Jump to content

Missing arrival procedures from MSFS


Recommended Posts

Hi all,

I've been simming for about 20 years but have only recently taken the plunge and joined Vatsim. I'm finding it hugely enjoyable but also a tad stressful, because I'm so used to the predictability of offline ATC add-ons that the workload when flying online is taking some getting used to! I've moved over wholesale from P3D to MSFS recently, and consequently from the FSLabs A320 to the A32NX. I've tried to go back but P3D looks and performs so much worse that I just can't enjoy it anymore.

Anyway, I was on a flight the other day from EKCH-EGLL and had filed the LOGAN 1H STAR. Just before my TOD, I began setting up for my expected arrival - 27R with the LAM transition. Unfortunately, the MCDU insisted on sending me from LAM-BIG, and then via a very rough approximation of the 10-2P initial approach from BIG routing. I tried to fix it, failed, and ended up disconnecting from Vatsim and landing without ATC because I just didn't know how to broach this with the controller.

I imagine, with MSFS navdata in the state it's in at the moment, I'll encounter this problem at other airports as well. Is there a way of handling it? Did I give up and quit too soon? Or is this the sort of situation where disconnecting is the only fair way forward?

Cheers,
Filbert

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Filbert Waghorn said:

inactive since May

Yep. A bit of a desert in here at the moment. You could try Pilot Talk under Discussion. But I've heard (Bill Casey, Scotland) that trying to use MSFS2020 with "big tin" right now is not a great idea.

Alistair Thomson

===

Definition: a gentleman is a flying instructor in a Piper Cherokee who can change tanks without getting his face slapped.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh @Bill Casey won't forgive you for saying he's from Scotland....  😂

Us controllers have seen a number of issues with the default MSFS tubeliners.   I had someone make 3 attempts at establishing on the ILS in the 787 the other day and it just wouldn't capture the localiser so he reverted to a visual approach.   The SIDs/STARs in the FMC's are not 100% accurate out of the box either for some reason.   Hopefully NavBlue will get this resolved soon or other companies will come in (such as Navigraph) and provide more accurate data for the FMCs to use.

My advice would be to have a chart open on a second screen/tablet and if a point doesn't exist in your FMC that should according to the chart, look at the headings from the last point that does exist in your FMC and then switch to using manual headings from there.  Once you then reach the missing point, make sure you set the next available point as a direct in your FMC and switch back to managed/LNAV mode to track it inbound.

These aircraft are getting better (and community mods are helping that) but they're no patch on third party aircraft as yet - and the top ones will not hit MSFS for some time until the SDK gets some significant upgrades.

Trevor Hannant

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Alistair Thomson said:

Yep. A bit of a desert in here at the moment. You could try Pilot Talk under Discussion. But I've heard (Bill Casey, Scotland) that trying to use MSFS2020 with "big tin" right now is not a great idea.

Mr. Casey is probably right. But at the same time, the A320 NEO with the A32NX mod is so close to being really good that I can't help but fly it! 😉 If the navdata is complete, it's perfectly possible to do a full flight in it from cold & dark to shutdown with everything working flawlessly. The 78X & 748 are a different matter though.

22 minutes ago, Trevor Hannant said:

My advice would be to have a chart open on a second screen/tablet and if a point doesn't exist in your FMC that should according to the chart, look at the headings from the last point that does exist in your FMC and then switch to using manual headings from there.  Once you then reach the missing point, make sure you set the next available point as a direct in your FMC and switch back to managed/LNAV mode to track it inbound.

That's good advice and I think that would work with the majority of approaches. The reason I didn't do that on this occasion was that I just thought the S-turns between Lambourne and the ILS would be beyond both the capability of the FMC and my own capability!

Thanks for the replies both of you. I copied this post into General Discussion immediately after posting and have some more feedback in there. Appreciate your time.

Filbert  

Edited by Filbert Waghorn
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Trevor Hannant said:

Oh @Bill Casey won't forgive you for saying he's from Scotland....  😂

I may have to adhere to the modern fad of announcing that I am OFFENDED by such a suggestion but I'm not sure what happens when one is offended, I believe it may be nothing at all?

My preference for not using the MSFS big tin on Vatsim is largely because if an aircraft cannot do everything required of (direct to's, holding patterns, latest Navdata etc etc) then I'd prefer not to be an inconvenience and dish out "unables". I much prefer to be capable of doing whatever is asked. Maybe I'm too fussy, dunno. 

Now, about being Scottish......... 😈

Edited by Bill Casey
  • Like 1

Bill Casey

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Bill Casey said:

if an aircraft cannot do everything required of (direct to's, holding patterns, latest Navdata etc etc)

I've done Direct-to and I do have the latest Navigraph AIRAC, I'm using FS2020 Asobo A320 Neo, with or without the A32NX mod.

Hold patterns I should be able to follow manually with littlenavmap and HDG mode, I will try to practice those tomorrow.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/16/2020 at 9:48 AM, Bill Casey said:

Now, about being Scottish....

:) Sorry,  Hamish  Bill: I think I saw your comment about big tin in the Scottish forum and I put 2&2 together, resulting in the ENIAC value of 3.999999.

Anyway, lots of folks like the thought of being Scots. When folks here in Canada hear my accent, they nearly always say, "I'm Scottish too!" despite never having been there, simply because their old folks came from there in the fifties. Some of them are actually more Scottish than the Scots, with weekly pipe band marches (no, really).

  • Like 1

Alistair Thomson

===

Definition: a gentleman is a flying instructor in a Piper Cherokee who can change tanks without getting his face slapped.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/16/2020 at 1:11 PM, Filbert Waghorn said:

That's good advice and I think that would work with the majority of approaches. The reason I didn't do that on this occasion was that I just thought the S-turns between Lambourne and the ILS would be beyond both the capability of the FMC and my own capability!

Fair point however if you watch your speed, even the heaviest of aircraft will manage.   Generally, LHR controllers will give you:

- 220 knots leaving the Holding fix (in this case LAM)
- 180-200 knots for the "base" turn which may be an S bend rather than a straight base leg
- 160 knots until 4DME

If you go with those, particularly dialling the 180 speed in first before making the base turn so that it's slowing just before/as you make the turn, you should be fine.

 

15 hours ago, Alistair Thomson said:

Anyway, lots of folks like the thought of being Scots. When folks here in Canada hear my accent, they nearly always say, "I'm Scottish too!" despite never having been there, simply because their old folks came from there in the fifties. Some of them are actually more Scottish than the Scots, with weekly pipe band marches (no, really).

Completely agree - the number of times I've heard about how sure people are that they've got Scottish blood in them so we must be related....  🙄

  • Like 1

Trevor Hannant

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/18/2020 at 10:13 AM, Trevor Hannant said:

Fair point however if you watch your speed, even the heaviest of aircraft will manage.   Generally, LHR controllers will give you:

- 220 knots leaving the Holding fix (in this case LAM)
- 180-200 knots for the "base" turn which may be an S bend rather than a straight base leg
- 160 knots until 4DME

If you go with those, particularly dialling the 180 speed in first before making the base turn so that it's slowing just before/as you make the turn, you should be fine.

When your refer to the S bend as a base leg, it sounds much more manageable somehow! I suppose it doesn't matter if I'm not pinpoint accurate on the virtual waypoints as long as I adhere to the altitude restrictions, follow the shape and end up pointing at the runway...?

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/16/2020 at 2:48 PM, Bill Casey said:

My preference for not using the MSFS big tin on Vatsim is largely because if an aircraft cannot do everything required of (direct to's, holding patterns, latest Navdata etc etc) then I'd prefer not to be an inconvenience and dish out "unables". I much prefer to be capable of doing whatever is asked. Maybe I'm too fussy, dunno. 

Well this is what I'm trying to work out. I do find it stressful being 'unable', but the question is whether it upsets the controllers and generally spoils the experience for everyone or whether it's just seen as par for the course. I suspect it varies from one controller to another.

Yesterday, on approach to Frankfurt, the MSFS navdata was missing the transition I was cleared for. I requested a different one 'due to incomplete Navdata' and, after a bit of discussion between the centre controller & the approach controller, I was re-cleared for the one I requested. Neither seemed too put out by it, but you can't necessarily tell! 

My trouble is, I could go back to P3D & the glorious FSLabs & PMDG planes I've spent so much money on over the years, which fly beautifully and have complete & accurate navdata. But the sad fact is, flying in MSFS feels so much more like you're flying in the real world (even with the buggy, incomplete aircraft) that I really found I didn't enjoy P3D any more last time I tried. So really, my choice at the moment is between flying in MSFS on Vatsim or flying in MSFS with Pilot2ATC. I'm mostly doing the latter, but I'd like to do more of the former.

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Filbert Waghorn said:

When your refer to the S bend as a base leg, it sounds much more manageable somehow! I suppose it doesn't matter if I'm not pinpoint accurate on the virtual waypoints as long as I adhere to the altitude restrictions, follow the shape and end up pointing at the runway...?

In the UK, generally speaking you'll be vectored from either the end of the STAR or at some point along it to final.  It's rare for anyone to leave a pilot to navigate "their own way" to final.  Obviously elsewhere the use of transitions is more prevalent.   For these, despite the fact that I use the likes of PMDG/FSLabs for the majority of my flying, I still make sure I've got the relevant chart depicted on Navigraph Charts open on either the iPad or second monitor while I'm flying it as I can see the position of my aircraft as I'm flying the STAR/Transition and can see that:

- I'm adhering to the lateral requirements of the procedure and
- I'll make any altitude restrictions along the way

There may be other tools than Navigraph Charts that provide a similar visual reference to procedures however I'm not aware of them as I've been happy with what I have but this would also give you some peace of mind if you're flying into more congested airspace in MSFS.

  • Like 1

Trevor Hannant

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/17/2020 at 6:09 PM, Alistair Thomson said:

Anyway, lots of folks like the thought of being Scots.

I am not one of them I'm afraid! 5 years of school as an Englishman in Glasgow in the 70s convinced me not to harbour any such wishes ☹️  It did though introduce me to the world of aviation geeking.

Bill Casey

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Filbert Waghorn said:

My trouble is, I could go back to P3D & the glorious FSLabs & PMDG planes I've spent so much money on over the years, which fly beautifully and have complete & accurate navdata. But the sad fact is, flying in MSFS feels so much more like you're flying in the real world (even with the buggy, incomplete aircraft) that I really found I didn't enjoy P3D any more last time I tried. So really, my choice at the moment is between flying in MSFS on Vatsim or flying in MSFS with Pilot2ATC. I'm mostly doing the latter, but I'd like to do more of the former.

I do understand the dilemma. Yesterday I went back to big tin in FSX on Vatsim for the first time in ages and actually thoroughly enjoyed a 3 hour flight without workarounds (having a PMDG under me), having fully accurate Active Sky, spot on Navdata and not having to compromise on anything. It actually made a very nice change from carting around VFR in MSFS! So for the moment I am using horses for courses. I'm not spending ages trying to make MSFS default a/c "fit" Vatsim when they will become irrelevant once PMDG etc get their aircraft out but thoroughly enjoying the VFR experience in MSFS instead.

As regards the effect of "unable" on others, I think that totally depends on the controller and also the traffic situation. One unable in a hugely busy terminal area could be a complete PiTA at times but totally acceptable at others. I just prefer not to do it when i have the option to avoid it by using another simulator.

Edited by Bill Casey
  • Like 2

Bill Casey

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...

Hi @Filbert Waghorn

To confirm what a few others have said; use the Navigraph data if you can. It's in beta for MSFS right now https://forum.navigraph.com/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=9963 but from my perspective I'm not having any issues with it along with the A32NX mod. All SID/STAR/Transitions and Vias have been available when I've needed them. The mod still isn't perfect but it's getting better every day and apart from no hold function in the MCDU yet I've not come unstuck with it while on VATSIM. Once you know the 'quirks' of the flight model and the managed modes etc. then I think it's perfectly flyable online and you're able to follow decent SOP.

It sounds like you've found yourself in the same position as me: Excited for MSFS being released but didn't think I'd be doing airliner flying with it until Aerosoft/PMDG/FSLabs etc got a detailed aircraft released for it. However, the environment and immersion from MSFS just has no competition and keeps pulling me in to fly!! 🙂

Enjoy!

Mike

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I  have used flightsim for almost 25 years and  just flew my first flights on Vatsim with msfs2020 and default data and C700 with working title G3000 mod. Learned most of the quirks before jumping onto the network. However the strange behavior of the fms sometimes increases the workload.  I have navigraph charts and littlenavmap to assist and goto heading mode as soon as something happens. 

 I tried navigraph beta navdata and immediately ran into trouble.  I was issued a direct, but the fms could not find it. However it was present as a waypoint after loading the approach. Known problem according to navigraph and is due to how msfs2020 deal with the data.  

Not possible for me to go back to p3d either, msfs2020 is just so much better. I really smiled while taxing on orbx loww with lots of vatsim traffic and setting sun. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...