@zionstrat2
i thought stating the reason and asking you to read the answers on the topic of ils tuning in this thread was enough but i guess i'll try again, i wrote
but that is not done because deviations from the glideslope trigger an automated warning requiring to go around.
also the fms is just not set up to do it. why not? i don't know because aircraft computers need to be programmed and apparently it has not been done.
so basically when doing a visual approach without lnav/vnav guidance (FMS visual) it's not a problem to tune the ils because there is no other approach mode active.
but the fms seems to be not flexible enough to accommodate it properly according to this post
http://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/5...ml#post9829103
also read these posts
http://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/5...ml#post9831663
http://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/5...ml#post9832515
http://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/5...ml#post9832855
and this post
http://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/5...ml#post9833997
and finally i can recommend this very nice post:
http://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/5...ml#post9836345
so it would be nice to have it .... even nicer would be to notice the missing ALSF-II or the missing PAPI.
oh another thing: once you misidentify the runway you might not even look at the ILS indication.
regarding that: observed 2 747s on the VOR22L at JFK with 3 weeks or so in between line up with 22R and go around after the controller caught their error. (observed as in online flight tracking and liveatc)
the procedure lines you up quite well with 22L so the minimums are around 500 ft
but with good visual conditions pilots tend to line up with the runway a lot earlier.
both those approaches where in the daytime.
what would in my opinion be much better (if the radars are sufficiently precise) to give the controller automated warnings about straight lines towards non-runways (22R here would apply as it was an inactive runway).
an international standard about sequenced flashers active for every active runway wouldn't be bad. so no flashers == you don't land.
flashers have the advantage of standing out from other lights at night and being energy efficient enough to make them bright enough for day use and being recognized from far away.
a lot of things would be an improvement, the question is which are going to be an actual improvement to safety. also you could argue no need to spend even more money on this while cars are still statistically much more dangerous. you could also call for lower controller workload which certainly would not be a bad thing
.
i wonder what the system announcing "approach runway xxx" would've given an alert instead or if it wouldve just said approaching 28R because it was relatively close