Please increase Localizer and Glideslope range

I understand that the localizer may become unreliable past 18 miles, but for it to completely lose reception? C’mon. Please consider upping the range of the localizer and glideslope.

The VOR and NDB rages are also very unrealistically limited in range.

There is a BIG difference between the longer Reception range, the range that the flag operates, and the range that the VOR is certified to be Certified to operate at.work at.

Its probbaly a total waste of time to even discuss this here, until Asobo recognises, and is ready to address the issue.

When they are, there is not shortage of Aviation Professionals that can talk to get get the real world information they will need to correct the current dumbed down, “ex FSX” operation of these ground Nav systems

Navigraph have recently implemented some big improvements on this in AIRAC 2112 - Navigraph Blog � Real-world localizer ranges in MSFS 2020

The navigraph data should be the “Certified” range of these facilities, not the actual range that the instruments in the plane can give an INDICATION of navigational data.

MSFS does a half way decent job in calculating the signal strength from Ground based station, based on their TX Power, range, plane’s elevation etc, and this seems to be used to control any FLAGS – but the trouble is, when the signal is below Flag Threshold, there is still “unreliable” data being received by the plane, but MSFS acts as if that signal is non existent, when it is more than sufficient to be detectable and operate the Nav instruments in a limited way, and hence without a flag.

Any audio on that nav signal should also reflect that signal strength, and become NOISY with increasing range, but still be audible in the noise, when the flag fails to register an acceptable “Certifiable” signal strength.

Then there is the whole matter of what data is nav radio derived, and what data is GPS database generated, and how that is displayed to the pilot. :upside_down_face:

2 Likes