Aspen Missed Approach Localiser request.

  • The localizer is there, it just can't be received from that side. If you fly south east past the localizer on the mountain then you can receive it. As if the simulated antenna is rotated by 180 degrees and faces the wrong direction... but then again it's the back course so it's probably right, just no signal strength if you're on the back side of the station. I'll check if we can change this.


    Edit: It's not an easy fix because this would affect other ILS'es. It wouldn't be as much of a problem if each runway of one airport would get a unique ILS frequency. But since e.g. KLAX uses the same ILS frequency for multiple runways it's not as easy as just activating the back course.

  • Thanks Jan, I get the impression that in the US localiser back courses often are not suppressed but as you say this would be hard to feature with the automatic orientation of two direction localiser frequencies in Aerofly.


    Having to provide reverse sensing means that a normal localiser set up on 123 degrees inbound would not work properly. Flying 303 degrees outbound on a HSI setup on this 123 degrees ‘front course’ would provide correct sensing but it would not be an authentic simulation of the real situation, it would also give conventional reverse sensing on an ordinary VOR/ILS instrument when flying 303 degrees outbound.


    A short route from the fixes SKIER to LINDZ shown on a nav display map is a close approximation.

  • A LOC-DME instrument flying approach has no glideslope. The plane is initially descended on a calculated 3.0 degree descent with the underlined levels being exceeded or held until the DME range has been passed, for example FIMSO is not below 12,300 feet until 9 miles is passed. After the last DOYPE fix a very steep 6.59 degree loss of hight is needed, perhaps requiring a descending visual circuit to position for a landing on the chosen runway.


    The visual limits for this circling maneuvre approach are extremely high compared to a straight in ILS because of the nearby high ground. Three miles visibility and a minimum descent hight of over two thousand feet above the runway is shown on this LOC-DME approach plate.


    An ILS with a glideslope could have much lower limits but an ILS would need to guarantee considerable clearance from terrain well off to the side of the centreline. That is not possible at Aspen.

  • A LOC-DME instrument flying approach has no glideslope. The plane is initially descended on a calculated 3.5 degree descent with the underlined levels being exceeded or held until the DME range has been passed, for example FIMSO is not below 12,300 feet until 9 miles is passed. After the last DOYPE fix a very steep 6.59 degree loss of hight is needed, perhaps requiring a descending visual circuit to position for a landing on the chosen runway.

    Thank you. I learned something today. :)

    I’ve even never spotted at the flight plan maker that there are LOC and ILS frequencies. My eyes read LOC as ILS. :S

    It’s nice because on day I told to myself that LOC only could exist. Well they really exist so. And It’s clearly written.

    Regards :*