|Anonymous | Login||2019-03-19 15:54 CET|
|My View | View Issues | Change Log | Roadmap|
|View Issue Details|
|ID||Project||Category||View Status||Date Submitted||Last Update|
|0000170||124thATC||[All Projects] Landing||public||2016-03-26 17:36||2016-08-08 02:30|
|Platform||x64||OS||(All OS)||OS Version||(All versions)|
|Target Version||Fixed in Version|
|Summary||0000170: Unfavorable choice of runways / suggestion for work around|
|Description||The plugin does not yet consider all important factors for choosing the runway for approach and landing. Please see the screenshot with the route and approach of my flight today (LOWW to LOWS). The plugin chose runway 33 for landing at LOWS, however, in this situation actually runway 15 would be more obvious and much better for following reasons:|
1) the last waypoint (SBG/VOR) is better aligned for runway 15 approach
2) runway 15 provides an ILS approach, which runway 33 does not have
3) the wind actually was better for landing on runway 15 (110/05)
4) runway 15 can be approached without high terrain and overflying the city
5) whenever the wind allows, all approaches in LOWS will be on RW15
As the plugin in the current version is not aware of the terrain below and the calculated approach approximation was directing me into high mountain area along with descent commands, this flight could have ended (virtually) deadly, if following ATC instructions (which I finally refused to do).
There are certainly some factors, which the plugin aleady may detect (ILS runway, wind, last waypoint close to runway) and consider them, others (such as terrain or preferred runways) currently could not be detected by the plugin, so let me suggest a work around (see additional information section), especially used for airports with terrain around and preferred runways.
|Steps To Reproduce||Flight plan:|
LOWW - SITNI - BAGSI - MATIG - SBG/VOR - LOWS
|Additional Information||Suggestion for work around:|
When filing the flight plan right beside the departure and destination airport you can (fully optional) enter your preferred runway for departure and landing. The plugin will use that information by following logic (applies for DEPARTURE runway and ARRIVAL runway):
a) if no value is filled in, the plugin will simply select the runway same way it was up to now
b) if a preferred runway is entered, the plugin will use this preferred one, if the actual wind allows (no tail wind higher than 10 knots)
c) in case the actual tail wind exceeds 10 knots for this manual entered preferred runway, the plugin will override it and choose the matching runway itself, same way as it was up to now
This would help to solve many problems, at least until the plugin reaches a state, where all factors (terrain, airport flows, etc.) can be considered for choosing the runway.
|Tags||No tags attached.|
|Attached Files|| LOWS_RW33.jpg [^] (474,201 bytes) 2016-03-26 17:36|
FlightPlanWindow.jpg [^] (61,492 bytes) 2016-03-26 17:51
124thATC_Log.txt [^] (19,346 bytes) 2016-03-27 00:07 [Show Content]
FlightInformationNotUpdatingAnymore.jpg [^] (64,820 bytes) 2016-03-27 00:10
|Just added a screenshot showing the "preferred runway" fields in the flight plan menu. So these are just the "preferred" runways, which the plugin may choose, if the wind does not command some other runway. If this preferred runway is not safe due to high tail winds, the plugin will override that choice.|
|Just noticed the "change runway" function on the approach (with the first runway announcement "expect runway ..."). I´m not quite sure by now if I saw it right (clicked "Readback" too fast). I will check this first in another flight, especially if the STAR is adapted properly when changing the runway. This also would help on this issue, however, with the preferred runway option we could avoid, that ATC is suggesting a senseless runway in the first place.|
Ok, finished the flight (same as above) and the "change runway" function at approach is really there, however, it is not working properly. After changing the runway for approach, ATC confirms the new runway, but then there are no more heading instructions and also the flight information (distance to waypoint) is not displayed and updating anymore (see new screenshot).
It appears, that the "change runway" is offered AFTER the plugin already calculated the approximation or chose the STAR for the approach, so the runway change has no impact, which of course is causing problems, since ATC already sent you to the wrong approach course.
See attached log file. At 22:50:52 ATC sends me to the approximation/approach course 220. About one minute later at 22:51:47 I get the information about the runway 33 to be expected. Shortly after that at 22:51:59 I request runway 15 instead. From then I just get descent instructions, but no more heading instructions.
Interesting research, Michael! I agree, there should be a solid plausible structure regarding runway-changes.
However, I disagree for any "workaround" regarding unfavourable landing-runways, for what ever reason there may be(wind, hills, techically etc.). The solution for all this is already available:
1.) Airport Flows ! They are extremely powerful, as long as the author is aware what he's doing (I encourage you, we can develop one for LOWS)
2.) Approach Files, those are processed anyway already, even only partly. I am confident, as time goes by, the interpretation of all approaches anywhere can be done. Important is, in the approach files there are also ALTITUDES!
So, combine the vectors in the approach files with available altitudes and look at the airport flows, if available. voila...
The workaround you suggest may seem as a for-the-meantime-solution. But only for you with local knowledge at this particular a/p. It will fail (as an example) in RCTP. There you can insert, what ever runway you may "prefer" for landing. In any case, coming from any direction, your chance is 50% to smash into the mountains north of Taipei if you dont read approach and altitudes, provided in the approach files.
Same applies to LSZH, Kai Tak (my favourite test object), LOWI, and even to an obvious harmless(?)airport like EDDF (Taunus!)
The list is too long to ignore and being treated as exceptions.
|2016-03-26 17:36||AdvMichael||New Issue|
|2016-03-26 17:36||AdvMichael||File Added: LOWS_RW33.jpg|
|2016-03-26 17:51||AdvMichael||File Added: FlightPlanWindow.jpg|
|2016-03-26 17:56||AdvMichael||Note Added: 0000062|
|2016-03-26 21:33||AdvMichael||Note Added: 0000063|
|2016-03-27 00:07||AdvMichael||Note Added: 0000067|
|2016-03-27 00:07||AdvMichael||File Added: 124thATC_Log.txt|
|2016-03-27 00:10||AdvMichael||File Added: FlightInformationNotUpdatingAnymore.jpg|
|2016-03-28 16:48||ron||Note Added: 0000069|
|2016-08-08 02:30||ntnll||Status||new => assigned|
|2016-08-08 02:30||ntnll||Assigned To||=> ntnll|
|Copyright © 2000 - 2019 MantisBT Team|