Aivlasoft Charts

[Kaan KASIM 54]

Yep, pretty clear. It would be Jet/Turbojet, Prop etc.

[Taipan 30]

Ok thanks.

 

Well I priced up the stationary, A5 folders, sheets, paper, hole lunch, plastic protectors etc to print all the charts I need for a "real" chart collection for where I fly, and its coming to double the $ that Aivlasoft is charging. Seriously $170 of stuff, not including ink. It also comes with a whole load of hassle to print these and keep up to date.

 

I think I will go with the Aivlasoft for the sheer convenience and cost effectiveness of it. If I ever get to the stage of flying IFR in real life, maybe at that stage I'll consider building a printed chart library again.

 

But after this research the EFB seems a no brainer despite the small shortcomings. I'll start the trial.

 

They have said on their forum there will be a discount on v2 for current v1 owners but not how much. At least that's something to move forward on.

 

Thanks for the help guys

[ajpongress 467]

The missing altitude crossing restrictions is the main reason I will never buy Aivlasoft EFB.

I use VNAV for every descent and knowing when to cross Y intersection at Z altitude is important for calculating my TOD.

 

In the end I still have to look up the actual STAR charts to get that info, so I might as well use pdf charts all the way.

Aivlasoft EFB isn't a one-stop-shop in my opinion. Handy tool, like FSCommander, but not really complete.

[CoolP 283]

I think I will go with the Aivlasoft for the sheer convenience and cost effectiveness of it. If I ever get to the stage of flying IFR in real life, maybe at that stage I'll consider building a printed chart library again.

I think that's a good way to look at it, especially with having in mind that the lack of data in EFB is the same lack of data in any FSX FMC plane using Navigraph (which all advanced ones do).

 

The sim restrictions are there, but they are no show stoppers and I doubt that most folks actually run into them. Well, it's the sim and it also comes in very cheap and convenient in regard to any rw sources, as you say. If there ever will be a sim dev using ARINC formats for their nav data (some may plan this), I think the step for EFB is reasonable to do the same.

 

But as long as your sim plane uses the same sim data as your map tool, the system should work just fine. Got access to rw charts? Sure, use them, perhaps besides EFB. Best of both worlds.

 

As an example on what differs. The rw charts often define teardrop turns differently for Cat A&B, C&D planes for example. Navigraph depicts the C&D stuff only. Crossing altitudes like those 'expect 250kts, FL100 at waypoint' are there, but mostly feature the jet values, not the prop ones.

 

So if you are flying the cat C or D jet, you will never notice a difference and if you are in the prop plane, you may still arrive at your destination without flying into terrain. This is just to show the severity or not severity of the issue being based on personal preference of course.

 

The 30 day trial will surely be able to clear up the fog on the ups and downs.

[realkewl 3]

Just to add to the forum. I've been using Aivlasoft for some years now and for the most part it's ok. But there are short comings like the ones mention and a couple that I'll mention here.

1. I run Aivlasoft on a remote computer (laptop). It's not a standalone product meaning if I'm in a flight and if I did not start the DataEngine I cannot start the remote client. I have no access to charts.
   
2. Aivlasoft works ONLY with a flight plan. I normally start with FSX flight planner...review it, remove or add waypoints that I want. Save flight plan and open it on remote laptop using Aivlasoft client. Enter the flight plan in GNS530. There is a way to enter your own waypoints in Aivlasoft but I get an error message ever time so that's way I go this route.
   
3. Selecting and activating a STAR or SID in Aivlasoft tries to push it to my GNS530 and causes it to crash. So I can only review them and not activate them. Approaches are the same but the screen is really small and very hard to navigate around to find the IAF and/or FAF.
   
4. The PLUS said about the STAR in Aivlasoft is that is gives you the arrival based upon your direction of flight, if you do not have ATC vectors. Unlike the real charts I have to look at each one to determine the best for my direction.
   
5. BTW, I do sim with a REAL EFB with real up to date charts(Seattle Avionics) but they are only for the US. So internationally is where Aivlasoft shines for me.
   

Hope this helps

Ray

[CoolP 283]

Hi, Ray.

 

1. and if I did not start the DataEngine I cannot start the remote client. I have no access to charts.

That's by design. The smaller data provider connects to FSX (Simconnect) and reads the nav data plus the FSX scenery. The display unit, which you can place somewhere in your local network or locally, or even both, then displays all data.

 

I think I'm looking at some support items with your post.

2. There is a way to enter your own waypoints in Aivlasoft but I get an error message ever time so that's way I go this route.

This should work. You can modify your route at any time and use all sorts of waypoints like VOR, NDB, intersections. The editing itself may be more intuitive in real flight planners though. I mainly use it to just modify a plan if there are errors.

 

3. Selecting and activating a STAR or SID in Aivlasoft tries to push it to my GNS530 and causes it to crash.

It shouldn't crash in the first place. It works here, but you can always disable the 'flight plan pushing' feature in the settings if it causes any trouble. The feature was meant for default FSX gauges, being able to use any EFB flight plan and the changes on the fly, without accessing FSX menus to load a flight plan. Pretty neat.

 

Find it in the settings of the display unit and data provider. Just turn off the marked items. The one is for the storing, the other one for the pushing, so to speak.

 

On those support topics, perhaps check the Aivlasoft forums. I'm sure the devs will be around trying to help. http://www.aivlasoft...pport/index.php

[gandy 18]

Ive been using the Demo of Aivlasoft EFB and europe is a mess, missing data, airports and lots of incorrect sids and stars and rnav data, i know they take the data direct from AIRAC data bases but its enough of a mess to put me off as i have to keep falling back on pdf charts for rnav approaches and sids and stars and reporting the errors is to much hassle as i find them a lot :(

 

Flying in the old USA is good with EFB

 

If Europe was not such a mess then i would buy it in a heart beat as the app it self is great and has a lot of features but the lack of ability to correct the sid's, stars and rnav approaches while im setting up my flight plan is a let down when i find these errors.

 

On a side note, it looks like i have to pay extra to have the fixed??? databases which is a let down as that means im in the trap of paying to update the software and there is no guarantee that the updated databases will be fixed or have the fixes in them when i have brought them :(

[CoolP 283]

Gandy, my main flights happen in Europe so I can't relate to the general problems to be honest. Got an example?

 

The EFB soft comes with a Navigraph set to start with. It's needed in the EFB concept. It's a full set, but it may be older, I guess some late 2011. If it would contain errors, an update would be advised. Means an update of the Navigraph database, not EFB. But your FMC planes using the same data base and cycle (in a different format) will have the same problems then.

 

So if there was some faulty data in lets say 1110 at LIRF, EFB will show them and the iFly, PMDG, CS planes too. I had rare occasions where only one data format had errors, but those are few and mostly get fixed by Navigraph on the next cycle. Well, they may need a HU at times. ^_^

 

Are you sure that the whole of Europe is off? I can see Navigraph being imprecise here and there, but not on the general basis you are describing. Hence the question on the example.

 

There's no force to update anything in EFB, the updates on the program come for free. There may be one to look for proper Navigraph data though. Agreed.

[realkewl 3]

Find it in the settings of the display unit and data provider. Just turn off the marked items. The one is for the storing, the other one for the pushing, so to speak.

 

Thanks CoolP..I'll have a look this evening. Guess, I just got use to reviewing it.

 

-Ray

[CoolP 283]

No problem, Ray. If there are problems remaining, head over to Aivlasoft. If there was some problem in the actual code, the devs are fast at fixing.

 

In general. The EFB topic always involves two devs. The one for the program (EFB) and the one for the data (AIRAC cycle). This is just to explain why I'm stressing to look for the one or the other source of errors. Usually, if they at Aivlasoft see that some Navigraph error spoils their customers, they contact Navigraph and try to solve it.

 

Fixing Navigraph errors will always include to download a fresh cycle though, at least a new revision of it. So perhaps that's where Gandy is coming from.

[Kaan KASIM 54]

Is the airac data supposed to contain everything?(in the real world) If it did how would it work between different categories of aircraft? I thought if there was a difference between the chart and the fmc data for your aircraft you would correct it, isn't that the procedure? This is generally where efb lacks unfortunately, you need to look at the charts to get other info, which are sometimes needed.

 

To each to his own I guess, pdfs are easier for me with precise information. I mean sometimes there are almost nothing on the sid that you might as well fly direct.

[CoolP 283]

I guess you are right. The charts may always be the reference and the FMC data has to be checked to match it.

 

I was a pdf only user, than had EFB and pdfs running and later, perhaps just for convenience reasons, ran EFB alone as it does the job and adds all those 'live' features. Well, I sometimes pick pdfs besides EFB, if they are easy to find or to check if Navigraph has included this and that.

 

The easy ways of the Navigraph basis may be the biggest pro and con at the same time.

[Taipan 30]

I tried a trial flight last night, EFB, radar contact, active sky etc, YSSY to Coffs Harbour, with Port Macquarie as an alternate.

 

I don't know how I do it, but I managed to pick another 2 destinations with no navigraph coverage! They are both ORBX airports, both with arrivals, but not covered. The airports inland with no scenery have navigraph like Armidale.

 

Not happy really, I know it's not Aivlasofts fault, but if 3 of the 4 airports I pick are not fully mapped out there's not much point.

 

I know the FMCs won't have the data but the GNS530 I used does, and I want to look at the chart before selecting the Proc. Proc preview on the RXP is not as good as a chart. For example Coffs Harbour has an unused runway as a taxiway, on the same heading as one of the runways. This is clearly marked on the chart, but if you didn't know that you could easily land on the taxiway by mistake.

 

During the flight I found it wasn't the tool I expected, there were no choices of charts to view it was more like context sensitive and just showing you where you are already going. I think it's great tool but it will hold my hand too much all the way.

 

Sounds sad but I enjoy the planning and looking up the details. When I'm in cruise I like to tune in various Navaids and check my position etc. I found with the EFB I was watching the map and tuning Navaids but didn't get the same enjoyment.

 

I think my position being a mystery to solve is part of the fun.

 

I reckon I'll go down the path of hard copy charts after all. If I only update navigraph every 3 or 6 months then my charts should stay fairly current as long as I don't get too many airports. I already have plenty scenery though for a while.

 

I think there gets a point where I have too many utils and I just need to do some things the old fashioned way, it's all part of the fun :)

[CoolP 283]

Sounds very reasonable, Dan. So the trial phase was of use, either way.

[ajpongress 467]

I'm starting to feel that way too about too many programs running with automation and not enough human work involved.

 

These days when I fly, I'll pull the star and sid charts and go way point by way point on the cdu in plan mode to double check my route and crossing restrictions against the dispatch report fsbuild gives me.

 

Much more enjoyable knowing my route was triple checked in the end by myself instead of relying on some efb software.

 

Sent from my LG-P500h using Tapatalk 2