Are you using Developer Mode or made changes in it?
no
Have you disabled/removed all your mods and addons?
yes (all relevant that might impact this scenery)
Brief description of the issue:
The GS part of the ILS on runway 25 is too low (alternatively the elevation of the runway is wrong). Following the GS of the ILS would lead into CFIT (controlled flight into terrain).
Provide Screenshot(s)/video(s) of the issue encountered:
Do you have the same issue if you follow the OP’s steps to reproduce it?
Yes
Provide extra information to complete the original description of the issue:
I flew two different arrival routes to the ILS 25 approach, and both of the final ILS approaches ended in being significantly short of the runway at touchdown. The GS indicator was centered all the way down to the wrong touchdown point. Stock WU airport.
If relevant, provide additional screenshots/video:
Not to say there aren’t issues with some glide slopes being wrong in the sim. But It’s not unusual for an ILS GS to not match up with a visual glide slope indicator (VGSI), either VASI or PAPI, even if they have the same slope gradient. I’ve seen IFR GS’s both above and below the VGSI. That’s because the GS signal is not always broadcast to guide to the same touchdown point at the VGSI. The only way to see that ahead of time is to look at the IFR approach chart.
Most of the IFR charts I have are PDF’s, so I can’t post them here. But you can go to the FlightAware site and pull down the IFR charts for almost all airports in the U.S. (and some others). As an example, pull down the chart for KSEA, ILS/LOC 16R. You’ll see a comment on the profile view that says “VGSI and ILS glidepath not coincident. VGSI angle 3.00/TCH 69”, and below the profile view of the approach it says “GS 3.00/TCH 55”. TCH is Threshold Crossing Height. If you’re in a position to watch the VGSI on an IFR approach, you’ll find The difference in crossing height becomes more and more obvious as you approach the runway and the VGSI will show high, and sometimes low, depending on the difference in crossing height and whether the ILS TCH is higher or lower than the visual TCH.
Regards
Do you have the same issue if you follow the OP’s steps to reproduce it?
Yes. Default EDDS
Provide extra information to complete the original description of the issue:
Voted but I don’t believe it is incorrect glidleslope however. Maybe a runway evelation error as thought here also from 2021…Suspicious for no real reason, but something about the older(time) metar of 9999(29.50) and landing at 1001(29.56). Could it be picking up old metar and not current data? I’d say EDDS is a very popular airport and yet few reports of issue.
If relevant, provide additional screenshots/video:
I think I solved this - it was brought to my attention in my misplaced PAPI wishlist thread. The touchdown zone (TDZ) elevation in the sim is 1253’, which far higher than the published 1181’. Further, there is a terrain “ramp” in the sim about 1500’ prior to runway 25, where it suddenly drops to ~1160.
That ramp does not exist in real life and it is a far more gentle (almost imperceptible) 20’ upslope beginning around 1160’ from the VOR (about .7nm from the approach end) to the threshold at 1181’. Not this ~75’ ramp that occurs over a 500’ distance.
I believe the Glideslope Antenna is set to the correct real-world height, but the terrain and resulting TDZ in the sim are too high, causing both a PAPI disagreement and a glideslope that is actually underground in the sim, resulting in a far too low threshold crossing height (TCH). Diagrams are in my thread, including the investigative work that led to the final conclusion.
For anyone who wants to contribute on this issue, Click on the button below to use this template:
