View Full Version : Final Approach Fix in FS2002 using ATC too close to Airport
11-08-2002, 01:38 PM
Does anyone know of a way to adjust the point in FS2002 where ATC asks you to intercept the localiser?
The point where you intercept it, is about 5 miles for the runway. This is far too close for a heavy jet like a 747 to intercept, and stabilise on the ILS. I would like reset this to somewhere between 11 and 15 miles out. Of course this would also involve getting ATC to start the decent earlier too !
Any ideas out there? Is there a config file?
11-08-2002, 06:09 PM
I dont think so. this is a limit on the ATC I believe. In fact when I fly Big jets like Aibuses or Dreamfleet, I usually use the FMC with those Craft and that usually sets me up nice 12 or so miles out. FS2002 is not really a very good ATC.
11-08-2002, 07:15 PM
Its true that the FS2002 ATC isn't that good, but at least it is interactive with the surrounding traffic, which makes you feel a little closer to the real thing.
I used to love ProFlight 2000 when I used to use FS2000 and FSTraffic. Unfortunately they did not interact with each other.
Microsoft could have made headlines if they had improved their ATC to include SID's, STAR's, altitude assignments etc. during flight planning, but hey, maybe that is planned for FS2004??!!?? :-) ( But I doubt it!) :-(
11-08-2002, 07:37 PM
11-15 miles shouldn't cause any problems if your aircraft is configured properly, and you aren't going too fast. Figure on being about 2000' AGL and flying at about 140KIAS (Jets), gear down, with 20 degrees of flaps. Also, it is very important not to have too much fuel on board (too heavy)
Rick - KPDX - Private Pilot
P4-2.8G@3.2G 1GB-1066 RDRAM ATI-9700 Pro
4-15K RPM SCSI Drives w/Raid 0 - WinXP Pro
2-120G WD Backup Drives - 3 Monitors
11-08-2002, 08:27 PM
Essentially, I have cured the problem by not using the default descent rates for the aircraft. For the 747-400 I have increased my descent rate to about 2500 fpm, stick out my speedbrakes, and put extra airsick bags in the pockets of the seatbacks in front of you! :-)
That way I reach my ATC assigned altitudes earlier, and intercept the localiser at about 10 miles out. Giving me enough time to stabilise the aircraft.
11-08-2002, 09:49 PM
>Does anyone know of a way
>to adjust the point in
>FS2002 where ATC asks you
>to intercept the localiser?
>The point where you intercept it,
>is about 5 miles for
>the runway. This is far
>too close for a heavy
>jet like a 747 to
>intercept, and stabilise on the
>ILS. I would like reset
>this to somewhere between 11
>and 15 miles out. Of
>course this would also involve
>getting ATC to start the
>decent earlier too !
>Any ideas out there? Is there
>a config file?
yes, that has been somewhat of a problem for me as well, particularly when approaching in a heavy. what i do and seems to work well is subtract 4 or 5 degrees from the final interecpt heading given by ATC, so, for example, if they say turn left heading 250 degrees, cleared for the intercept, i will punch 245 into the hdg selector which will bring me within a reasonable distance, allowing time to properly configure for landing, and ATC will not catch this 5 degree difference or cancel or IFR as a result. try it,
11-08-2002, 10:14 PM
I must admit that I have started doing the same too!
But how could I admit to ignoring ATC!
You trying to get my Virtual Pilot's licence revoked?
:-) :-) :-)
When ATC asks u to turn to xxxHDG to intercept the localiser, dont do it for about 10 secs. Thats what i do. For example, if ATC tells me to turn to 150HDG to intercept runway 22L (i am presently at 100HDG), i just wait about 10 secs, then turn to 150HDG and i find i am established on the localiser about 12 miles out.
ATC wont complain to you that you are not on the right path.
11-09-2002, 11:09 AM
Shmoo is exactly right. That's how you do it with a heavy while using the FS2002 ATC. Depending on how tight i think ATC is calling the turn, i will usually deviate from 5 to 10 degrees off the heading called by ATC without ATC picking up on my deviation. That way, i intercept the ILS at about 8 to 12 miles out.
11-09-2002, 01:02 PM
I actually think that as soon as the ATC says cleared for the visual / ILS runway __ approach, you can do anything you want. You don't have to worry about ATC cancelling your IFR flight plan. So what if they do anyway? You've already utilised all the ATC service you need in the air.
11-09-2002, 03:17 PM
Ah we meet again Kitty!
Are you never away from these forums?
As to what you said about ATC, very true. Use them, then abuse them.......... lol
But when I get around to re-joining a Virtual Airline, don't tell 'em that I am doing visual approaches in a 747-400! ok?
11-09-2002, 11:32 PM
>I actually think that as soon
>as the ATC says cleared
>for the visual / ILS
>runway __ approach, you can
>do anything you want.
>You don't have to worry
>about ATC cancelling your IFR
>flight plan. So what
>if they do anyway?
>You've already utilised all the
>ATC service you need in
not true, you are still passed on to TOWER ATC, which will provide additional, often contradictory, instructions than that given by approach. if you want to perform the approach correctly, DO NOT wait the 5 or 10 mins. before intercepting - anyways, this makes no sense. if your KIAS is 150 or 140, that time frame (speed) will bring to too quickly into the intecept formation, giving you little ample time to configure properly. i've tested the ATC even af FL's of 320+ when given headings and hve deviatied the appropriate degrees considered acceptable (to me).
Bottom line, do not assume that you are clear and fine once taking the intercept heading from approach, 'cause you're always passed onto the tower (who actually in real flight conduct ILS, VFR approaches anywhere in the world [given the existence of an ATC facility], that can dramatically influence your final approach procedure.
things to keep in mind? :)
11-10-2002, 10:51 AM
In real life, all the tower does is to clear you to land at a particular runway. How you do it, can be suject to clearance, but it's pretty much your call. Even in a Skyhawk as soon as approach kicks you over to the tower, you contact them right away. If they have radar in the tower cab( and lots don't) they can't do anything except zoom the image in and out. The control zone of the tower is about the same as class D.
Kitty, my home airport has one ILS approach. Most seasons except for winter pretty much you would be landing downwind doing the ILS. Often I am told to land on a different runway than the ILS approach. In real life, if you have a good reason, they will usually let do a straight in approach. Otherwise you circle to land on another runway. What is most interesting is to be doing the ILS at KSCH and having planes takeoff on runway 22. So long as you are out of the clouds, you break off go into your downwind early and save the tower controller a few grey hairs.
11-10-2002, 11:59 AM
Am I missing something? I presume everyone is talking about the MSFS2k2 ATC?
I have never received any instructions to intercept an ILS or a heading. I am only told which runway to land at, and in the very final approach I am given final clearance. If everyone is talking about MSFS2k2 ATC have I missed something in my configuration?
11-10-2002, 04:20 PM
You have to create a flightplan using menu- flights->flight planner. Then you should get IFR clearance option when you tune your radio.
This will cause you all sorts of grief and insist you fly along straight lines and not deviate altitude even one little bit, before telling you to go where you don't want to go.... and maybe they'll vector you onto the right runway at the end!
No really, it's not that bad!
Any probs let us know!
11-10-2002, 06:06 PM
Thx Tom, I will give it a try!
11-10-2002, 11:48 PM
Err...sounds like you are talking about real life ATC. Difference is that I can file for a clearance to go direct through the NY Class B airspace from Albany NY. In real life I would get a routing that would send me to parts of western NY and Penn. To be fair, you can wheel and deal with a real life controller.
I give the Microsoft boys high marks for cramming in the ATC. If they had tried to do a full blown version, I suspect people would have been much more confused, and it would have been buggy beyound belief.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.0 Copyright © 2013 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.