x217
CV-990
Posts: 8
|
Post by x217 on Feb 25, 2013 0:28:42 GMT
I have a problem and I was wondering if anyone had the same problem, or has a solution to it. When I have approach mode on it will capture the glide slope, but it gets too low and then back up again, then too high and down again. The Plane doesn't keep the smooth glide slope like every other plane I have. It seems to me that the autopilot moves the trim very slowly which might be causing the problem. Can anyone help me fix this problem to keep a constant glide slope with the autopilot?
Using FS2004, and HJG MD-88 and MD-90 (Problem happens on both). I have tried several different panels but all have the same result.
|
|
|
Post by hornit - HJG on Feb 25, 2013 1:49:21 GMT
What airspeed, altitude and aircraft configuration are you capturing the glideslope in?
|
|
|
Post by aerofoto - HJG Admin on Feb 25, 2013 1:52:27 GMT
I trust you're using the panel options offered by HJG. "IF NOT" .... then other available panel options might result in less than desirable ILS/GS performance. ANYWAY .... I, personally, tested the each of our MDXX simulations "EXTREMELY THOROUGHLY" and throughout almost a year prior to their being publicly released here at HJG. These tests included many AP controlled ILS/GS coupled auto-approaches to landing at a number of different FS2004 airports (among probably hundreds of hours of other unrelatred pre-release testing also) .... and "each simulation" was noted to perform "EXTREMELY WELL" in this particular respect. HOWEVER .... successful AP controlled ILS/GS coupled auto-approaches to landing, in FS, are dependent upon a number of important factors .... - AP controlled ILS/GS coupled auto-approaches to landing should not be attempted with in excess of 25% total fuel load remaining. - AP controlled ILS/GS coupled auto-approaches to landing should not be attempted at too acute an angle of intercept to the RWY centerline/ILS/GS beam .... about 25* (degrees) should be considered the (normal) maximum intercept. - activating an ILS/GS coupled auto-approaches to landing whilst already on the RWY approach HDG/centerline can, in FS, can result in any simulation missing the coupling coupletely .... or .... result in any simulation hunting for the coupling by increasing/decreasing altitude throughout the approach to landing, but, not actually engaging properly with the ILS/GS beam - AP controlled ILS/GS coupled auto-approaches to landing should not be attempted too close to the threshold of any ILS/GS equipped FS RWY .... a minimum of about 10 DME should be considered the (normal) minimum, in FS, for such a successful approach to landing. - speed must be monitored and adjusted thoroughout any AP controlled ILS/GS coupled auto-approaches to landing (any landing) .... and in conjunction with with both flap settings and distance to run, or, the simulation can simply end up overflying the beam in the case of excessive speed. - never attempt any ILS/GS coupled auto-approach to landing from above the beam .... always intercept it during level flight and from slightly below the beam or the simulation may simply fail to engage with it. - "The longer any approach to landing (I prefer flying approaches of up to 20 DME, and as such, have managed to successfully perform intercepts of up to 90* (degress) and without any problems although I don't, normally, recommend such) .... then the better/more successful any ILS/GS coupled auto-approaches to landing is likely to be" .... simply because it results/promotes more distance within which to manouver, or, configure the simulation, properly, for landing on the basis of having first become established on the beam at a much earlier stage. One still has to concentrate and stay in front of the simulation all the way down .... particularly in regard to engine power and airspeed .... in order to remain alligned with the ILS/GS beam throughout the approacch to landing. - It's not uncommon for a lot of simulations to loose the beam within the last few hundred feet of any AP controlled ILS/GS couple auro-approach to landing .... which "IS" an FS thing unfortuately .... BUT .... which can also be a symptom of flying such approaches too fast and/or too heavy. There's lot's of possibilities for what, you say, you're experiencing, but, I'm "pretty certain" that within either of the above 8 advisories you'll find the reason why you're, apparently, having diffuculty .... "PILOT ERROR" I'm sure I suspect airspeed and aircraft weight are likely to be your prime problem/s .... and/or maybe also the distance of your ILS/GS intercept as well as your angle of intercept too. Mark C AKL/NZ
|
|
|
Post by aerofoto - HJG Admin on Feb 25, 2013 2:09:01 GMT
The following is a "FAIRLY BASIC" guide/tutorial I wrote in order to try'n assist folk flying AP controlled ILS/GS coupled auto-approaches to landing using the HJG MDXX simulations .... supported by each of the panel options offered "HERE" .... See how you go on the basis of the above advisories Provided these recommendations are followed .... then one won't/shouldn't experience any difficulties at all The "FULL/COMPLETE" guide is available within "SECTION 3" of my following posting and which also serves as the HJG online/forum based manual for each of these MDXX simulations .... tonymadgehjg.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=md8090boardinfo&thread=5002&page=1"THIS" information covers almost everything that's essential to be known/understood in order for one to be able to derive the most/best enjoyment possible from each of these MDXX simulations Mark C AKL/NZ
|
|
x217
CV-990
Posts: 8
|
Post by x217 on Feb 25, 2013 22:49:27 GMT
I have tried your HJG panel, your approach instructions, and I have tried reinstalling the aircraft, but it still ends up having the same result.
|
|
|
Post by aerofoto - HJG Admin on Feb 26, 2013 2:17:20 GMT
There are times I wish I had the ability to produce FS video .... simply in order to be able to demonstrate what I endorse "IF" .... your simulation is missing the ILS/GS, as you imply is the case, then it's got to be "your technique" .... because .... based on the procedure which I been advocating .... I simply cannot replicate any problem/s whatsoever. There must be something (part of the recommended procedure) that you are misunderstanding or otherwise not performing correctly .... since there is absolutely nothing wrong with any of these simulations. Really need "more information" from you here .... I invite to you to describe .... in detail (best) .... precisely what you're doing/how you are actually trying to fly your AP cotrolled ILS/GS coupled auto-approaches to landing .... please. Maybe then we can determine precisely where, and why, things are, apparently, going wrong for you. FYI .... I have, this afternoon, performed 2 AP controlled ILS/GS coupled auto-approaches to landing using the HJG MD88 simulation .... and using the recommended SPADA, and SOUTHEY, B717-200/MDXX panels for for each .... and both tests (re-tests) were concluded with the same almost perfect results. Mark C AKL/NZ
|
|
|
Post by aerofoto - HJG Admin on Feb 26, 2013 4:21:30 GMT
ACTUALLY .... before you get a chance to tell me precisely what you've been doing .... I'm going to tell you (everyone) precisely how I've been doing it .... per my following "TUTORIAL" ....
AND THAT FOLKS .... is how it works best/easiest, "in FS", and is also how I, personally, do it.
I hope this bassic "TUTORIAL" helps those in need of such guidance.
These particular procedures are intended for any of the HJG MDXX aircraft .... but .... are also applicable to any other HJG aircraft simulation also .... with only weight, airspeed, pitch/attitude, and flap settings tending to differ somewhat between aircraft types .... BUT STILL .... always resulting in the same "near perfect" AP controlled ILS/GS coupled auto-approach to landing each time.
In fact the only HJG aircraft simulations which may prove somewhat challenging with which to fly AP controlled ILS/GS coupled auto-approaches to landing are the B707/720, CV880, CV990, and DC8 .... BUT THERE AGAIN .... this (according to what some retired aircrew have told me in the past) is apparently quite true of such early jetliner types anyway and before such landing aids were ever perfected .... to the extent that they are ar modern airports and on todays advanced/hi-tech aircraft types .... or since the 1970's at least.
Mark C AKL/NZ
|
|
|
Post by hornit - HJG on Feb 26, 2013 16:26:07 GMT
Those are EXCELLENT instructions! The bottom line with ANY coupled approach in flightsim is that you have to give it every chance to succeed. In the real world autopilots are pretty stout about capturing courses and vertical guidance, but in the sim, its VERY touchy, and unless you place the aircraft almost perfectly on an intercept, completely stabilized, on speed, properly configured, and with the SWITCHES all correctly set (that means radios too!) it probably wont do a very good job. That has been my experience with MANY aircraft, including some payware.
So follow Mark's guide, and see how it goes. i did two approaches last night with two different panels and was able to get a smooth track on the glideslope to touchdown.
|
|
x217
CV-990
Posts: 8
|
Post by x217 on Feb 27, 2013 19:59:36 GMT
Thanks everyone the instructions did help. I always captured the glide slope around 190kts, but when capturing it at 140-145kts it had a smooth decent on the glide slope. Thanks
|
|
|
Post by aerofoto - HJG Admin on Feb 28, 2013 5:17:28 GMT
Just a further few comments in relation to your last/most recent .... to hopefully aid your further improving the success you're apparently, now, beginning to realize .... "IF" .... one reduces ones airspeed to around 140 KIAS as one "commence ones turn in toward the final approach" .... then ones likely flying a bit too slow, and whilst one may still engage with the ILS/GS a little more successfully than previously, a slow airspeed like that, at the assumed distance out from the RWY, is also going to likely result in a much higher than desirable nose-up pitch attitude .... possibly to the extent of even obstructing ones forward vision/view of the RWY ahead "IN FS" .... and provided ones not already overweight for landing (which will impose problems during ILS/GS intercepts and landings generally) .... and flying these MDXX TYPE simulations in particular also .... ones best advised to fly the downwind league, "prior to the turn toward base league", with about 3 notches of flap extended and at around 200 KIAS .... reducing to 180 KIAS "during the turn toward base league" .... and then further reducing to 160 KIAS "just as the AP/APPR mode controlled automatic turn toward final approach is commenced" and as the simulation senses the ILS/GS beam. "ONCE AGAIN" .... Once established on final approach, but, "just prior to the simulation commencing its AP/APPR mode controlled descent down the ILS/GS beam" .... ones best advised to further reduce ones airspeed towards 150-140 KIAS .... then extend the landing gear (at around 15 DME before the RWY) .... and then add the final 2 notches of flap, in proportion to airspeed and pitch attitude, somewhere between there and about 10 DME before the RWY .... whilst also "jockeying engine power a little bit" in order to further assist ones pitch attitude and stability during the final approach to landing .... and which should all result in one, then, flying the last 10 DME prior to the RWY at airspeeds of between 145-148-143 KIAS .... depending on ones weight. "AS I MENTIONED IN MY EARLIER POSTING" .... Flying "a much longer" AP controlled ILS/GS coupled auto-approach (I prefer at least 18-20 DME) always results in much more precise coupling and a far better final approach to landing generally .... simply because one has more time within which to maneuver/manipulate the simulation with greater precision. It does takes "a bit of practice" to get right .... BUT .... like applies to most things .... "PRACTICE MAKES FOR PERFECTION" .... trust me !!!! Mark C AKL/NZ
|
|
|
Post by hornit - HJG on Feb 28, 2013 5:30:38 GMT
I have had good luck doing pretty much everything Mark says above, but I tend to not put the landing gear down until about 6 miles out. I also dont start the approach as far out as he does. 10 miles is plenty as long as your stabilised. You are still below the glideslope and i have never had a problem with capture as long as everything else was under control. I use 180 knots until about 8 miles with 15 degrees of flap, then before i intercept the glideslope at about 6 miles, i put the landing gear down and slow to about 150 and do the landing checklist just like in the real world. By the time the glideslope gets captured im stabilized in landing configuration and on speed. Works every time for me here.
|
|
|
Post by walterleo on Feb 28, 2013 10:25:01 GMT
Hi: I want to add only one point more: Not all airplanes and all simulations of airplanes are created equal. Some create considerable drag with gear down, others have a marked ballooning. So often its advisable to put down final flaps while being still one point down the glide slope the ballooning will put you at the glide slope and putting down the gear at that moment will create a descent rate for staying on glide slope without the necessity of changing the power. So it works in DM BAC-111. Totally different in the real IL-62 and in the PT-IL-62M: Their AP (and flight director) wont follow the GS if flaps and gear are not down well in advance of GS interception. At the other hand this airplanes intercept the localizer nicely and from baselag as long as the heading bug is put on the final heading. Kind regards Walter
|
|