Tom. Your views on the issues with circling approaches in FS9 are I am sure correct, and one could add that what you see out of FS9 cockpit windows is often a great deal less informative than it would have been in the real world.
Manfred. I look forward to the release of these new gauges and possibly to testing them if you need them testing.
Canton Island to Honolulu.As a result of landing issues in Honolulu, this was my second attempt at this flight. Qantas flight EM732 was scheduled to leave Canton Island at 03:55 (UTC 14:55) on 8th November, 1955 and arrive at Honolulu at 11:55 (UTC 21:55), the former being eleven hours behind UTC and the latter ten hours. Perhaps some of the passengers slept through landing and refuelling at Canton. The flight to Honolulu is about 1,665 nm and I load 25,514 lbs of fuel forwhat I expect to be about the scheduled seven hours in the air. As usual I have created a flight plan with waypoints which also serve as assumed positions for sextant shots, these waypoints being about 200-250 nm miles apart as the latter is roughly an hour's flying time in the Super Constellation. I have also consulted the FSGRW weather report for the dynamic weather file I am using, and have downloaded a forecast for 4 hours into the flight to reflect the crew being supplied with more information on the weather as it proceeds. The initial report is for lightish following winds which will probably require a heading adjustment of +3 degrees on the magnetic compass and therefore a course of 023 magnetic rather than 020. When I do eventually consult the later forecast it is for the winds to have dropped even further, all of which makes for straightforward navigation.
Take-off and climb present no problems and this screenshot shows the state of affairs about 1500 feet from cruise altitude of FL170. My heading should be 020 with a reciprocal of 200 and the rmi and AILA are almost there. They are not quite the same because the rmi is pointing at the Canton Island beacon whereas the AILA arrow is pointing at the threshold of R09 about 7 nm away. Once stabilised at cruise altitude I find that I do need a heading offset of +3 degrees to maintain a reciprocal of 200, which confirms the winds as described in the weather report. I lose the rmi after about 140 nm and switch off the AILA at that point too, but this procedure has got me off to a very accurate start, which is good because I know from past experience that not doing it properly can result in significant navigational error.
Cruise is at a pressure altitude of FL170 and as OAT is 0 deg Centigrade this represents a density altitude of about FL190. Indeed OAT remains the same throughout the cruise portion of the flight and although I keep an eye on the mixture and the throttle readings it is at no point necessary to make any adjustment to either. As on the last flight, cruise is a Constant Power cruise at 1700 BHP, which in the later stages gives a true airspeed of nearly 260 knots. I have used
Stellarium to do a little research into the night sky to be expected, although I am sure not on anything like the scale that a real navigator would have done. I suspect that they did a great deal of their work before the flight, with the approximate time of arrival at the waypoints worked out in advance and perhaps also the azimuths and elevations of the heavenly bodies to be used in the sextant shots noted down from the lists in the almanacs. They also had other issues not present in FS9, for example sextants like magnetic compasses had to be calibrated for error and that error factored into the eventual calculations. 8th November is summer in these latitudes and I know that dawn will come early, which is less than ideal. In fact it begins to break in the eastern sky at 16:25 UTC about 90 minutes after take off.
As a result I take the first star shots, on Jupiter and Betelgeuse, earlier than intended because it seems sensible to use the stars while they are still visible. With my second waypoint as the assumed position, this shot returns a result of Lat 2 5; Long -168 -35. I always plot the figures on
Google Earth, which is running on a laptop along with
Stellarium, in order to get a perfectly clear idea of where the sextant has suggested I am; in this case I am short of the waypoint, as was to be expected because the shot was taken early, but also some way off course to starboard; the Plan G breadcrumb shows that I eventually passed it at a distance of 7.5 nm. As a result I change my heading from 023 to 021. Then the sun rises. Sunrise and sunset are always enjoyable in FS9, even if, as in this case, the former is erasing those telltale stars.
Nevertheless, there is about to be a new navigational experience. Late in the flight to Canton Island the moon began to rise off the starboard bow, and as the time for the second sextant shot approaches it is still visible high in the sky ahead of me. This is very useful, because any line of position derived from a heavenly body more or less due ahead or due aft of the aircraft can give a valuable indication of the extent to which it is still on course, and in daylight such indications can only be given by the moon or the sun, as now. Although the moon is quite often visible during the day, this is the first time I have ever used it.
At the time of this shot, using the next waypoint CH03 as the assumed position almost exactly an hour after the previous shot, the azimuth of the moon is 087 which yields a line of position (plus and minus 90 degrees) of 357-177 degrees. As the assumed position is represented by the centre of the chart the aircraft is clearly slightly to starboard. Equally clearly the previous heading correction has brought me back on course and as I am very near to that course I keep the same heading, actually passing within 6.4 nm of CH03.
The shot on waypoint CH04 at 18:40 UTC has the benefit not only of the moon but also of a sun which is now far enough above the horizon to be of use. This allows a proper fix which shows me to be beyond the waypoint and still slightly to starboard (almost 9 nm as later transpires), so I adjust the heading from 021 to 020. An hour later both sun and moon are still useable and the fix is very similar, though we are now slightly further to starboard at 14.5 nm. This was waypoint CH05 and an hour after that I know that I must be within range of a Honolulu beacon with a range of about 400 nm (see above). Consequently I open the AILA gauge, tune it to PHNL and am rewarded with an orange arrow pointing dead ahead at a distance of 282 nm. The navigational aspect of the flight has gone very satisfactorily and it is now over.
But the approach and landing are not. I am better informed about the PHNL navaids than on the first flight, but still have a surprise in store. Based on information from John Hewson I have placed a beacon to the east of Runway 26 to represent the location of a former Range Station with a frequency of 344. I am also now aware of the beacon to the north east at Kaneohe Bay which a Plan G qdm bearing shows to have been aligned on a bearing of 220 degrees with the PHNL runways 22. Clearly, when wind conditions suited this was used for approaches from that direction, which only had to negotiate a certain amount of high ground. Aircraft arriving from California presumably often used this approach, and probably also the approach to R026 via the Range Station, although the still higher ground on that line would have needed particular care. As I descend ATIS advises me that the wind is 7 knots at 178 degrees and that landings are on the 04 runways and runway 08, even if one would have expected one of the 22s on the basis of the wind. Since the flight Bill has explained how FS9 arrived at this rather curious conclusion,* but in fact it is one which suits me. Despite cruising at 1700 BHP we are running very close to a Qantas schedule which would be seriously affected by the time involved in making an approach via Kaneohe Bay. Could it be that the Qantas schedule assumed that they would never do this and that if they approached on the line of the 04 runways aircraft facing a south-west wind would overfy them and then turn back to land on the same runways from the opposite direction? However, that may be, none of this is running through my mind as I make the approach. What does is that I want to land on schedule and that I do not want to land on a runway with a following wind of 7 knots. This eliminates the landing on 04 to which ATC assigns me, so I cancel my landing intentions and go for 08 instead. At a visibility of 10 miles visibility is not bad but not good either and the high ground of Honolulu appears through the murk. At Flaps 60 and with gear down, the rmi needles indicate the direction of the runway.
More or less lined up, as the ILS shows, I am a little startled to see a Range Station in the middle distance and the runway beyond it. The charts supplied with the Cal Classic Hawaii scenery show that this was indeed the location of the Range Station by 1960, it apparently having been moved from its earlier position on Pacific Heights. The frequency of 344 is, of course, the same.
Once over the Station (the rmi needle now points backwards) and about to land.
And parked with engines off. Scenery Hawaii 1959 by Cal Classic.
'Ladies and Gentlemen. Welcome to Honolulu', and my stewardess reminds the passengers of the date, just in case they have not quite grasped the nature of the International Date Line. We took off three minutes ahead of schedule and the wheels touched the runway five minutes ahead of it. Flight time 6:58. 6,219 lbs of fuel left. On the whole I prefer not to have to repeat flights as long as this, but I did enjoy both of them.