matthew47 Posted August 25, 2014 Share Posted August 25, 2014 Hello This is for THE wonderful KTVL scenery airport by Misha. 1st off I have AFX and I went into the Orbx KTVL AFCAD and put a check mark where it asks about "Has Glide Path" since I wanted to add a glide path (easier to land when flying the Lear45). I noticed that when I get about 20 to 30 feet off the ground my nose dips down suddenly and I basically do a nose dive into the runway. Is there any other adjustments that I need to make in order that the "Glide Path" is correct? I resent my landing several times to make sure it wasn't something I was doing. For example do I need to make any adjustment to the elevation or range? I did notice in my AFX that my range is slightly different. DME states 27.2 where the glide path is set at 27.0. Perhaps I can try that. Anyways, thought I would ask. I should ask this question in the Sim Flight Forum under AFX as well. Thanks!! Matthew Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Misha Cajic Posted August 26, 2014 Share Posted August 26, 2014 Hi Matthew, It's against the EULA to modify original Orbx files, however I will note this for a possible future update. Nevertheless, let us know if you do get it right and it will be easier for us to implement it Cheers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
matthew47 Posted August 26, 2014 Author Share Posted August 26, 2014 Oh, sorry. I didn't know that I would be modifying a file and being out of compliance. I don't mean to be Insolent. Not sure what the EULA is. Anyway's, I will try to a few things and see what happens. Thanks for your feedback Misha. And, I will let you know. Matthew Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Misha Cajic Posted August 26, 2014 Share Posted August 26, 2014 No worries at all Matthew, it's just in case you wanted to share it, and if something went wrong then we'd have to support it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
matthew47 Posted August 26, 2014 Author Share Posted August 26, 2014 Oh, I see! I'll be transparent about it in here and let everyone know. Is that what you mean by share it? I don't share any of my files with anyone in case if that's what you mean. Matthew Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Misha Cajic Posted August 26, 2014 Share Posted August 26, 2014 By sharing we just mean sharing the modified file for others to use. There's nothing wrong with modifying for your own use but you will be unsupported by doing so. Either way, let us know if you get something working. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
matthew47 Posted August 26, 2014 Author Share Posted August 26, 2014 Cool, got it!! And, will keep you posted! Matthew Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B77X Posted October 29, 2014 Share Posted October 29, 2014 How can I enable this? Thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tttocs Posted October 30, 2014 Share Posted October 30, 2014 Hi Matthew, It's against the EULA to modify original Orbx files, however I will note this for a possible future update. Nevertheless, let us know if you do get it right and it will be easier for us to implement it Cheers Strictly speaking, it would be incorrect to add GS as this approach doesn't feature it IRL. There aren't a lot of airports in the US which have LDA approaches, and one of the things I like about KTVA is that it does feature one. Would prefer to see this kept as it is at the RW airport. I know the original post was a few months back but I'd point out to Matthew that IRL you would have disengaged autopilot long before 20-30' AGL. An LDA approach is a non-aligned approach (and non-precision), and in this specific case, the final 4.4 miles are required to be flown visually, where the pilot would be expected to accomplish the final runway alignment and descent in visual conditions hand flown. I know this is a bit far afield for the support forum, but I offer the above mostly to bolster the argument that a GS should not be implemented on this approach. Scott Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.