Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 27, 2008 17:43:59 GMT -5
We can do all the standard approaches in F's. ie. ILs, NDB's and VOR's along with the new GPS but Gps came long after the props. What I'm wondering, is it possible to do a G.C.A. approach in F's 9 and if so how is it activated.
|
|
|
Post by jesse on Nov 27, 2008 18:18:05 GMT -5
That would be a nice feature of FS9, but I don't think such a program has been devised. This would require ground controllers monitoring your flight, and issuing you corrections in your verticle and horizontal direction of flight. I am not a programmer so I don't know how that would be accomplished. I am a retired USAF GCA Operator, and it is my opinion only that FS9 engine is not designed for duplex operation other than your ATC instructions.
Jesse
|
|
|
Post by Tom/CalClassic on Nov 27, 2008 21:21:29 GMT -5
Hi,
I don't think there is anything available for FS9 at this point.
Remember that "You do not need to respond to any further communications" was a typical statement from a GCA controller, so it's not really duplex after that (the actual approach).
I used to have an FS98 adventure that included Kevin Trinkle intoning "You are right of course, you are above the glide slope". It was a lot of fun making the approach just on the basis of Kevin's oral instructions. I assume a panel gauge could issue those instructions today. It didn't specify the amount you were off course, though.
Take care,
|
|
|
Post by emfrat on Nov 28, 2008 0:44:28 GMT -5
"You are right of course, you are above the glide slope". ;D IIRC, this phrase was only used after the pilot had very politely pointed out that the GCA controller had only just said he was below the glide slope. Sorry, Tom, it's my Irish blood that does it ! Seriously though, Muggins' Guide to ILS Meters says "The dot in the middle is where you are; where the needles cross is where you should be". In FS, the ILS already feeds into the APR setting of autopilots, and I have a Connie panel (FSDZ I think) with left/right lamps active when an ILS is tuned. So, said he from the depths of his ignorance, if XML can carry out an "If...then" test to produce a tyre-chirp sound at touchdown, surely it is not a hugely difficult task to call one of a selection of stock phrases, based on the position of the ILS needles on an undisplayed gauge ? "You are above glideslope, right of track" "You are above glideslope, closing track" "You are on glideslope, left of track" "You are below glideslope, on track" "you are on glideslope, on track, 800 QFE" and so on. I am sure Jesse, with his wealth of experience, can advise on the correct phraseology and enunciation - e.g. were "left,left" and "ri-i-i-ght" used for clarity, and "steady" used to indicate a fine adjustment? ATB (and a Happy Thanksgiving to all of you) MikeW
|
|
|
Post by jesse on Nov 28, 2008 9:50:51 GMT -5
That is very true. The wording used during the GCA run was fixed by regulations. On the initial callup, the aircraft was directed to a specific location, given a couple of turn instructions to identify the aircraft. The PPI operator at this time was the sole communicator with the pilot. He would give the pilot instructions and the pilot would acknowledge. After a point on the scope was reached on the downwind leg, the PPI operator informed the pilot that he was being turned over to the Final Controller. When the Final Controller took over he notified the pilot that "This is your Final Controller; you need not acknowledge any further transmissions. He would then issue the necessary order to place the aircraft on Glide Slope and Azimuth.
He would indicate the pilot was left or right of course and would give him corrective turns in degrees. etc., turn to a heading of 185 degrees, you are approaching the centerline,and then give incremental changes to bring the aircraft on course. For the glide slope, he would indicate the plane was either high or low, and would advise the pilot to adjust your rate of descent if he was high or low. All the way down final the controller kept the pilot advised as to his position, You are on course, you are on glide slope and when the aircraft was close to the threshold, the pilot was instructed to take over visually and land your airplane.
In the early days of GCA when I was at Tucson, AZ commercial flights used our military base Davis-Monthan AFB as the airport at Tucson was under construction. We only served American Airlines at that time. On the approach to DM, the pilot would call in over the Vail marker for landing if coming West from El Paso, and if coming from Phoenix, over the Red Rock marker. Since GCA monitored the flights, we would ask the pilot if he would like to make a practice GCA approach. A few times their reply would be; No Thanks, GCA....we have passengers on board this trip. A real confidence builder. ;D
Jesse
|
|
|
Post by jimmyfingers on Nov 28, 2008 10:56:00 GMT -5
Being a tactical Navy guy in the late 70's-80's, the GCA was our only precision approach on the beach. The non-precision option was the TACAN(good) or the NAVY UHF NDB(useless).
Jesse's description is of course perfect. The only thing that I would add is that we referred to the Navy GCAs as "water soluble". They worked great when the weather was good, but always seemed to go down when you really needed them. I remember Key West as being particularly bad.
The Navy GCA controllers were very good though. As long as their equipment worked and you flew their commands, they could get you right onto the runway.
We were jealous of the USAF dudes because they actually had ILS-what a concept.
But it was a different story at the boat-that's what we born for. We had TACAN, ILS and ACLS (Automatic Carrier Landing System). If need be, the ACLS could be used like a GCA to get you to minimums (200'). We had a Mode 3 (no cockpit indication or actual lock on) or Mode 2 Talk-down (ACLS radar lock but no cockpit indication). Of course, my preferred choice, especially at night, was a Mode 1--fully coupled auto-throttles and autopilot to touchdown. [The Hornet, F-4 and A-7 made excellent auto-lands. The A-6 and F-14 were fair. The poor Hummer dudes didn't have the option.]
In any case, it would seem a gauge could be built to key off the ILS freq and needle position. The GPWS gauges already have the "Glideslope" caution. Just change the .wav to "below glidepath, reduce descent".
Now you talented gauge designers--get busy!
jim
|
|
|
Post by jesse on Nov 28, 2008 12:22:27 GMT -5
Jim, in the beginning when we were using the old Gilfillan Brothers AN/MPN-1, we were also water soluble. If it rained, we were up the creek without the proverbial paddle. However, the sharp minds came up with a solution in the CPN-4 and the MPN-11. Circular Polarization. We never had a rain problem again.
Jesse
|
|
._.. _._ ._..
DC-3
'Glory Days' Whiteman,AFB,Mo 1956-59
Posts: 37
|
Post by ._.. _._ ._.. on Dec 4, 2008 12:41:19 GMT -5
In response to Jesse's "The wording used during the GCA run was fixed by regulations " It reminds me of (and I will never forget) flying into Torrejon AFB, Spain from Lajes in the Azores late at night in March 1959. We were on a GCA approach in a driving rainstorm. The operator said the following "Sir, you are DESPERATELY low" Everyone on the crew was looking out the windows hoping to see some ground. Anyway, the landing (KC97-F) was successful and the next morning after the WX cleared, I looked up at all the mountains that surrounded the base, and just smiled and gained a little more respect for Ground Controllers. Did the Ground Controller break regulations.....Ha!
|
|
|
Post by Tom/CalClassic on Dec 4, 2008 13:16:12 GMT -5
OK, I finally decided to figure out what your Morse code is. Your initials, I assume?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 8, 2008 18:51:20 GMT -5
Some of us used thies approches and at times were thankfull that thay were available and working well, thanks to the operators, ya sometimes our ears were not tuned to the language they were speaking but all in all i think this might be a fun approch in the sim to have.
|
|