27 minutes ago, SierraHotel said:

Magdec applies to runway alignment with magnetic north, if it's never been updated on some sims it could be as much as 12 degrees out!! here is where to get the latest updated magdec.bgl, and instructions as to where it should go..................... Happy Landings (again 😉

https://www.aero.sors.fr/navaids.html

Do Asobo/MSFS ever update that file themselves at any point do you know? Actually I guess not reading this part:

Quote

Magnetic variation data calculated by FS9 date back from 1988 and have significantly changed (several degrees in some part of the world). Those used by FSX, P3Dv1-4 and MSFS are identical and date back from 2009. P3DV5 uses more recent data (around 2018-2019).

You would have thought they may have updated it every so often and included it by default.

Edited January 7, 20233 yr by Zangoose

 Here is straight from FAR AIM

"The visual glide path of the PAPI typically provides safe obstruction clearance within plus or minus 10 degrees of the extended runway centerline and to 3.4 NM from the runway threshold"

ILS provide abstraction clearance 3-4 degrees. There are not necessarily alighted! 

3 minutes ago, sd_flyer said:

 Here is straight from FAR AIM

"The visual glide path of the PAPI typically provides safe obstruction clearance within plus or minus 10 degrees of the extended runway centerline and to 3.4 NM from the runway threshold"

ILS provide abstraction clearance 3-4 degrees. There are not necessarily alighted! 

Indeed but it doesn't change the fact that both are often way off in the sim. This is a well documented issue.

10 minutes ago, Jazz said:

Indeed but it doesn't change the fact that both are often way off in the sim. This is a well documented issue.

I fly same instrument approaches as I do IRL doesn't feel anything off. Here is good depiction difference between GS beam vs eye angle 

 

Another example CAT III approach video. Tell me if PAPI are very useful? ALS is what primary visually guide pilot focuses on

 

4 minutes ago, sd_flyer said:

I fly same instrument approaches as I do IRL doesn't feel anything off. Here is good depiction difference between GS beam vs eye angle 

 

Another example CAT III approach video. Tell me if PAPI are very useful? ALS is what primary visually guide pilot focuses on

 

I'm not going to get into an argument about it, buddy. That is a video of reality and not the simulator and it doesn't represent what I was talking about in terms of discrepency between PAPI and glide slope. I remember in FSX days entering slew mode sometimes when on the glide slope and going up or down to see when the PAPI would be right. Just to get an idea of how wonky it was. The difference would be laughable and I can assure you that it was nowhere near reality. I have not done that in MSFS I admit but only because I accepted this problem years ago and rarely even look at the PAPI in sim anymore. I have learned to ignore them.

The bigger issue is the glideslope issue. This is a long running issue with flight sim. Sometimes the glideslope data is off and it behaves erratcly as you close in on the runway. Sometimes in the sim it will have you way higher than it should over the threshold and I have also seen it want to fly me short of the runway. Although much more rare in my experience.

It's something that has come up over and over again for decades now. I have seen scenery develpors talk about it. Aircraft developers talk about it and users talk about it.

It's a thing.

2 hours ago, Jazz said:

It has nothing to do with what he's talking about. The problem exists everywhere. The MSFS, P3D, FSX, FS2002, FS2000, FS98.....all of them had issues with this system. It's always been a problem as long as I can remember.

What do you mean it has nothing to do with Navigraph ??
Many ILS / GS has been superb when Navigraph is installed.
When you have a subscription you always have the latest 

13 minutes ago, Jazz said:

 

The bigger issue is the glideslope issue. This is a long running issue with flight sim. Sometimes the glideslope data is off and it behaves erratcly as you close in on the runway. Sometimes in the sim it will have you way higher than it should over the threshold and I have also seen it want to fly me short of the runway. Although much more rare in my experience.

It's something that has come up over and over again for decades now. I have seen scenery develpors talk about it. Aircraft developers talk about it and users talk about it.

It's a thing.

Hopefully by the time one  flies over threshold he/she already established visual contact with runway otherwise it would put airplane way below published minimums (200AGL on average).

IRL we fly ILS to minimus  and  if see approach lighting system or runway  we continue  visually or go missed. That is of course exception for CAT III  automated approaches equipped  which completely different beast.

3 hours ago, Bobsk8 said:

The LOC are usually pretty good.   As mentioned before,  the GS especially when near the runway is ridiculous. If you follow it, you will wind up with a long landing 80% of the time. 

I seem to have the opposite problem. Many of the ones I fly have me landing well before the threshold. 

1 hour ago, sd_flyer said:

Hopefully by the time one  flies over threshold he/she already established visual contact with runway otherwise it would put airplane way below published minimums (200AGL on average).

IRL we fly ILS to minimus  and  if see approach lighting system or runway  we continue  visually or go missed. That is of course exception for CAT III  automated approaches equipped  which completely different beast.

Indeed, buddy. But it has nothing to do with the sim and how the ILS is implemented in the sim environment. The point of the thread is that the there is an issue with some of the ILS's in the sim. They are often not accurate.

Somebody mentioned well above: if you follow the ILS signal (glideslope) near the runway, most of the time you end up high. And this happens on default sceneries, freeware sceneries, payware sceneries. I have rarely seen a scenery in which you can thrust the glideslope until almost touchdown (which should be the case most of the times). 

1 hour ago, altenae said:

What do you mean it has nothing to do with Navigraph ??
Many ILS / GS has been superb when Navigraph is installed.
When you have a subscription you always have the latest 

The point was that it has nothing to do with having the incorrect frequencies entered. You can have everything setup perfectly and ILS identified at a default airport with or without navigraph installed but the GS can often be inaccurate.

I never found a single one wrong.

53 minutes ago, flyingpauls said:

I never found a single one wrong.

Same here.

Actually with it's dynamics update of runway numbers, it's on spot even when these get updated IRL, compared to other sims where we have to wait patiently for some kind soul to update the airport scenery ...

3 hours ago, Jazz said:

Indeed, buddy. But it has nothing to do with the sim and how the ILS is implemented in the sim environment. The point of the thread is that the there is an issue with some of the ILS's in the sim. They are often not accurate.

I do not have any issues with ILS in the sim or in real life buddy lol

4 hours ago, Jeeeno said:

Somebody mentioned well above: if you follow the ILS signal (glideslope) near the runway, most of the time you end up high. And this happens on default sceneries, freeware sceneries, payware sceneries. I have rarely seen a scenery in which you can thrust the glideslope until almost touchdown (which should be the case most of the times). 

Exactly.