I bought 300 using my credit card directly on the website and it was a very easy and quick operation. I wasn't hesitant as it is a serious business.

Yeah.. like I said I think it's some kind of glitch.. I've sent them another e-mail and mailed ot their FMC section too.. just to get some added attention..It's now been nearly 2 days and still nothing really.. I'll wait and see.. I've no doubt they'll sort it for me..CheersCraig

Yep.. as I thought.. all resolved for me.. it's a good service.. I'd recommend it..RegardsCraig

Have they got full SIDSTAR integration yet? I've held off until such time as they do have, as it's really only half a product until they do . . .

>Have they got full SIDSTAR integration yet? I've held off>until such time as they do have, as it's really only half a>product until they do . . .Chris et al,Apparently not yet but it is the works. Check their forum for more news. http://forum.navdata.at/Hope it helps,

The developers should have been doing this (providing free cycles) from the moment they released the aircraft. That is totally absurd. You're paying what, $50-60... That pays for the man-hours to produce the add-on, etc. How you expect them to cut from their bottom line to accomodate you because you're reluctant to pay $2.30 a month for something unessential to the plane's functions is just beyond me. The plane works with AIRAC 0608. That is provided to you for free. End of story.Blaming PMDG because you're too cheap to spend $2.30 a month on an AIRAC cycle that you don't even need is just messed up. :-lolI suppose you're also e-bombing the tellfs e-mail because MS/ACES doesn't pay for the payware add-on scenery upgrades that you want to have, right? You did pay $50-60 for FS! Daniel P.http://www.precisionmanuals.com/images/forum/supporter.jpgMember of SJU Photography. [A HREF=http://www.jetphotos.net/showphotos.php?userid=9004]Click Here[/A] to view my aircraft photos at JetPhotos.Net!The official psychotic AA painter. :)

>The developers should have been doing this (providing free>cycles) from the moment they released the aircraft. >>That is totally absurd. You're paying what, $50-60... That>pays for the man-hours to produce the add-on, etc. How you>expect them to cut from their bottom line to accomodate you>because you're reluctant to pay $2.30 a month for something>unessential to the plane's functions is just beyond me. The>plane works with AIRAC 0608. That is provided to you for free.>End of story.>>Blaming PMDG because you're too cheap to spend $2.30 a month>on an AIRAC cycle that you don't even need is just messed up.>:-lol>>I suppose you're also e-bombing the tellfs e-mail because>MS/ACES doesn't pay for the payware add-on scenery upgrades>that you want to have, right? You did pay $50-60 for FS! >>Daniel P.>http://www.precisionmanuals.com/images/forum/supporter.jpg>Member of SJU Photography. [A>HREF=http://www.jetphotos.net/showphotos.php?userid=9004]Click>Here[/A] to view my aircraft photos at JetPhotos.Net!>The official psychotic AA painter. :)We already had this discussion and it was NOT about being cheap. It was about the fact that Richard wasn't being paid by the developers in the first place.Jasper

I see now that the thread is rather old and was brought up, and I only checked the date of the post I replied to. I apologize for bringing up the discussion. But now that I have, I do have to point something out. You responded:It was about the fact that Richard wasn't being paid by the developers in the first place.Was it? That's not what you said here:What I was trying to point out is that has neer been Stephan responsibility to keep us updated. The developers should have been doing this from the moment they released the aircraft.What this tells me is, you expect the developer to pay Stephan so the customer won't have to (which is different from paying Stephan to use his navdata). And I think that's just absurd, because having the latest AIRAC is not necessary to fly the plane properly, it is an addition. "Add-on for an add-on", if you will.But I apologize if I misunderstood your point; and if you don't wish to respond, I'll understand. I am just curious about your meaning with the statement above if it's not what I just described.Daniel P.http://www.precisionmanuals.com/images/forum/supporter.jpgMember of SJU Photography. [A HREF=http://www.jetphotos.net/showphotos.php?userid=9004]Click Here[/A] to view my aircraft photos at JetPhotos.Net!The official psychotic AA painter. :)

Without adding further fuel to this thread, which I thought was long ago ended, I think that the word "responsibility" used by Jasper in connection with Rchard Stephans contribution with navdata during the years.As he points out it was never Richards responsibility. Quite right. It was out of Richards interest and dedication to this hobby he made his work accessible to us who needed and wanted it! It was a voluntary task and he could do it as long as there was a free and easily accessible source of basic data that could be used (DAFIF).It is a mistake however to confuse Richards non-profit work with what commercial addon manufacturers can be expected to provide.What Jasper doesn't seem willing to accept is that for the aircraft addon that he has bought, he has to pay for navigational software updates just like any airline has to do. It has become a little bit to much "as real as it gets" and that seems to be his point it seems.Well, as in real world, there is a classic mistake made when he bought the addon. He seems to forget to check what was included in his addon - didn't read the specs and contract, or ask the correct questions, before signing the deal and now see it fit to complain. Well, as they say in business: Too late! And as has been pointed out several times: The aircraft flies well with the free airac provided in the package. Anything else above or better than that is the owners own wishes and dreams.

Well,to sum it up:My point was indeed that it was Stephan interest and dedication that brought us good and reliable data. My other point was that it never was his responsibility but the developers responsibility to have the data available (be it at extra cost). Developers have (in my humble opinion) been reliyng on Stephan to make the airac updates when they should NOT have. I feel it is the duty of developers to make sure there are (paid) updates. They, for instance, could have made a deal with Stephan to make sure there are updates.Like I said before, it's NEVER been about me being unwilling to pay.Regards, Jasper

Folks,For what its worth, I believe that there is no requirement for PMDG, PSS or anyone else who develops an FS plane requiring FMC AIRAC data, to deliver the current data to the customer. If they do, that is a bonus and if they provide any updates at all that is really pushing the boat out customer service wise! But I would not expect it as a paying customer, so long as some FMC data was provided to enable me to use the FMC/MCDU included with the product.I have subscribed to Navigraph for a while now and find their customer service very good. The AIRAC product, although suffering from some teething troubles to start with, is now very good and reliable. Some of you might also be surprised to know that many of the currently available SID and STAR files, on the NAVDATA.AT website, can still be used with the newer AIRAC cycles - they only become a problem if there are major airways/waypoint changes. Even then, the FMC LEGS page can be directly edited to remove any discontinuities and the flight routes sorted out quite easily. I still make use of the files held there when I need SIDs or STARs for the 747-400.The quality of Navigraph's airport charts is good. Although many of the required charts for the mainland US and UK can be downloaded free from other sources, Navigraph are slowly building up a database of some of the more obscure places (OERK-Riyadh, Saudia Arabia for example) and this can only complement the charts available to us for free. I have not yet tried out the new En-route chart feature but I'm told by others who utilise two monitors, one to view the chart on, that it is good quality and very useful. The SID/STAR data to come should also be good, again because of the quality of the source data. All in all, Navigraph is producing the goods - at least for those that want it. Its a step in the right direction I believe, after the fiasco of the DAFIF publically available data being closed down and we, as flight simulation enthusiasts, benefit from Navigraph's facility.Many of my colleagues at BAV however, still use the older 0608 AIRAC cycle with no issues at all.Just my thoughts for those who may be considering whether Navigraph is what they want.Take care,Lee