FS Build, FS Nav or FS Commander?

[Guest krswen]

I'd value your opinions on these three. Factors such as ease of learning, compatibility with Radar Contact, support, updates, forum activity etc.First cost is not important ... I expect to get a lot of use out of which ever I purchase.I have a very capable computer, but choose still to run FS9 rather than FSX, so upgrade path to FSX is not important to me either at this time.

[Guest over and out]

I'm in the same boat. I have been looking into a flight planner also and will be sticking to FS9. My choice will probably be FSBuild, with perhaps FSNav later as an enhancement.FSBuild will not give you a moving map, but this may be good because FSCom and FSNav both include a moving map that may use up some of your computing power, if this is an issue for you.My biggest issue will be ease of exporting flight plans into the Level-D and PMDG formats for direct loading using the FMC.

[ronzie 21]

My preference is FS Build since it can run without FS up. I also like the way if you have Active Sky running loaded with archived weather, FS Build will take winds aloft into consideration for its fuel planning features. Aircraft performance profiles for popular aircraft come with it and following information on their web site you can copy an existing one and modify it for an aircraft profile model you do not have.I also like the route window where you can paste in a flight plan you can acquire such as found in the real world FAA plans of active flights on flightaware.com. You might have to modify the name of a SID or STAR slightly but in most cases they will be in the FSB database.Besides FS8/9 exports, and now FSX in build 2.3, routes can be exported to PMDG 737 and 747 FMCs, and the LDS FMC is listed as well.There are occasional bugs if you use auto-routing due to duplicate waypoint references in its database but with options to rebuild from the editable route grid produced these can be overcome by proofing the route on its included display world map.While they are somewhat outdated you can get a good idea from the tutorials and FAQ on their web site which also has a link to their support forum.

[Egbert Drenth 250]

Hi,I've got them all and it depends on the kind of functionality you are looking for (moving map <-> flight planning), which suites the best.FS BuildThis is foremost a flightplanner and a good one. It generates flightplans in all kind of formats.However if you find a moving map more importantly, FSC or FSNAV would be a better choice.FSCHas flightplanning capabilities but not as extensive as FS Build. It does however has a very good moving map, also capable showing AI/Online traffic and online ATC.FSC runs 'outside' FS however, so if you want to get the most out of it, it either has to run on your 2nd monitor, or better, on a 2nd PC (using WideFS)FSNavA bit dated, but still a very good moving map, also with flightplan capabilities. It runs 'inside' FS, meaning you can show/hide the moving map whilst flying in FS9 (by means of a key press)FSNav is more convenient if you don't have a 2nd monitor/PC.Also check the reviews, I'm sure there are several available.

[SAS263 1]

I

[Glynn 405]

HelloFSC does something that is really nice .It will check your plan for control zone violations and allow you to route around them. it makes you think about your routings much more.In the real world unlike the sim you cant just zoom around over any area at whatever altitude you like.

[Krister 51]

As Tord and Egbert I have FSBuild, FSC and FSNav. They are all very good programs although as stated with a different focus. If Radar Contact compability is important then FSBuild is the only option but I would also use either FSC or FSnav. Up til now I've always prefered FSNav to FSC and I still think the interface is better. But FSNAV causes problems (as in disappears) when I use it on my second monitor when I also show a a panel there. I run FSC from my latop over Widefs and that VATSIM capability is truelly awesome (mind you, you don't need Widefs to show VATSIM activity).Totally Off topic, but I also tried installing Squawkbox 3 on my laptop. I connected but it claimed FS couldn't connect to the multiplayer session. So I flew around at LOWW with AI-aircrafts around me until an supervisor on Vatsim told me I was flying head on towards five aircrafts inbound on the approach to LOWW! :) Turned out my aircraft was actually logged on to VATSIM during a big fly-in to LOWW... Very embaressing!

[Glynn 405]

Hello"If Radar Contact compability is important then FSBuild is the only option" This statement is totally wrongThis is taken directly from the Radar Contact Manual.Any planner that can save or export FS2000/FS2002/FS2004 plans, such as:o FS Navigatoro NAV 3o FS2000/FS2002/FS2004o FlightSim Planner / FlightSim Commandero Super Flight Plannero Flight Managero IFRPlan 2000o FSBuildo Jeppesen FliteStar

[jagabom 21]

Totally Off topic, but I also tried installing Squawkbox 3 on my laptop. I connected but it claimed FS couldn't connect to the multiplayer session. So I flew around at LOWW with AI-aircrafts around me until an supervisor on Vatsim told me I was flying head on towards five aircrafts inbound on the approach to LOWW! Turned out my aircraft was actually logged on to VATSIM during a big fly-in to LOWW... Very embaressing!That's a funny one. No repercussions?I use FSNav. FSC seemed clunky. Never had is disappear from the second monitor. I usually run it in 1/4 of the screen with a panel in another 1/4. Something like that. Strange. FSNav and FSC are both free to test.JimCYWG

[Guest SilverCircle]

>FSBuild will not give you a moving map, but this may be good>because FSCom and FSNav both include a moving map that may use>up some of your computing power, if this is an issue for you.>My biggest issue will be ease of exporting flight plans into>the Level-D and PMDG formats for direct loading using the>FMC.FSBuild has the most trouble free exporting method. It's just a matter of selecting the formats you want and when you build the flight plan, it will automatically export fmc flight plans for all the formats you have selected in FSBuild options (you only need to configure this once, although you can select additional formats to export from a menu before building the flight plan). This works for most popular add-ons (leveld and PMDG for sure, it also works for the Lago MD-80, for FS9 default flight plans, most PSS planes, Squakbox and many, many more). It also saves the fmc plans to the proper directories (that is, where the add-ons are searching it when you enter a co-route).I would say, FSBuild is, by far, the best planner.

[northridge 2]

Thanks to this thread I have discovered FSC. I have used FSN for years.One thing not mentioned here is that FSC will import and show on the map realworld weather.However, as far as I have seen so far there is no direct Import facility for LDS or PMDG or whatever.FSBuild looks a bit scary to me.

[borisvp 0]

Hi,FSBuild is surely the most professional out of the three, and it has the most options for flight planning. It also has the steepest learning curve *g*But there's one thing I like most about FSB: the accurate fuel planning. Whenever I plan my flights with FSB, the deviation between estimated fuel and actually used fuel is below 10%, and even this is mostly because of the variable winds enroute. I also have FSC and mostly do it this way: I plan the route with FSB/Route Finder, let FSB build the route, get the fuel load and use the flightplan with FSC and in the sim. FSC serves as a moving map, navaid database, airport ground chart and traffic check, especially when flying offline with lots of AI. And - FSC can steer the plane for you.Flying online, I sometimes use my AI traffic when no ATC is around (you can do this with two PC, switching to multiplayer when ATC or other traffic comes up), and funny thing is, FSC shows both AI and online traffic simultaneously :-)So, both programs have their own advantages, and I believe for FSN goes the same as for FSC, just FSN runs within flight simulator and FSC runs externally.CheersBoris

[Krister 51]

Maddog,I stand totally corrected and don't know what I was actually thinking since I certainly knew what you wrote already. I suppose as I use them, in my mind I consider FSC and FSNavigator to be best suited as moving maps, although the flightplanning possitiblity is there. FSC is certainly growing on me - the only feature I really miss, besides a cleaner interface, is indication of heading from present position to any vor/waypoint you hoover your mouse over. This is found in FSNav and is very useful.

[JSACKS 0]

FSNav, FSNav, FSNav...For me, the best add-on in 10 years of MSFS simming. Love it. Simplex. Flexible. Can build complex flightplans too with hi or lo altitude jetways. A fair emulation of reality. Great moving map. Tune your radios automatically. Set your ILS and final course automatically. Easy and clear to use. Drag and drop waypoints. Great design. Many others prefer FSBuild and FS Commander for their greater sophistication. I've not tried them but I believe what people say about them. But for quick and easy, FSNav can't be beat. It's the one add-on I'd take to a desert island with me.My wife's nephew who flies 747-400s and A340-300s in Asia said to me when he saw my FS set-up with FSNav,"I'd really like a map like that in my "office."!JS