RandallR and KFTW, TX

[Guest]

RandallJust wanted to catch you before you start on a fix for KFTW, if you haven't already. I already had AK's tm_ftw installed so I set up a flight from KHOU to KFTW with C4TO, and it vectored me over fws just south east of KFTW and then lined me up for approach to runway 34R.See attached pics (might be a little dark cause sun was setting). I don't have a clue why yours didn't work but I thought I would at least let you know about this before you got too involved in a fix.Regards,Robert

[RandallR 446]

Robert,Thanks for the heads-up - I already made some discoveries on the situation. You're right, in that there were no improper settings for this airport in the DB. However, as I posted, the runway IDs were totally whacked in my copy of Fly!II when the program was loaded. When I got into the DBs, I could find nothing wrong in the assigns for 16L/34R or 16R/34L, but take a look at the sim's representation:Here's a look at RWY 16L

http://ftp.avsim.com/dcforum/User_files/3e17c2de38e39df3.jpg

Here's a look at RWY 09

http://ftp.avsim.com/dcforum/User_files/3e17c302393d5efc.jpg

Now isn't that the Twilight Zone? BTW, though your runway IDs are correct, take a look at the Vector Map of the airport layout in your images - your RWY 09/27 is totally out of position...it should actually cross 16L/34R, but it's way off to the west.It's my guess that there was a fault in the DBD file, so I removed the info for FTW from my system, then reimported the original settings - I now have an airport that looks like yours, with the runway IDs corrected (which means the approach for 34R will probably perform properly now). However, RWY 09/27 is now out of position (like yours). I'll make a fix just for that and also check if there's a need to modify the localizers. Since you appear to have decent alignment for 34R, I'm guessing that 16L is off, as very few opposing approaches with the same frequency give proper alignment for both ends.

[Guest]

RandallI hadn't really noticed RWY 09/27, good eye. I don't fully understand your explanation about removing FTW and reimporting the original settings since I have the FTW and at least the RWY's 16L/34R and 16R/34L running in the correct direction. But that's okay, I'm just barely off the ground on the learning curve WRT the program itself.While we're on the conversation of frequencies for opposing approaches, which I seem to run into in quite a few places, why are there so many somewhat major airports with long runways that don't seem to have any localizers or minimal at best? I'm only a simpilot at this point in my life but logically IFR is more accurate of an alignment tool than VFR. Not that I don't enjoy VFR, it's definately more challenging. But in the real world, I would think IFR should almost be a prerequisite for runways over a certain length, say 5 or 6,000 ft. I'm sure dollars have a lot to do with it but I would think airports could recover that money in a heartbeat.Anyway I look forward to your fix for KFTW.RespectfullyRobert

[RandallR 446]

Robert,Most of the runways and their allied approach systems in Fly!II are an exact duplicate of their real world counterparts. There are certainly a few approaches and navaids missing here and there, which is why some of us are repairing and updating where needed, but most are there - at least in the U.S. Most long runways at major airports have some type of instrument approach, it's just that most of them are not ILS.ILS is a precision approach and very expensive to put in. Most instrument approaches are nonprecision approaches such as VOR, NDB, and LOC. There are also approaches such as microwave, RNAV and GPS. A good example would be the University of Illinois-Willard airport in Champaign-Urbana, Illinois. There is only one ILS - into 32L. However, there are 3 other runways with instrument approaches: a LOC BC (Localizer Backcourse) into 14R, a VOR approach into 4L, and a VOR/DME approach into 22R. As an instrument pilot, you have to be prepared to fly whatever approach is necessary for the assigned runway.The reason importing the same data helped resolve some of the problems with FTW, is that that data was somehow corrupted when being accessed by my Fly! installation. When I recreated the data, the corruption was apparently removed (though I'll need to edit RWY 09/27 to get it in the proper place).

[Guest]

Randall,Thanks for the explanations and information. I'll keep plugging and chugging on the learning curve and maybe sometime in the future I can help you out. It's been a real pleasure.Highest regards,Robert