Makerwys and dual ILS

[srcooke]

Hello John/Pete,

Should makerwys v4.873 be capturing dual ILS entries for a single runway where they exist eg EDDN EDDF.

Runways.txt has the second entry missing although these are contained in the AFCAD and can be tuned on the NAV radio.

Here is the EDDN entry for the addon scenery:

          Runway 10 /28  centre: N49:29:55.4486  E011:04:39.3506  1046ft
              Start 10 : N49:30:01.7655  E011:03:35.1902  1046ft Hdg: 98.6T, Length 8858ft
              Computed start 10 : Lat 49.500553 Long 11.059102
              Start 28 : N49:29:49.1317  E011:05:43.5096  1046ft Hdg: 278.6T, Length 8858ft
              Computed start 28 : Lat 49.496922 Long 11.096093
              Hdg: 98.600 true (MagVar 3.200), Concrete (Transparent), 8858 x 243 ft
              Primary ILS ID = INUE
              Primary ILS: INUE  109.55 Hdg: 98.6 , Flags: GS DME BC "ILS/DME 10"
              Secondary ILS ID = INUW
              Secondary ILS: INUW  109.10 Hdg: 278.6 , Flags: GS DME BC "CAT III ILS/DME 28"
              *** Runway *** EDDN0100 Lat 49.500553 Long 11.059102 Alt 1046 Hdg 95 Len 8858 Wid 243 ILS 109.55, Flags: GS DME BC
              *** Runway *** EDDN0280 Lat 49.496922 Long 11.096093 Alt 1046 Hdg 275 Len 8858 Wid 243 ILS 109.10, Flags: GS DME BC

 

 

 

[Pete Dowson]

1 hour ago, srcooke said:

Should makerwys v4.873 be capturing dual ILS entries for a single runway where they exist eg EDDN EDDF.

Runways.txt has the second entry missing although these are contained in the AFCAD and can be tuned on the NAV radio.

I don't know. I've never heard of twin ILS's for aone approach. Why would that be? Which would you choose and why?

What program makes those displays of details?

I expect that once MakeRwys have found one ILS it wouldn't search for another. but the code is now very old and convoluted and I'd really need a lot more details to delve into it.

Are those Add-on airports you find these in, if so which ones?

Pete

 

[srcooke]

Frankfurt has had dual ILS configuration for its new 07L/25R runway I guess since its opening. The preferred 'Y' approach has a steeper glidepath at 3.2deg.

Nuerenburg has a separate LOC and ILS approach, possibly for redundancy.

KORD 10R has dual ILS approaches with one been an offset.

 

Some scenery addons such as Aerosoft EDDF are supplied with the dual freq, others not. They are contained in AIRAC data and supported by some addons such as iFly.

Personally I use Herve Sors Airport Inspector to add the missing entries.

 

It was a query Pete as to whether makerwys was looking for these.

[Pete Dowson]

18 minutes ago, srcooke said:

Some scenery addons such as Aerosoft EDDF are supplied with the dual freq, others not

I  have that one.

18 minutes ago, srcooke said:

They are contained in AIRAC data

Do you really mean the AIRAC stuff updated by the likes of Navigraph and Aerosoft's AIRAC service? MakeRwys only gets ILS data from the AFD BGLs .

19 minutes ago, srcooke said:

I use Herve Sors Airport Inspecto

Is that where those pix you added came from?

20 minutes ago, srcooke said:

It was a query Pete as to whether makerwys was looking for these.

Evidently not, as you proved in the data you showed. As I said, since I didn't know you could have multiple ILS's for the same runway MakeRwys would not be likely to scan further once it found one. But I wouldn't know exactly what goes on without examining the code and checking an actual BGL containing such data.

Would it be important for MakeRwys to include this data? I assume it would mean double entries in the assorted Runways files it produces. I don't want to change the format as too many programs depend on it. Also it would depend how those programs assimilate the data. If they are only expecting one ILS would the order in the files be important -- would they take the first and ignore the second, or would the second override the first?

It could be a bit of a nightmare and not something ot be entered into lightly.

BTW, I'll soon release version 4.88. We found that many recent airports (most of the UK2000 ones for instance) have the runway HOLD POINTS set as "NO DRAW" -- they are invisible. Why Gary has done this we don't know. Really it should be applied only to Grass and Gravel taxiways.

Anyway, this type of hold point uses a different code in the BGLs, one not recognised by MakeRwys as a Hold Point. The same applies to ILS Hold Points. I've fixed this is 4.88 and when testing is finished I will be releasing it.

Pete

 

[srcooke]

My reference to the AIRAC was to indicate these approaches exist and are available to the sim user should entry also be included in the afcad.

Yes the images are from the Airport Inspector, this allows you to easily apply the navaid again using AIRAC data.

As this was more of a query Pete I wouldn't spend time on adding a function unless a developer requests it. It was an observation the runways.txt file whilst looking at data with a dual ILS that I had configured. I can however forward the afcads if you wish.

I would imaging the 'NO DRAW' is used to facilitate the AI holding point, not too far away from the runway, the actual drawn line been placed by a .bgl file at the correct location.

[Pete Dowson]

39 minutes ago, srcooke said:

I would imaging the 'NO DRAW' is used to facilitate the AI holding point, not too far away from the runway, the actual drawn line been placed by a .bgl file at the correct location.

Good point. But in the airports I've looked at I don't there are any hold short lines. But I can check again. Also whilst I see more hold short points defined that I would have thought were essential, wouldn't the AI hold at every one, not just the last before the runway?

Also the default automatically drawn lines have always looked okay to me. Seems a lot more work to superimpose thrid party ones.

Thanks.

Pete

 

[srcooke]

I took a look at UK2000 EGPF D1 entry, the hold short line and wigwags are a lot further back from the runway compared to the hold short no draw entry of the afcad.

If this were a runway start position it could well be too far back for AI and they would not depart.

[Pete Dowson]

13 minutes ago, srcooke said:

I took a look at UK2000 EGPF D1 entry, the hold short line and wigwags are a lot further back from the runway compared to the hold short no draw entry of the afcad.

If this were a runway start position it could well be too far back for AI and they would not depart.

Did you actually see the lines on the ground? That's my real problem. I'll have another look. EGCC is my home airport and will be quick to re-check ...

Pete

 

[srcooke]

Yes the scenery hold short and wigwags exist but not at the 'no draw' position.

[srcooke]

EGCC hold short at F1 and AFCAD position

 

[Pete Dowson]

18 minutes ago, srcooke said:

Yes the scenery hold short and wigwags exist but not at the 'no draw' position.

Okay ... just loading up to check at UK2000 EGCC ...

... Ah, yes!!! See them!

so all is okay -- except that ATC programs which provide taxi onstructions will get the wrong hold positions as there's no way they can "see" the visibly marked hold shorts! 😞

Pete

 

... 

[srcooke]

Indeed and is the reason you may not get a takeoff clearance when on the visible hold-short and have to nudge a little further forward.

[herve_sors]

Quote

As I said, since I didn't know you could have multiple ILS's for the same runway MakeRwys would not be likely to scan further once it found one. But I wouldn't know exactly what goes on without examining the code and checking an actual BGL containing such data.

Hi Pete,

It is always possible to include 2 ILSs associated to a single runway end since, as you know, ILSs are not coded in the same section of the BGL file than airport data. Both are functional in the simulator. However, the problem is that, the runway record includes at offset 0x0C (for the primary end) and 0x10 (for the secondary one) a single ILS identifier. I don't know the possible effects of choosing one or the other in such a case but it may affect the choice of some approaches by the simulator ATC and by some 3rd party FMCs. Anyway, just reading the runway record in such cases cannot indeed guarantee there's no other ILS associated to it. For that the only way would be to read the full 0x13 section (VOR/ILSs) and determine for each ILS both the associated airport (bit 11-31 at 0x24 of main ILS record) AND runway it is linked to (0x06 and 0x07 of localizer subrecord). May be it will complicate things quite a lot considering the very few BGLs that include such dual ILSs for a single runway end.

Hervé  

[Pete Dowson]

Thanks for the further detail Hervé. 
I think I'll leave it be for now. This area of MakeRwys coding is complicated enough (in the "ugh!" sense) and i'll only mess things up.

Pete