KJFK ILS 22R

[Robert_Bance]

Has anyone made a perfect ILS landing at KJFK on runway 22R >> 109.50 >> 222.? Regardless of aircraft, I can see ,on approach, the misalignment to the runway, and of course I land on the grass at the left side. I'd appreciate a comment/correction via e-mail (Rlbance@aol.com) as my browser does not respond too well
Thanks.
Bob.*

[Strategic Retreat]

The last time I landed there was under FS2002, but if the misalignment is very pronounced and does not mirror the real life situation, you can search for a corrective AFCAD on a freeware server or, if you CAN use AFCAD or ADE9X, correct it yourself.

Answer written here and sent on the given e-add as requested.

[JoBee]

22R at JFK matches the RW.

The localizer is offset to match what we see in Google Earth.

The red arrows point to the localizer transmission antennae for 22L and R...


You could change it with Afcad or ADE, or fly it as intended and line up with the runway visually once out of the clouds.

cheers,
Joe

[Strategic Retreat]

Wait... wait... wait... seem to remember... been there in the golden days of FS2002 and found that the LOC wanted me to land on the green parallel to the runway forcing me to step aside in final... man... been a while... cannot even remember what kind of plane I was piloting at the time...

This begs the obvious question: is there a whatever logical explanation for having put the LOC antennae array there and not in a less stupid more logical position, like in the other runway?

I mean, does the 22R end up into the water (and even if... there are lots of other examples of LOC on water-ending runways around the globe that aren't positioned like that at all) or is there any other physical reason the LOC was put there? I find hard to believe it was the momentous inspiration of an engineer with the hobby of practical jokes. :-?

[JoBee]

I don't know for sure and can only assume that they had already filled in a bunch of Jamaica Bay when they built JFK and they didn't want to ruin any more of the bay.

Maybe someone with a better knowledge of JFK's history can chime in.

cheers,
Joe

[Strategic Retreat]

I don't know for sure and can only assume that they had already filled in a bunch of Jamaica Bay when they built JFK and they didn't want to ruin any more of the bay.

I almost questioned myself if you were being sarcastic here. Nowadays, and I'm talking of NOWADAYS, that kind of concern is NOWHERE in any list, when a whatever construction comparable to an airport is designed... unless some environmental parties put all their weight behind said concern, of course... :-?

Back in the days KJFK was built? Not a chance.

Maybe someone with a better knowledge of JFK's history can chime in.

Let's hope.

[Webb]

Maybe someone with a better knowledge of JFK's history can chime in.

It wasn't JFK when it was built.

The Odyssey of Flight 33

[Fozzer]

Maybe someone with a better knowledge of JFK's history can chime in.

It wasn't JFK when it was built.

The Odyssey of Flight 33

The origins...>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_F._Ke ... al_Airport

Idlewild Airport:
http://www.britishpathe.com/record.php?id=58544

Paul.

[Strategic Retreat]

Obviously, we have to adjourn the timeframe to the days of the adoption of the ILS. No sense in going all the way back to 1939 (with all the mess that was about to happen) to look for a time-displaced 707 (it would need for us to be time-displaced as well... thing that is not yet quite possible), but it would be a good thing to search the informations dating back to the late 50ies, first 60ies... or whenever the ILS was added to the airport TODAY NAMED KJFK, on the runway that gives the name to this thread.

[DaveSims]

I have a good friend that is Ops at JFK.

[DaveSims]

My friend says it is because of the lack of room at the end of the runway.  However it is planned to redo the runway in a couple of years and this is in the plans to get corrected.