Visual Landings question?

[mabe5454]

Hello guys,

Recently I've been getting Visual Landings Approaches in airports in Russia with no ILS. The problem is that if the day is hazed and with ATC not laterally precised enough I ended up miss-approaching a lot. Any ideas how to minimize or counteract this scenarios? Thanks in advance.

Cheers,

MAB

[ReggieF5421]

Practice, practice and practice.

Many of the Russia airports without ILS might have an NDB. Knowing where on the field that is located will help you use it for guidance.

From my real world small GA flying experience, I almost always overfly an airport before I land the first time unless the weather is super clear with unlimited visibility. With any kind of haze, I want to get a good look at the field before I come into the pattern to land.

I do the same thing in FS, in jets or props. Fly over the field on a missed approach to make sure I'm established where I want to be, and can then fly a proper pattern.

But the main thing in FS is to practice, practice, practice. It takes hundreds of landings to be comfortable flying into strange airports with less than perfect visibility.

[SunnySaratoga]

In FS ... and only in FS you can make up your own IFR approaches based on any of the less precise navigation instruments you might have available in the vicinity of the destination airport. In real world flying that is highly dangerous and not at all advisable.
I would look to see if there are "official approach plates" available on the Web for the airport you are going into.
Not all airports have IFR approaches and in cases where there is no IFR approach, theoretically you can only land if you can fly with visual guidance only.

1. Lets assume you have a VOR or NDB on the field and you know the wind conditions and the runway layout of your destination. Based on that information you can position yourself so that you fly inbound to the airport on the runway heading descending in small increments as you get near. That's basically what a VOR-A or NDB-A approach would look like. Of course if you have access to official approach plates, then you use them. Since they give you vertical guidance as well and prevent you from running into terrain or tall buildings.

2. If there is no VOR or NDB on the field you need to find the closest one to the airport. The further away the greater is the difficulty of "finding" the airport. If that VOR/NDB is for example 8nm east of the destination you would fly to the VOR/NDB, pass over it and reverse course directly over the station and fly west for 8nm, again descending carefully.

FS ATC will offer the highest precision approach available for the destination airports active runway. In some cases you can "ask" ATC, using the different options in the on screen menu, for a different approach. For example there may be an ILS approach to a runway not aligned with the winds. In that case you ask for that approach and then get cleared for a "circle to land" on the active runway. During that circling you must maintain visual contact with the airport/landing runway.
In most cases when FS ATC offers only a visual approach that means there is no IFR approach available to this runway and if you can't land visually you need to go to a different airport that either has better weather or has a workable IFR approach.

You might want to go here: http://www.faa.gov/library/manuals/a...ying_handbook/ and download the FAA's IFR flying handbook since most of FS flying is based on the rules and tips contained in that handbook.

Cheers
Stefan

[mabe5454]

Thanks ReggieF5421,

I fly the big rigs and your solution is more GA appropriated/oriented. The immersion would be lost.

Cheers.

[jeroen79]

What you can also do is play ATC yourself.
Open the GPS and vector yourself to the airfield.

[mabe5454]

SunnySaratoga,

I know all that but it is always good to check other users just in case I am missing something. I am not. Here is a pdf link of where I am trying to land: http://training.unnt.ru/docs/UWGG_JEPP.pdf

So my next try will be to wait for ATC to place me on final and use one of the ADF's to square me into the runway. Like a triangulation but with just two references.

Cheers,

MAB

[mabe5454]

jeroen79,

I am too greedy to let ATC off the hook that easy.

Cheers,

MAB

[mith]

Thanks ReggieF5421,
I fly the big rigs and your solution is more GA appropriated/oriented. The immersion would be lost.
Cheers.

You probably know this, but when you say "big rigs" they're referred to as "heavies"... I Googled this and I'll paste what I found.


Taken from Appendix A of the FAAO 7110.65R "Air Traffic Control"

"AIRCRAFT WEIGHT CLASSES

a. Heavy. Aircraft capable of takeoff weights of more than 255,000 pounds whether or not they are operating at this weight during a particular phase of flight.

b. Large. Aircraft of more than 41,000 pounds, maximum certificated takeoff weight, up to 255,000 pounds.

c. Small. Aircraft of 41,000 pounds or less maximum certificated takeoff weight."

Any aircraft that is classified as a heavy in this manual must use the word heavy when communicating with airtraffic control on or near the airport, with the exception of the Boeing 757, which also must use "heavy". The use of the word "heavy" may be ommitted when an aircraft is operating within the en route envirnoment, aka "center".

Notice the word "capable" above. Even if a heavy aircraft does not weigh more than 255,000lbs at takeoff, it still must be referred to as a "heavy". Also, in other parts of the world besides the U.S., the weight limit is 300,000lbs if memory serves me correctly.
Source(s):
I'm an En Route Center Air Traffic Controller, and also have certified in 5 airport control towers over the past 15 years.

[mabe5454]

Thanks to all,

It did worked, at least this time for this particular airport.

Cheers,

MAB