the sim have not been properly implemented by the developers, you'll find that most waas approaches will not be useful until you reach the published FAF and its associated altitude, and in some cases the waypoint following the FAF (as in this particular case).

...and don't feel bad or shy away from asking anything around here that you're not sure of...because most of us are just figuring this all out as we go and are in the same boat as you...we're all on the same team so no need to feel shy about it 😉

Thanks Hanger!

[fppilot 4,371]

3 hours ago, mikeklimek said:

Hey guys, I'm trying to figure out how to do rnav approaches in MSFS, and the more I search and read, the more confused I get. 

Hi Mike,
Bert has provided a nicely appropriate response to your questions.  And now here is a key followup question.  Have you learned to fly RNAV approaches in previous simulators?  Specifically with well modeled aircraft models and with well modeled (modeled, not modded) GPS avionics such as for example those from Reality XP you can experience and learn.  Then when in MSFS you would better understand the shortcomings involved and how to best anticipate and adjust.

Edited May 2, 2021 by fppilot

[hangar 661]

From my experience most people don't care too much about all the technical shortcomings about how something SHOULD work in the real world or a sim, but instead just want to better understand how to make it work for them right now so that they'd have some sort of vertical guidance down to the runway.

This (how its broken and not realistic in its current state) has been gone over to dearth already by the people who it matters most to...but the average player will just become even more confused by all the technical banter back & forth.

If someone wants to discuss all day in every thread about how its broken and how it should work in the real world by all means knock your socks off...but don't forget to first get the OP up and running so he can accomplish what he's asking to do (which is some vertical guidance down to a runway). I just feel this might be more helpful to some who are asking about it.

Edited May 2, 2021 by hangar

[Alpine Scenery 1,609]

You can definitely lock a VPATH on the DA-62, I wish I had time to make a video. Just re-tested it, but it's very bugged however, it will show GP - AP - PIT even though it's locked. If you notice, if you change your altitude it will correct it even when it shows PIT. Again, as I originally suspected, there are too many bugs here, it's not consistent. 

However, my first post about the KingAir was 100% accurate, it's the easiest one to do, and I think the WT CJ-4 has pretty close to a working VGP, whether or not that follows every RNAV rule, no idea.

Edited May 2, 2021 by Alpine Scenery

[fppilot 4,371]

24 minutes ago, hangar said:

From my experience most people don't care too much about all the technical shortcomings about how something SHOULD work in the real world or a sim, but instead just want to better understand how to make it work for them right now so that they'd have some sort of vertical guidance down to the runway.

That is the type of statement that gets the "is it a this or is it a that" arguments raging.  Let's try the following to keep that from happening once again:

most  some people

Hummm.... to at least some its about this...
https://www.flyingmag.com/tags/i-learned-about-flying-from-that/

Edited May 2, 2021 by fppilot

[Bert Pieke 7,585]

Speaking for myself:

From the early days of the original Microsoft Flight Simulator, it was about simulating real flight, VFR and IFR.   Those of us who have grown up with this idea find it difficult to accept the notion that in MSFS 2020 we should try to game the simulator to do things that do not work in real life.

So, helping people find ways around the shortcomings of MSFS by encouraging procedures that violate real world piloting rules has no merit in my book.  We should be trying to teach people to fly, not play a flying game, as much as this is possible.. and with some basic fixes to MSFS, this would be possible, as it was in FSX and P3D before it.

Edited May 2, 2021 by Bert Pieke

[Alpine Scenery 1,609]

They hired WT, it will probably be fixed, I'd give it 2 more months maybe. It is annoying, but FSX and Xplane weren't perfect either, but they did have it right in many / most cases, but there were issues that usually were more airport specific. So it's never been perfect, but better, yes.

[fppilot 4,371]

9 minutes ago, Bert Pieke said:

So, helping people find ways around the shortcomings of MSFS by encouraging procedures that violate real world piloting rules has no merit in my book.  We should be trying to teach people to fly, not play a flying game, as much as this is possible.. and with some basic fixes to MSFS, this would be possible, as it was in FSX and P3D before it.

+1ⁿ  (what he said)!

[Phantoms 800]

This is how I do it in MSFS. I fly mostly GA along with the EMB-110 freighter. I use the WT-G1000 mod and Scorpion's amazing GNS530 mod depending on what the plane came with. I make my flight plan in the MSFS World Menu. I select the takeoff and arrival airports, then select Low Altitude airways. Next, I select my parking spot on the drop-down for my takeoff airport. On my arrival airport I look at the wind and decide what runway I want to land on then select the RNAV approach for that runway on the Arrival Airport's drop-down.  For instance, I just landed at KSAV on my last flight and chose RNAV01 for the Arrival runway.  I do all this in the World Menu Flight Planner so I don't have the added problems of getting it to work while I'm flying and for the most part, it works.  It may not be realistic locking in a landing runway at the beginning of a flight, but it reduces the chances of something going wrong in my flight. If there's an Arrival/Departure available also in the appropriate drop-down, I select them too.

In my aircraft I set my GPS for CDI/FMS/etc. so that it's following the flight plan I created and set AP to NAV to follow it.  I manually enter enter ALT and VS to keep up with ATC instructions during my flight.

The G1000 mod will fly me to the IAF without having to do anything, the GNS530 mod will not. I have to pick a spot along my flight-plan in the GNS530 to activate the approach in the procedures page and then it will fly me to the IAF.  In either case, ATC will "usually" instruct me to the correct height to be at by the IAF. Occasionally it will be wrong, but that's why you read the charts for the RNAV approach you're using and make note of the IAF and FAF altitudes to make corrections to ATC instructions if needed.

Once at the IAF, hit the APR button on the AP (in my case, on the Logitech Multi-panel) and when close to the FAF (sometimes right before it, sometimes right after it), APR mode will take over (ALT button on AP will go off) and vertical guidance down the glidescope will begin. The AP will fly you right down to the runway if you let it. This works for most airports I fly too that have RNAV approaches, but then lately I hang around the Southeast U.S. mostly doing NeoFly missions.

 

I'm not a RL pilot and only ever flown in Flight Sims. I'm not saying this is the correct RL way, just how I do it to get it done in MSFS. I have modified flight plans in the aircraft during flight and it seems to work, but I have always used the World Menu flight planner to make my initial flight plan. For the most part doing it this way, RNAV works and Vertical Guidance of the Glidescope works (even if the plane in real life doesn't have vertical capabilities, but that's MSFS for you).

[mikeklimek 151]

Hot word not allowed!  Hanger and Phantoms, you guys nailed it for me.  😃  Hanger, I tried it again as you described (1840msl alt at XISMO), hit APR at that point, and bingo, guided it went.  Phantom, based on your comments, I guessing I could've hit APR sooner, i.e., after the IAF, and as long as I was manually descending to the published altitudes, it was going to take over as soon as it hit the FAF (or in this case the following waypoint).

The last time I did rnav approaches was years ago in FSX (and even then only once or twice) and it seemed to work as intended--I *think* back then I hit APR after the IAF and the vertical guidance just happened (at least I don't recall having any issues back then).  

In the case of MSFS, I believe what happened was I expected it to work the same.  And when it didn't just start descending on its own after hitting APR (and I didn't manually descend because I expected it to just kick in), I was too far above the glide scope once I hit the waypoint where it would've kicked in.  

After that I was like "ok, I'm either forgetting to do something correctly here and/or I'm running into bugs" and trying to sort the two out.

Gentlemen, I can't thank you enough!  

[hangar 661]

2 hours ago, fppilot said:

+1ⁿ  (what he said)!

Wrong (well its just an opinion so while it cant be wrong I feel its a very self centered attitude that mainly serves ones self)...

...as much as I am personally akin to what Bert said and fully understand his point (afterall I am a licensed part 121 aircraft adx, retired and have enjoyed flight simming since the 80's) ...

...as a teacher, a gamer, and a flight sim enthusiast I have to say that to have an attitude which deems people who are helping others who don't take the game as seriously as you do, as being without merit and to think that your only role here is to force them to be and think like you in order to deserve the help they're actually looking for, is really not a nice attitude and comes from a place of self-righteousness and self centeredness, IMO. 

As an example, what about the people who love flying Carenado's who don't really care about how accurate the flight model is, or new comers who don't have the time to wade through all the technical crapola that you and I like to sort through and figure out? Is refusing to tell them that they can simply start the plane up with ctrl+E without merit? You and I may shudder at the thought, but that doesn't mean we should ignore their needs just because they don't match our own, you know?

We're all supposed to be on the same side here, and helping each other out like gentleman, regardless of how seriously we feel about our hobby and whether or not others take it to a lesser degree. There's nothing wrong with sharing the very technical aspects of real world flight as you like to do, but if it's going to get in the way of you answering simple questions and getting someone the help they really need right now then yea it becomes a stumbling block that can actually STOP people from listening & learning.

I'll shut my trap now 🙄

[hangar 661]

39 minutes ago, mikeklimek said:

Gentlemen, I can't thank you enough!  

Glad it helped for now!...and lets hope that the developers get it fixed so that it works more realistically in the near future!

[Bert Pieke 7,585]

1 hour ago, hangar said:

We're all supposed to be on the same side here, and helping each other out like gentleman, regardless of how seriously we feel about our hobby and whether or not others take it to a lesser degree.

I certainly agree with that statement, and you do make some valid points here.

Lets hope that WT get this sorted out soon and put us on a more solid footing. 🙂

[Alpine Scenery 1,609]

I am afraid this thread is just going to confuse more people overall though, but it will auto-descend without hitting APPR depending on the plane depending on how you setup the flight. 

EDIT
I have a lot of mods installed on the DA-62 atm (too many), so I need to re-test the default DA-62, but this is pretty funny.

As far as the bugs being "consistent", I still don't see it...

Look at this screenshot, I have a GS indicator and I hit VS - and am supposed to be descending at -900 FPM, but instead I'm locked at 2,800 ALT due to a bug. The GS indicator just popped up, it wasn't there a second ago, If you try to confuse the AP, you definitely can, and it doesn't take that much. 

Edited May 3, 2021 by Alpine Scenery

[ryanbatc 12,857]

2 hours ago, Alpine Scenery said:

 

Look at this screenshot, I have a GS indicator and I hit VS - and am supposed to be descending at -900 FPM, but instead I'm locked at 2,800 ALT due to a bug. The GS indicator just popped up, it wasn't there a second ago, If you try to confuse the AP, you definitely can, and it doesn't take that much. 

 

I've had that quite often.  Try as a workaround (since I guess this is what we are doing these days lol): First engage NAV mode, then press APR once you see the GS come down (or I guess it comes up - another bug)