Hello there, I have been having this issue at OLBA airport, Beirut, and it has started bugging me a bit. Basically, in the PMDG 777, upon descent, you select you STAR and approach. For example, at Beirut, they use ILS16 for arriving aircraft. However, in P3D v5, when using the PMDG 777, I only have the options for RNAV, LOC and visual approaches. There is no option to select an ILS approach in the arrival page of the FMC. Weirdly enough, I am able to select ILS approaches at major airports such as OMDB or EGLL. In addition to this, I am, nevertheless, able to select an ILS approach at OLBA on runway 16 in the FSLabs A32X series. Now, I am unsure if this is an error due to PMDG or the scenery or my sim but I would appreciate a response.

 

Details :

Location / scenery : OLBA Beirut by MFSG

Runway : All runways don't have ILS option

Aircraft : PMDG 777-300ER

Simulator : P3D v5

 

Hardware : 

i7-8700k

32gb ram

RTX 2080ti

2TB storage

 

I hope someone can help me fix this issue.

 

Regards.

 

Edited July 11, 20214 yr by Hani Freij

Is your AIRAC up to date on your PMDG aircraft? I don't think it's a scenery issue, as the aircraft and scenery is not a direct correlation. The FMS pulls data from the AIRAC data supplied, not your simulator's installed scenery. Only the EFB will scan for installed airports, for airport maps so that it matches with your sim. The FMS however, does not. 

1 hour ago, arwasairl said:

Is your AIRAC up to date on your PMDG aircraft? I don't think it's a scenery issue, as the aircraft and scenery is not a direct correlation. The FMS pulls data from the AIRAC data supplied, not your simulator's installed scenery. Only the EFB will scan for installed airports, for airport maps so that it matches with your sim. The FMS however, does not. 

Yes, I have navigraph AIRAC updated to the latest cycle.

1 hour ago, arwasairl said:

Is your AIRAC up to date on your PMDG aircraft? I don't think it's a scenery issue, as the aircraft and scenery is not a direct correlation. The FMS pulls data from the AIRAC data supplied, not your simulator's installed scenery. Only the EFB will scan for installed airports, for airport maps so that it matches with your sim. The FMS however, does not. 

Oh my god! I apologies for wasting your time. I’m stupid, I checked the navigraph forum. My bad. I found out that an ILS approach is coded as LOC. Here…

https://forum.navigraph.com/t/faq-ils-missing-only-loc-provided-for-missed-approach-turn-prior-to-rwy/4966

Edited July 11, 20214 yr by Hani Freij

I just checked navigraph's data in LMN, and also the navigraph's chart, as you siad, there is no ILS in data, but ILS chart....

At least for Boeing (and airbus, and pretty much any aircraft with FMC as I know), it doesn't matter, because for ILS approach, you will not use FMC data after FAP aka G/S capture, and before that, ILS is essentially same with LOC, all information you need for doing ILS is in the chart.

In most cases, there is no LOC in database rather only one ILS for doing both LOC and ILS, I don't know why OLBA is different, but it should work both way.

4 minutes ago, Hani Freij said:

Oh my god! I apologies for wasting your time. I’m stupid, I checked the navigraph forum. My bad. I found out that an ILS approach is coded as LOC. Here…

https://forum.navigraph.com/t/faq-ils-missing-only-loc-provided-for-missed-approach-turn-prior-to-rwy/4966

That's interesting to know!

 

 

Edited July 11, 20214 yr by C2615

2 minutes ago, C2615 said:

I just checked navigraph's data in LMN, and also the navigraph's chart, as you siad, there is no ILS in data, but ILS chart....

At least for Boeing (and airbus, and pretty much any aircraft with FMC as I know), it doesn't matter, because for ILS approach, you will not use FMC data after FAP aka G/S capture, and before that, ILS is essentially same with LOC, all information you need for doing ILS is in the chart.

In most cases, there is no LOC in database rather only one ILS for doing both LOC and ILS, I don't know why OLBA is different, but it should work both way.

Thank you for the comment, i’ve finally understood why it doesn’t show up as ILS.

Thank you!!

13 hours ago, C2615 said:

At least for Boeing (and airbus, and pretty much any aircraft with FMC as I know), it doesn't matter, because for ILS approach, you will not use FMC data after FAP aka G/S capture, and before that, ILS is essentially same with LOC, all information you need for doing ILS is in the chart.

A little word of caution, the plane I fly (not a Boeing or airbus to your point) inhibits GS reception if we load a LOC approach.  The mfc auto tunes the ils frequency but blocks GS signal.  The reason for this design is to prevent unreliable/false indication. 

11 hours ago, windycloud said:

A little word of caution, the plane I fly (not a Boeing or airbus to your point) inhibits GS reception if we load a LOC approach.  The mfc auto tunes the ils frequency but blocks GS signal.  The reason for this design is to prevent unreliable/false indication. 

Good point, Actually some new Beoing with IAN system do the same, while still use same ILS/LOC approach, there is a selection to turn on or off the G/P signal, to use it's baro based VNAV instead when hiting the APP button.

On 7/11/2021 at 11:58 AM, windycloud said:

A little word of caution, the plane I fly (not a Boeing or airbus to your point) inhibits GS reception if we load a LOC approach.  The mfc auto tunes the ils frequency but blocks GS signal.  The reason for this design is to prevent unreliable/false indication. 

Not sure if there are differences in the simulation world from the way it works in the real world - there shouldn't be - but the reason for such a design would actually be because LOC and ILS approaches are distinctly different approaches - LOC is a non-precision approach, and ILS is a precision approach.  A pilot can't simply pull out an ILS chart and fly the approach as a LOC approach by ignoring the glideslope data, or vice versa. 

In this flight sim instance, I would assume that if a particular approach is not available in the airliner FMC, that approach would simply not be available to fly in that aircraft until the data issue is resolved, even if the desired approach actually existed at the airport in question.

Edited July 12, 20214 yr by elcaro

10 hours ago, elcaro said:

Not sure if there are differences in the simulation world from the way it works in the real world - there shouldn't be - but the reason for such a design would actually be because LOC and ILS approaches are distinctly different approaches - LOC is a non-precision approach, and ILS is a precision approach.  A pilot can't simply pull out an ILS chart and fly the approach as a LOC approach by ignoring the glideslope data, or vice versa. 

In this flight sim instance, I would assume that if a particular approach is not available in the airliner FMC, that approach would simply not be available to fly in that aircraft until the data issue is resolved, even if the desired approach actually existed at the airport in question.

1. on Most airports, ILS anc LOC charts are on same page, there is a "GP INOP" minimum on it, and some also contants different FAF/FAP altitude or SDF.  Of course rarely but still, there are some airports have different chart for ILS and LOC.

2. In flight sim as well as in real life, unless it's an RNAV/RNP transitioned Approach, or RNP APCH itself, there is no need even for an FMC to begin with, you can simply fly such approach by standard instruments (or in some cased, +DME is needed). Our airline IRL used to opearte 737 to some small airport that isn't in FMC data at all, what we do is manually put points in FMC as reference, sometimes even with LNAV on, but must tune the needed VOR/NDB and use it as the hard foundation to fly such procedure.

On 7/12/2021 at 11:59 PM, C2615 said:

1. on Most airports, ILS anc LOC charts are on same page

I stand corrected.