neilends

Just to be fair, the person who started the thread did so in the same spirit that I think the majority of us are speaking/posting. The post I think you're thinking of, that was discouraging, was not his post but someone else's.

It may be in theory possible to have LN do this for you. I read that it was. However, I gave up figuring out how and don't try anymore. LN is extremely helpful for spitting out quick distances for all kinds of functions on the map. Once you learn those, you might care less about time calculations that obviously will vary anyway depending on speed and wind conditions.

I have a feeling that, as someone just noted, MSFS's version of autopilot and ILS is still very buggy. If I do ever end up taking real-life flight lessons one day I am probably going to be so confused by the difference between reality and MSFS-land. (I am enrolled in ground school at the moment; still plugging away).

Randy I have become a fan of your humorous interjections. :D The vast majority of us here agree: we wish there were much more women simmers here on the forum and in general. I hope over time this becomes a reality.

This comment is complete rubbish and is probably a good explanation of exactly why women aren't flocking to flight sim forums to pursue simming as a hobby. I am not in the aviation world so I don't know as many people in it of either gender. But whenever I see a man pontificating about what he perceives women's "motivations" to be in other aspects of life, the ease with which to disprove such nonsense is comical. The women I know in my profession, and also my other hobby in the music world, kick some serious ass and are rock stars.

:D

(1) Escape. (2) You can’t.

Little Navmap makes it pretty easy. I kind of do a hybrid of your two options. My trip is recorded by LN. Whenever I fly I first go to LN and tell it to transmit my plan to MSFS.

Are you setting your autopilot to fly the ILS route from the very start to the runway? Maybe that's what is throwing you off (just as it did me for a while). As someone else mentioned, the route from A to Z is not designed per se for a small plane but for an airliner. If you follow it you might be yanked backwards from your location to some waypoint that seemingly makes no sense for you. It makes more sense for me, per a real pilot's advice here, to choose my preferred location once lined up with the runway, and only then intercept the localizer to take advantage of ILS.

Lol.. I've wondered the same thing and assuming it's the latter. There are a couple of female pilot Youtubers out there, and one uses MSFS regularly for her episodes. So they exist. But women MSFS fans are probably an untapped market that Microsoft will hopefully take an interest in. :)

I've been gradually flying up through the entire state of Alaska in the Cessna 172, from Anchorage as a starting point and intended destination of Barrow, on the northern tip. And I have to admit, the official Microsoft website for forum discussion makes it a ton easier to post screenshots. Their limitations are higher than here and you can just drag and drop. I assume that's not a betrayal of loyalty. The ease of screenshots has made journaling my Alaska trip a lot more fun. Link here if interested.

Little Navmap is what I use and what sounds like will be your best bet. Once you input your desired route, a few clicks is all it takes to see a visual elevation profile so you can plan your altitude for the flight.

My method, in turn, is what was suggested by one of the real pilots on this forum. Get the plane in line first, and only then lock in with the localizer.

I have a Dell Alienware with these specs: Intel Core i7 10700KF (8-Core 5.1GHz Turbo Boost), RTX 3070 8GB, 32GB Dual Channel at 3200MHz, 512GB M.2 PCIe NVMe SSD. It runs beautifully.

That made me curious so I just flew from Gatwick to Heathrow. The ILS is working fine at Heathrow, all 4 runways. Beautiful weather in London today!

I am actually taking "ground school" from Sporty's online program. It's very well done.

I gave your exact route a shot so a few more comments: Approaching KMRY, I see that waypoint ZEBED is 9.6 nm from the airport and waypoint MINCK is 5.9 nm from the airport. Those two points became my targets. I set course on my own for ZEBED. As I got a little closer (which happened quickly, this being a short flight) I used the G1000 to load ILS runway 10L. (I had to ignore ATC in doing this, because ATC refused to offer me 10L as an option. My landing will be illegal I guess). Activating the ILS approach at this point changed my route. My direct GPS route would have taken me straight to the airport. But upon activation of the ILS approach, my GPS changed my route so that I would be hitting the waypoints instead. I had also noted, pre-flight, that waypoint MINCK had a required altitude of 1,700 feet. So, I headed for ZEBED at a cruising altitude of 2,000 feet, knowing that I would have to get to 1,700 by the point I reached MINCK. At ZEBED and altitude 2,000, I hit the CDI button which converted my navigation source from GPS to LOC (you can see this change on the G1000, to confirm the source). In addition, once I was sure I was actually on course and in line with the runway, I hit the APR button. My location at this point is right around ZEBED. Upon hitting the CDI button, a green bug showed up on the G1000 main screen which indicated whether I was too high or too low--but I was still controlling my own altitude (using autopilot). About 0.9 nm from waypoint MINCK, the interception with the localizer happened. Automatically. My autopilot and the localizer began communicating with each other on their own, I "felt" a bump in the plane as it locked on, and it began reducing altitude on its own. Smooth sailing from that point on.

The "old Cessna" is the most popular airplane in the world! I respect your lack of desire for not wanting to fly in it personally, but you are one person. About 25% of MSFS users have connections to the real-world aviation world, so Microsoft's base of long-term Flight Simulator loyalists very much prioritize the Cessna 172.

I don't claim this is the correct method, but it's just the method I use: I use GPS navigation to get as close as I can to a selected waypoint on the ILS plate for a given airport. As I approach it, I switch to ILS by using the G1000 to select which runway I am using. (I think this is realistic anyway, because ATC has to tell me which runway I will use; I can't decide that at take-off). I also make sure at this time that the NAV is dialed in to the correct frequency for that ILS runway (again, relying on the plate). If I am on a final approach with no turns necessary, only then do I take two additional steps: (1) switch the navigation source from GPS to LOC using the CDI button, and (2) hitting the APPR button. Typically, that is the point at which the green "bug" shows up on the G1000 main monitor that tells me whether I am too high or too low, and in a matter of seconds locks in with my autopilot anyway so that I am no longer having to control my altitude.

Sorry for the multiple posts but one more: On this plate for an ILS runway at Phoenix, you’ll see a waypoint called TESLE. The plate shows a target altitude for TESLE of 7,000 feet. I try to hit TESLE at 7,000 feet. https://skyvector.com/files/tpp/2102/pdf/00322IL7R.PDF

And yes, I am cruising on AP at a cruising altitude when the localizer is intercepted. The localizer automatically takes control of the AP (so to speak) at that point.

Hit the CDI button to switch the navigation data source from GPS to LOC when you are on approach. As for altitude, I try to match the altitude listed on the airport’s “plate.”

This is hilarious because I only use ACTIVATE!

Looking forward to it. Sorry I can't help with your question, I don't have the technical know-how, but still following your updates!

It may be an MSFS flaw letting me go up that high. But, the C-172 is the plane that MSFS has probably spent the most amount of time into getting right. So, I dunno but certainly open to hearing what real pilots say. A few weeks ago I was in Nepal with the C-172 and again tried to fly at that high level altitude. However, the weather was poor, the windows iced up immediately, and it was windy. At far less than 14,000 (not less than 16,000, but less than 14,000) the Cessna spiraled into an out of control stall that I barely survived. I then crashed into the ground shortly thereafter anyway, I think because of icing on the wings. The entire Himalayan mountain range in South Asia is generally a death zone for C-172s, especially in not-perfect, not-clear weather.