ILS approach at Portland (KPDX) on runway 28L

I've made some crazy ILS approaches in different airports. The visibility was really low, like 1 or 2. The airport should have been closed in real life. It was rainy too and WINDS! OMG, that was so crazy, but I survived. It was fun anyways. I do the same as you by flying with real world weather. It's nice and lovely.

I don't know any file or something that fixes ILS approaches. What was wrong with your ILS approach? Did you have the localizer in the center?

ILS stands for Instrument Landing System. You use your instruments to land.

I had it centered but I landed on the taxiway. My altitude was alright. I wonder if anyone else has had the same problem.

I don't have that problem. Were you far away from the runway or just some degrees? That is strange.

My left wheels were on the grass or dirt and my right wheels were on the taxiway. Does the storm maybe affect it?

Could be.... Maybe you had strong winds. You have to perform a crosswind landing. Did you check the ATIS for the weather?

35 degree crosswind at 5 knots.

That's not much. The winds are calm. So, what could be the reason? Do you have the same problems with other aircraft? Maybe the aircraft you are using has some kind of problem.

I just tried it that one time. In was at Portland (KPDX) It was in the American 737-800. I've flown ILS landings before in that plane with no problem. I'll try it again.

Try the ILS for rnwy 28L at KCMH, Port Columbus International, you'll land to the right in the grass between the rnwy and taxiway. Some of the ILS's are screwed up. You're not the first one to notice this glitch.

I just found another one too. South Lake Tahoe. (KTVL) Is there any updates or anything to fix it?

I didn't know that some ILS's are screwed up. I've never had this problem with ILS.

Agus, bad pilots always blame the ILS! Unlike us who find a runway at the end of it 😉

That was a good one. PH, do you blame the ILS 😉 ? I'm kidding.

Yeah. I still blame the ILS though. But I didn't crash.

mypilot wrote:

Try the ILS approach at Portland (KPDX) on runway 28L. It is slightly off. The visibility there is 1/2 mile today (I always fly with realworld weather) so I had to use the ILS approach. I was right on. No doubt about it. Still I landed on the taxiway and ended up crashing into a 767. Is there any way to fix the ILS approach. Just out of curiosity what does ILS stand for. It is something like instrument landing something.

You did crash following this ILS.
It's hard to fly the ILS with winds, I know. I have problems to, but I always try not to land on the taxiway. If you see that your are going to land on the taxiway go around and try again.

I always blame the ILS but find it quicker to taxi from landing on the taxiway to the terminal rather than landing on the runway....ATC always complain though!! 😂

Agus0404 wrote:

mypilot wrote:

Try the ILS approach at Portland (KPDX) on runway 28L. It is slightly off. The visibility there is 1/2 mile today (I always fly with realworld weather) so I had to use the ILS approach. I was right on. No doubt about it. Still I landed on the taxiway and ended up crashing into a 767. Is there any way to fix the ILS approach. Just out of curiosity what does ILS stand for. It is something like instrument landing something.

You did crash following this ILS.
It's hard to fly the ILS with winds, I know. I have problems to, but I always try not to land on the taxiway. If you see that your are going to land on the taxiway go around and try again.

It was the 767 that made me crash. Not the ILS approach. If it hadn't been for the 767 on the taxi way, I wouldn' of crashed.

Hahaha, you are a funny guy, PH. That way is much faster than taxing to the gate. Hehe, I have to try it 😉

mypilot wrote:

Agus0404 wrote:

mypilot wrote:

Try the ILS approach at Portland (KPDX) on runway 28L. It is slightly off. The visibility there is 1/2 mile today (I always fly with realworld weather) so I had to use the ILS approach. I was right on. No doubt about it. Still I landed on the taxiway and ended up crashing into a 767. Is there any way to fix the ILS approach. Just out of curiosity what does ILS stand for. It is something like instrument landing something.

You did crash following this ILS.
It's hard to fly the ILS with winds, I know. I have problems to, but I always try not to land on the taxiway. If you see that your are going to land on the taxiway go around and try again.

It was the 767 that made me crash. Not the ILS approach. If it hadn't been for the 767 on the taxi way, I wouldn' of crashed.

I understand you, Mypilot. You should try the PH way to taxi. Don't land on the runway, land on the taxiway and that's it. It's easier 😂 And if you crash, blame the ILS! It wasn't your fault...

HERE HERE NOW! I'm a good pilot, on the sim, and in real life. Try the one I discussed earlier. Bad pilot my foot.

We know, leadfoot. We were only joking. I have to try that landing you gave us.

Agus0404 wrote:

mypilot wrote:

Agus0404 wrote:

mypilot wrote:

Try the ILS approach at Portland (KPDX) on runway 28L. It is slightly off. The visibility there is 1/2 mile today (I always fly with realworld weather) so I had to use the ILS approach. I was right on. No doubt about it. Still I landed on the taxiway and ended up crashing into a 767. Is there any way to fix the ILS approach. Just out of curiosity what does ILS stand for. It is something like instrument landing something.

You did crash following this ILS.
It's hard to fly the ILS with winds, I know. I have problems to, but I always try not to land on the taxiway. If you see that your are going to land on the taxiway go around and try again.

It was the 767 that made me crash. Not the ILS approach. If it hadn't been for the 767 on the taxi way, I wouldn' of crashed.

I understand you, Mypilot. You should try the PH way to taxi. Don't land on the runway, land on the taxiway and that's it. It's easier 😂 And if you crash, blame the ILS! It wasn't your fault...

😂 😂

Why don't we just quote EVERYBODY! 😛

Ok, I'm up! 😂 Let's do it.

mypilot wrote:

Agus0404 wrote:

mypilot wrote:

Agus0404 wrote:

mypilot wrote:

Try the ILS approach at Portland (KPDX) on runway 28L. It is slightly off. The visibility there is 1/2 mile today (I always fly with realworld weather) so I had to use the ILS approach. I was right on. No doubt about it. Still I landed on the taxiway and ended up crashing into a 767. Is there any way to fix the ILS approach. Just out of curiosity what does ILS stand for. It is something like instrument landing something.

You did crash following this ILS.
It's hard to fly the ILS with winds, I know. I have problems to, but I always try not to land on the taxiway. If you see that your are going to land on the taxiway go around and try again.

It was the 767 that made me crash. Not the ILS approach. If it hadn't been for the 767 on the taxi way, I wouldn' of crashed.

I understand you, Mypilot. You should try the PH way to taxi. Don't land on the runway, land on the taxiway and that's it. It's easier 😂 And if you crash, blame the ILS! It wasn't your fault...

😂 😂

I do! 😂
I didn't realize it. Sorry. 😂

I tried the Port Columbus approach also and FS9 did center the ILS approach needles so that I was aligned for a landing on the grass off the taxi way.

You all think this is funny but a real world Continental Airlines pilot actually did land on a taxiway instead of the runway at the old Denver-Stapelton airport many years ago. Whats worse, he had Robert Six, at that time the President and CEO of Continental, on board at the time.

I have always wondered what the rest of his and his second officer's careers were like.

If they even had a carreer after that one. Was it their fault or was the ILS approach off like in the flight simulator?

Don't be sorry Mypilot, i just think it's funny to view a post and see this tiling boxes with quotes all down it. 😂

Yeah. It is mind racking!

I find it kind of stupid, that the pilots career would be practically ruined for that. I know he had passengers along with an incredibly expensive airplane but if it was the ILS systems fault then i would have to say that it is stupid to have a ruined career for that case.

Yeah. But would their boss feel the same way as you?

There have through the years been several instances of landings on taxiways, wrong runways etc. At the end of the day it is easily done depending on the airport, conditions but inexcusable at the same time. I was joking of course previously saying bad pilots blame the ILS as in the real world they are regularly calibrated and this would/should not happen. I think the Continental incident was probably like others in the fact that it was good VMC and the taxiway looked like the runway....it happens believe me! I think Sanford Fla. (if I remember correctly) has three runways all the same heading which can be tricky....much easier even when visual to tune the ILS as backup.

There was nothing wrong with the ILS in the Continental case. The aircrew just screwed up. As someone alluded to, professional airline pilots have also landed at the wrong airports or on the wrong runways.

The suggestion another poster had that the ILS should have been tuned and used even on a visual approach is correct. In a previous post, I said that a prudent pilot uses EVERY navigational device available to him/her at all times. Using ILS/VOR/NDB/GPS/LORAN/INS - whatever is available would prevent almost all of these kinds of errors.

The reason a career can get screwed up over something like this is inherent in the term PIC - Pilot In Command. The PIC is responsible for everything that occurs in his/her aircraft that effects the safety of flight. There are some things they cannot do anything about such as maintenance errors on hidden components and unanticipated equipment failures but if the PIC had any way to prevent an accident/incident, that PIC will be held responsible. It can't be any other way and keep the highly safe flight environment we enjoy.

Just to keep everyone feeling safe, I have never seen or heard of an ILS sending a false positioning signal that would mis-align an aircraft on approach. ILS transmitters have self-checking calibration and if there is any problem with the signal, it shuts down automatically. Pilots then have to revert to another type of approach or fly to an alternate depending on conditions and their company's procedures. This false signal problem is just a FS9 bug.

Just to add to Don's usual fact filled posts the ILS can however give false indications when intercepting from above. False lobes can exist above the glide path. An aircraft might intercept one of these erroneous signals when intercepting from above, leading it to the runway on an improper glide path. Rare but it happens which is why (UK) we are brought in below.

There seems to be more than a few of these ILS approaches that
are not quite accurate. I think that the problem lies with the flight sim
programmers. There are many mucho ILS approaches and the Microsoft
people made mistakes-- when they were in a hurry, leaving at the end of
the day, or going to lunch, "scoping out" the bosses secretary, etc. With so much data to program there are bound to be some mistakes. 😕

I landed at Portland on 28L last night. The localiser beams on 28L and 10R are not aligned with the runway! 28R and 10L are. There was a superb piece of software for FS2K and FS2K2 called Easynavs which allowed you to correct (or add) localisers and correct the many misplaced glideslope transmitters but I have seen nothing equivalent for FS2K4.

Mike Moir

Is there a reported glitch on manchester airport runway 6r?

I just landed there and ils glided me in well low, kept hearing "terrain, terrain, terrain".

Or maybe it was just me. Who knows 🙂

I dont think so. I land there all of the time without any problems.

I have a problem with the ILS on runway 8 at EGNS though. That is off so the only way to land safely there is visually.