Print Page | Close Window

Gaps in FPL between STAR and approach

Printed From: Avidyne
Category: Avidyne General
Forum Name: IFD 5 Series & IFD 4 Series Touch Screen GPS/NAV/COM
Forum Description: Topics on Avidyne's IFD 5 Series and IFD 4 Series Touch Screen GPS/NAV/COM
URL: http://forums.avidyne.com/forum_posts.asp?TID=2678
Printed Date: 17 Sep 2024 at 6:07pm
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 12.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com


Topic: Gaps in FPL between STAR and approach
Posted By: jhbehrens
Subject: Gaps in FPL between STAR and approach
Date Posted: 12 Aug 2024 at 8:38am
On recent flights, I have often noticed there was a gap in the flight plan between the same two waypoints, one the termination point of an arrival, and the other the IAF of the connecting departure. Moreover these could not be manually deleted or 'connected' with a softkey press as is often the case.

Some trial and error showed me the way to remove the gap, is to set the same altitude restriction on both waypoints. As soon as there is any difference, this gap is introduced.

In Europe, there are quite a lot of examples where the published altitude restriction on the same waypoint, when in the START and when in the approach, is different. I know that doesn't make a lot of sense, but there you go. As a result of that, a gap is always introduced and can only be removed by tweaking the restrictions manually.

Although I understand the logic behind this heuristic, I believe this is non optimal behaviour, as an unconnectable gap means you need to remember to manually sequence to the second instance of that waypoint when on the leg to the first instance, without any warning or prompt to say this is required.

A better choice would be not to introduce this gap in the first place, or at least have some logic that forced the pilot to acknowledge or act on the gap.

Can this be considered for an upcoming release?




Replies:
Posted By: AviSteve
Date Posted: 12 Aug 2024 at 12:02pm
The IFD generates an alert when approaching a Gap In Route, which acts a a prompt to remind you that something needs to be done.

-------------
Steve Lindsley
Avidyne Engineering


Posted By: jhbehrens
Date Posted: 15 Aug 2024 at 10:25am
I understand, I still think you can do better. The IFD doesn't seem to ever do 'at altitude', it's always 'at or above' even if the procedure says 'at'. So if the end of the STAR the IFD says 'Not below FL050' and at the beginning of the Approach the IFD says 'Not below 3800ft' (a real example I had last week landing at EDQM), why introduce the gap? These two values don't conflict.


Posted By: AviSteve
Date Posted: 15 Aug 2024 at 10:02pm
There are underlying software design reasons for introducing that rule, but I understand what you're saying.  Best I can offer is to say that we'll take it under advisement and see if there's some way we can tweak the design to support it. 

-------------
Steve Lindsley
Avidyne Engineering



Print Page | Close Window

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 12.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Copyright ©2001-2018 Web Wiz Ltd. - https://www.webwiz.net