Sjaak writes:
> I guess that's true and that the appropriate approach from STAR to runway is
> called a "transistion", as what I found out this morning.
Yup. A transition is an entry or exit point for a procedure. A STAR, for
example, has one or more transition fixes via which the STAR procedure is
entered from en-route flight, and runway approaches have transitions (although
they are not called as such, they are called IAFs) through which they are
entered from STARs, and so on.
The approaches are the most rigid procedures; they are supposed to be followed
exactly. STARs are more likely guidelines: in theory you follow them
precisely, but ATC will often make minor modifications as you come in. The
same is true for instrument departures (SIDs), which you may follow exactly,
or which you may follow with ATC modifications.
> It took me quite a
> while before I found out that I had to update the SID/STAR textfiles for
> EHAM and EDDB within the PMDG-directory in order te be able to select an
> appropriate transition. Using a transition, I believe, enables the aircraft
> to do an automated landing, but I'll have to study on that some more;-)
STARs and SIDs change fairly frequently, every few months in some cases.
Approaches may also change, albeit not as often. SIDs can change with similar
frequency.
In contrast, actual navaids and waypoints change much more rarely.
You don't need a transition or any published procedure to do an autoland. All
you need is an aircraft capable of doing an autoland, and an ILS with glide
slope. In reality, the ILS approach must be certified for autoland; in
simulation, all ILS approaches are suitable for autoland. (The real life
certification is required to make sure that real-world equipment is within
acceptable tolerances, but since everything always works perfectly in
simulation, any ILS will do in the sim.)
>> Stay informed about: How program FMC between STAR and rwy 
FAQ
Profile
Private Messages
Log in
