Hi
This is so far from being accurate that it is just not funny anymore
The fact is if you fly the NEO from say Leeds or Manchester to Newcastle the flight plan in FS takes you over the top of the airport and back round over approaching traffic.
Now I live on the flight path approaching final approach and they DO NoT fly to the airport
Ditto, I just create a custom flight plan in LNM and come in over Blyth (sometimes if Iām in something small I can come in over Wallsend and do a short final).
Xbox. But I fly manually over Shields and then back on AP
I think I may be able to answer this one.
MSFS uses āofficialā approach procedures for instrument approaches based on published charts.
If you look at the published ILS approach chart for EGNT (Newcastle) the procedure starts more or less over the airfield at the NT NDB.
In practice the ATC at Newcastle will be providing a āvectors to finalā for the approach instead of having the aircraft fly the full procedure.
I suspect that if the radar service at Newcastle were to ever be unavailable then all approaching aircraft would be asked to fly full procedural approaches, which would then mean that they would be flying to the NT NDB before commencing the procedure.
The link for all available aerodrome charts for the UK is:
https://www.aurora.nats.co.uk/htmlAIP/Publications/2022-01-27-AIRAC/html/index-en-GB.html
You can select the relevant airport from the list on the left (AD2 Aerodromes) and then find the relevant instrument charts there.
I think MSFS can make aviation seem so easy that the deeper aspects of real aviation are hidden from casual users, by design.
It allows players to jump into airliners and fly IFR routes without the need to even have the charts or any knowledge of airspace, radar services, planning etc. Itās all things to all users.
Navigraph actually allows a direct transition into most approaches which avoids the (to a non expert) odd ones which do a loop from the airport (there are several in the UK).
Unfortunately msfs does not allow these direct transitions to be selected (even when using the g1000 and g3000 mods).
Sometimes there is a rnav approach with more āsensibleā transitions which can be used, either all the way to landing or you can manually select the ils Once lined up.
Richard
If itās any consolation itās not just Newcastle. I fly into Glasgow IFR and every time I am vectored over GOW VOR at the Airport iitself. Only then am I vectored to do R23 or R5 approach which is crazy, and does not reflect reality at all except maybe as described above doing āfull proceduresā as opposed to realistic ones. There are fairly normal every day approaches that are never modelled in FS flight planner STARS for certain airports.
Itās maybe not quite right to say a full procedure is āunrealisticā as they are real world procedures, albeit rarely used.
You can usually request a different approach and select vectors to final or simply vector yourself. In in SIM ATC will catch up once you are on the approach.
Agree, but FS is supposed to be as real as it gets not as rare as it getsš. Manual approaches are the only way to introduce every day realism it would seem.
āReturningā to EGNT (my home base) IFR any procedural sim-generated approach usually ends in failure and I almost always resort to manual control to place myself on the ILS.
By using external sources to position myself could be regarded as ācheatingā of course although if I pretend Iām being given vectoring itās okay. The sim ATC attempts at vectoring are laughable!
Well the whole nav and ATC systems will be overhauled by working title so Iām sure we will see some improvement. Or just fly vatsim.
Manchester is the same.
Problem is that there is no direct procedure published, there is a direct route for the RNP approach (obviously) which doesnāt pass over the airport, all the conventional approaches in Newcastle are, well, very conventional 
. The Brits are quite far behind when it comes to PBN procedures, most parts of Europe have arrival routes nowadays terminating at the IAF which is located on the extended centerline. Not so in the UK, a lot if places are still heavily relying on vectors.
FWIW I fly around the UK a lot using IFR and there are work arounds in using the add on avionics available, e.g. WT mods or the FBW A320 or the Heavy Division add on for the 787.
Using these add ons, even with the procedure loaded into the FMC, it is possible to enter a flight plan with a direct route to an approach and then either eliminate the waypoints of the procedure that are not desired or at the appropriate point in the flight plan use the ādirect toā option to by pass the legs that would take the aircraft over the airfield.
I must admit to finding and using ādirect toā it does work wonders for adjustments to FLPL on the fly and crucially it is fast to implement/engage. Used it in the CRJ most recently.
Just an update. If you plan you flight from say EGGD to EGNT via world map in RNAV the flight plan actually follows the correct flight path (I know that as I live under it)
I actually said to my missus āif you open the back door I am flying overā yes you guessed itā¦!
This topic was automatically closed 30 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.
