VQPR(Paro) APPR RNAV-Z15 into mountain

The part of approach after fix PR818 is too far to North-West so you fly into mountains.
The fixes are in wrong places.
Checked with 2101 airac.

Yeah, just came hear to report the same. Also on 2101. The waypoints are all over the place and would fly you in the mountain.

I captured a screenshot ingame, but I accidently made a new screenshot, so I lost the planning. But with my excellent painting skills I mimicked the route as it was drawn on my A320 FBW.

So it was too far north over the path, and then had near 90 degrees turns in the valley which also ended up going out the valley instead of to the airport.

Now that I think about it, the waypoints also had different names than listed on the chart. I.e. PR816 wasn’t there.

The strange thing is that it does seem to be correct when I use Navigraph data in LittleNavMap to draw it out… so maybe a 320 (FBW) problem?

Hi Mark,
the problem is indeed the FBW A320 which is currently still using the same flightplan logic as the sim. The flightplan logic in the sim has limitations - specially the link between STARs and approaches, where the flightpath will be changed (truncate flightpath) in most of the cases, waypoints will be removed, or legs will be interpreted wrong …

And the last point is the reason here - the sim (and therefore the current version of the FBW A320) doesn´t interpret RF-legs (radial to fix legs) correctly. This is not a FBW A320 issue because they are using only the underlying engine in the sim but it´s more a sim issue.

When you try to plan this on the worldmap, you see exactly your great painted red line (you should switch from a simmer to an painter :joy:). When you now look on the flightplan you see only two really waypoints for this approach: PR818 and PR810 … all other waypoints between these two waypoints are existing but will not be used by the planner due any calculation-error in their engine. You see the path very strange around these waypoints.

So, in short words:
Sim issue sorry, FBW A320 uses the sim-engine yes and therefore the same effect, but the guys are working on an implementation of the Working-Title CJ4 flightplan module and when this is done, you will like this approach and the mountains are there where they should be :slight_smile:

One tip:
Try the same with the Working-Title CJ4 (stable release), you will see a BIG enhancement and you will see, that they interpret the data correctly (by the the same for LNM - LittleNavMap also interpret the data correctly and therefore you see a perfect flightpath). So, it´s an sim-interpretation issue rather than a navdata issue.

Here how the same procedure looks in the WT CJ4:




… and here all these legs on the ND:

All waypoints are there, in place and the flightpath looks like it should … :wink: and that´s because this mod don´t use the internal sim flightplan engine.


1 Like

Hi Richard,

Thanks for your fast and very detailed answer! I’ll try with the CJ4 indeed. With how my manual landing went with the a320 I might be a better painter than pilot :stuck_out_tongue: .

Just verified that it’s correct in tje CJ4… however, I don’t understand the approach… The approach says to be exactly at 10200 at PR808, but that’s above the airport. How are you supposed to use this approach? It’s always too high it seems.

1 Like

IRL they only land while VFR so PR808 alt restriction is disregarded (only MAP situation I think).
Thanks for checking this :slight_smile:

This topic was automatically closed 5 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.