About ILS?

[squallhx]

I just play this game,I am new player

who can tell me how to ues ILS and autoplitot  ?

thinks !

[ashaman]

For the general use of the autopilot, the learning lessons of FS are good enough. I read them once (in FS2002) even knowing everything already, and they were not so bad.

For the use if the ILS to land, follow the link below:

http://www.simviation.com/cgi-bin/yabb/ ... 1111322151

Have fun.

[Jakemaster]

I disagree.  The FS tutorias go too much into detail for me and when I tried to learn how to use all the stuff I couldnt figure it out.  The best way is to do it like real life, get someone you know to talk you through it.  Thats what I did...

If you have instant messenger or better yet teamspeak with a mike feel free to contact me and I can walk you through it

[garymbuska]

If you take the lessons in the correct order you should have no problems using ILS. If you jump straight into the Ils lesson with out knowing how to read use and set the instruments then you will indeed be lost.
 You have to be able to crawl and walk before you try to run.
In the real world you would start out with a good groud school then take the basic lessons once you have soloed and got your private pilot ticket you would then take the instrument lessons. You might not have to wait to get your private pilot ticket before starting the instrument training but the more knowledge you have the easier it will be to learn the instruments.

[Saitek]

I did both. Spent hours messing around trying to slowly figuring thingss out and then did the lessons. In hindsight I should have taken the lessons right from the start.

[Franky_4_Fingers]

One thing is for sure, learn to use VOR before taking on ILS.  ;)

[beaky]

Read, fly, read, fly... that formula works well.

But the advantage of FS is that it's cheaper and you won't die practicing, so there's no excuse to not try it in the air right away.

[ashaman]

One thing is for sure, learn to use VOR before taking on ILS.  ;)

Oh, in this I went the other direction.

When I finally digested what a VOR is and how it works I had long become used to the commodity called ILS to land.

At the time I still flew with autocoordination on and no pedals and a manual landing was something I dreaded.

Nowadays I can't find any satisfaction in an even semi-automatic landing and use the ILS only in a really I-cant-see-anything-beyond-the-nose-of-the-plane situation.

Else all the way down stick in hand.

[garymbuska]

I fly using real world weather with Active sky and beleive me there are times when you are glad you know how to use a ILS approach. I have yet to have ATC refuse me a ils landing that in the real world you would not ever attempt. Every aircraft needs to have a certain amount of vissability once on the ground and once the visability drops down below that number the airport shuts down. I think it is called Runway visual range  or something like that  MD 88's and MD90's seem to need the most where 767's and 757,s do not need as much RVR  8)
I use to work operations at KJAX and rember having to lead a B767-300 to the ramp because he could not see the taxiway.
The MD 88's we had  coming in that night wound up at another airport because the RVR had dropped below the minimum for them.

[Nexus]

Garymbuska, maybe it was just a case of the MD crew was not certified to conduct a higher ILS CAT approach, whilst the 767 crew was.

I believe both aircrafts are capable of Cat IIIb, but then it is another story if the company feels it is necessary to certify the crew to the highest ILS standards.

[ashaman]

Pretty much as Nexus said, in real life, and in stark contrast as in FS or any other sim I know of, it doesn't suffice that the plane be able to land with zero visibility, but the crew too has to be certified for that kind of landing. And the certification iis not free of expenses.

As for ILS, seen that I fly mainly in sunny south Italy... I can almost always do without it easily enough, and really enjoy my landings. Another matter altogether is if I decide to bring my simulated plane as far as LIPE already. Being that airport in a zone of frequent and thick fog for 8 months' a year.

Far from me to discount the ILS usefulness. I simply prefer when I can not use it.

[garymbuska]

Nexus you could very well be correct on that I do not rember for sure. If memory serves me correct the MD80 & MD90 series both need a large RVR which indeed could mean that they are not certified for the other catagories.
And the crew more than likely stay with that series aircraft so they would more than likely not be certified either.
While most of my flights are IFR I do a good bit of VFR as well and will use a visual approach but I still will use the ILS signal to help me find the runway initialy if it has one. With FS it can be a little hard to see the airport even on a clear day as it depends on where you have your sliders set at.  8)

[vololiberista]

Sigh!! Aaaaah the good old VC10 with autoland since 1964.
The ability to land in "zero" visibility!!!
I got a jump seat ride in a VC10 shortly after I got my instrument rating. Almost everyone else had to be diverted while we got in to Heathrow with visibility at less than 50mtrs. I remember we couldn't see "anything"  Suddenly the undercarriage made contact, And we were over the centreline!!!!
Vololiberista

[ashaman]

Volo, even today, with systems that are a lot more precise than in 1964, a complete autoland is not something devoid of anxieties.

This mainly because in real life, and again in contrast with FS or any other sim I know of, there's always the possibility that the radio signal from the ILS might be misinterpreted by the board systems, or polluted by interferences.

Phenomena this last not uncommon that has been the cause of many problems and narrowly missed disasters. I remember having read of a 767 whose pilots shooting for an ILS found themselves descending on a false glide by reckoning of the VOR/DME of the airport (don't remember which) on the other NAV radio that told them they were way too far to begin descent. They declared missed and landed using a VOR approach a little later.

They were lucky they were not trying a complete autolanding, as this requires usually both NAV radios on the same ILS frequency for reason of redundancy. Had they being trying an autoland I'd be reporting a aviation disaster here.

ILS in real life is surely a useful tool, but as it is a radio equipment, is not devoid of problems and/or quirks, even when certified for a CAT III landing. And as such to be used with the rightful cautions.


PS
Remains on my part the curiosity, once down on the runway, way back in 64 (five years before I was born), where did you go? I mean, with a near to zero visibility, how were you able to find your way to the gate? Nowadays there are electronic maps that signal the plane current position on the airport ground that help a little, but back then this was sci-fi equipment.

A follow-me car? With 50 meters visibility had to have been quite the slow taxi. Surely not a thing for a heavy traffic.

[Fozzer]

.....I fly using real world weather with Active sky and believe me there are times when you are glad you know how to use a ILS approach. I have yet to have ATC refuse me a ILS landing that in the real world you would not ever attempt. Every aircraft needs to have a certain amount of visibility once on the ground and once the visibility drops down below that number the airport shuts down. I think it is called Runway visual range  or something like that......  

I have been surprised many times using Real Weather in FS 2004, when I have been refused a take-off or landing at a controlled airfield by ATC when the visibility has been poor whilst flying a small GA aircraft not fitted with a suitable radio stack and ILS landing guidance system, (Cessna 150/152/ Piper Cub/ Microlight/ etc.....).......!
...pretty accurate I thought, when I cant see more than a few feet in front of me... ...!

With uncontrolled airstrips you take your own life in your hands in poor visibility...LOL..!

Paul...."As real as it gets".... ...!