Anything that makes the data better, is supported and looks to the future is good by me.

While I understand people not wanting 'yet another database'... here's something to consider:

 

Do you know the difference between these two approaches?

 

KIAD RNAV 19C Y

KIAD RNAV 19C Z

 

How about

 

KPSP RNAV 13R Y

KPSP RNAV 13R Z

 

There are several types of RNAV approaches (LPV, LNAV/VNAV, LNAV, RNP) and what the difference is between them is important when emulating a proper GNS.  The Garmin trainer, which the Reality-XP gauges use, knows the difference between those approaches and what those differences represent for navigational purposes.  Neither Navigraph nor NavDataPro (since it literally mimics the Navigraph data format) provide the detailed information required to know what those differences are.

 

That is the reason for RealNavData... accuracy that currently isn't available from anyone else.

Is it able to be networked ala FlythisSim?

No it is not, it's a gauge that runs inside FS.

Ed,

 

Good to hear that WAAS implementation is being worked on. Will it be a free or paid upgrade for existing customers?

 

Any idea when we can expect a product page with detailed info?

 

Thanks.

While I understand people not wanting 'yet another database'... here's something to consider:

 

Do you know the difference between these two approaches?

 

KIAD RNAV 19C Y

KIAD RNAV 19C Z

 

How about

 

KPSP RNAV 13R Y

KPSP RNAV 13R Z

 

There are several types of RNAV approaches (LPV, LNAV/VNAV, LNAV, RNP) and what the difference is between them is important when emulating a proper GNS.  The Garmin trainer, which the Reality-XP gauges use, knows the difference between those approaches and what those differences represent for navigational purposes.  Neither Navigraph nor NavDataPro (since it literally mimics the Navigraph data format) provide the detailed information required to know what those differences are.

All four of your examples are present in the current Navigraph data. Including their differences. :mellow:

 

That is the reason for RealNavData... accuracy that currently isn't available from anyone else.

Agreed. I would however consider picking examples which aren't represented in the current data from Navigraph or Aerosoft. It helps the argument a lot.

 

When it comes to Aerosoft's data there's a vital detail in regard to RealNavData. Aerosoft themselves state.

The Nav Data itself is supplied by Lufthansa Systems and is used in real world aviation by more than 180 airlines throughout the world.

 

While your description is.

The RealNav data source for the raw navigational data is Lufthansa Systems (not Lufthansa, though they are owned by some of the same people) and it is the exact same raw format that is provided to airlines and other agencies that create navigation databases for aircraft and other systems that require such information.

And I think both of you are pointing to the Lufthansa Lido data. Same source. Please correct me if I'm wrong. Side note, Navigraph doesn't use LH Lido, their sources differ as they cite Jeppesen for example.

 

So that 'Navigraph equals Aerosoft and only RealNavData is different' tenor currently can't be verified. It's more like RealNavData equals Aerosoft, due to the same LH Lido source.

 

Another point being that the current offer from Aerosoft includes the ability to support a whole bunch of addons (20+) while RealNavData doubles the price (40 vs 22 USD) and delivers data for a single addon, your gauges.

 

This still doesn't have to be a downside, if your data set would enhance the coverage given. But the WAAS data and functionality isn't available yet, as you've said. And if it ever was, from the source you are citing, Aerosoft would also be able to offer it. Maybe they already do or at least plan to.

 

So why go the extra mile with setting up a dedicated service for your gauges when people surely would appreciate if at least your current data standard could come via the subscription basis they already run? Or, from a customer's perspective. Why pay extra for the same data? :mellow:

 

Don't get me wrong, the availability of the gauges at that price level is great. Even with not knowing how they stack up against the RXP or other addon gauges. But that subscription data service, with the examples and explanations given, fails to make an impression so far. And I read it as if it's needed to make the gauges work in a current sim (data-wise) environment.

All four of your examples are present in the current Navigraph data. Including their differences. :mellow:

 

Agreed. I would however consider picking examples which aren't represented in the current data from Navigraph or Aerosoft. It helps the argument a lot.

 

When it comes to Aerosoft's data there's a vital detail in regard to RealNavData. Aerosoft themselves state.

 

While your description is.

And I think both of you are pointing to the Lufthansa Lido data. Same source. Please correct me if I'm wrong. Side note, Navigraph doesn't use LH Lido, their sources differ as they cite Jeppesen for example.

 

So that 'Navigraph equals Aerosoft and only RealNavData is different' tenor currently can't be verified. It's more like RealNavData equals Aerosoft, due to the same LH Lido source.

 

Another point being that the current offer from Aerosoft includes the ability to support a whole bunch of addons (20+) while RealNavData doubles the price (40 vs 22 USD) and delivers data for a single addon, your gauges.

 

This still doesn't have to be a downside, if your data set would enhance the coverage given. But the WAAS data and functionality isn't available yet, as you've said. And if it ever was, from the source you are citing, Aerosoft would also be able to offer it. Maybe they already do or at least plan to.

 

So why go the extra mile with setting up a dedicated service for your gauges when people surely would appreciate if at least your current data standard could come via the subscription basis they already run? Or, from a customer's perspective. Why pay extra for the same data? :mellow:

 

Don't get me wrong, the availability of the gauges at that price level is great. Even with not knowing how they stack up against the RXP or other addon gauges. But that subscription data service, with the examples and explanations given, fails to make an impression so far. And I read it as if it's needed to make the gauges work in a current sim (data-wise) environment.

 

 

I think what he is referring to is within those approaches the differences between lpv/lnav/vnav ETC.  While maybe not all that import to a average simmer, it is important to somebody using the product to practice for RW IFR

 

Maybe aerosoft does not provide the data in that detail even if they get it from the same source?   

Do you know the difference between these two approaches?

 

KIAD RNAV 19C Y

 

KIAD RNAV 19C Z

 

How about

 

KPSP RNAV 13R Y

 

KPSP RNAV 13R Z

 

 

There are several types of RNAV approaches (LPV, LNAV/VNAV, LNAV, RNP) and what the difference is between them is important when emulating a proper GNS. The Garmin trainer, which the Reality-XP gauges use, knows the difference between those approaches and what those differences represent for navigational purposes.

Ed, you've lost me a bit on this one. Three of these approaches are RNP AR (approval required), and can't be flown at all with a GNS430/530. One is an LPV approach and can.

 

Or, perhaps that was your point? I didn't know the Navigraph data had any of these, but the Garmin data (IRL) does not include the other three either (edit - by "the other three", I mean the RNP approaches), nor should it.

 

Scott

Exactly Scott.  The Navigraph/NavDataPro database content don't indicate what level the approaches are, other than RNAV.

 

To use a 430 to fly an RNP approach requires some rather specific equipment installed on an aircraft (really, someone showed us the FAA document to prove it!)... but I don't think there are any 430 equipped aircraft that are certified and no those approaches are not in the Garmin database.

 

It's just a perfect example of what kind of information is simply not present in either Navigraph or NavDataPro.  Another thing I pointed out is where there are real world approach transitions missing in the Navigraph data.  In the professional world these issues are a no-go and customers don't want 'mostly correct' navigational data.

 

Bottom line, the Mindstar Aviation 430/530 is used for real world training and it's database needs are driven by that.

I agree, Scott. The radius to fix legs at KPSP aren't stuff meant to be flown by the GNS430/530 units. KIAD RNAV 19C Z features RNP 0.30, the same applies. As you say, only the one LPV (KIAD RNAV 19C Y) should be an approach considered to be found and flown by the 430/530.

 

As said, not the examples I would have picked. :mellow: Especially since they are around in the currently available data sets.

 

To be honest, I would be very surprised if the same source data detail leads to different outcomes. Even more so when being adjusted for navigational units (referring to the rw devices) being well below the modern FMC standards. There's no low RNP value or RF leg to be expected for GNS 430/530. Legally that is.

 

So there's a bit of a paradox. If you wanted to fly those approaches, you already can. The data is available from both companies (Navigraph, Aerosoft). If those would have to add another format for a RXP competitor, no problem data-wise. Still, if you then had the data and wanted your 430/530 to be used as close to the real thing as possible, you can't actually fly some of the procedures. Puzzling. :wacko:

 

And, I don't know if it's clear to all readers, despite the raw nav data being transferred to your GPS unit(s), some information only is available on the charts. Even more so when using the limited 430/530 setup.

Ed,

 

Good to hear that WAAS implementation is being worked on. Will it be a free or paid upgrade for existing customers?

 

Any idea when we can expect a product page with detailed info?

 

Thanks.

The WAAS implementation will be a zero cost update.

I agree, Scott. The radius to fix legs at KPSP aren't stuff meant to be flown by the GNS430/530 units. KIAD RNAV 19C Z features RNP 0.30, the same applies. As you say, only the one LPV (KIAD RNAV 19C Y) should be an approach considered to be found and flown by the 430/530.

Actually all four of those approaches have an RNP level of 0.3.

I'm curious about the VNAV issue that was discussed earlier in the thread, and would like clarification.  In Reality XP, on the 530's VNAV page, you plug in an altitude above a fix, and it will give you a dynamic rate of descent to that fix.  That's all, and I don't think you can couple the AP to that anyway.  I've only ever used it as a nice little feature to back up the mental math, and nothing else.  So does the Mindstar 530 have this ability to simply display a continuously computed descent rate, same as Reality Xp/Garmin Trainer, or was Twharrel talking about the ability to do something else?  I really wasn't aware that more could be done than that, hence my confusion.

It also bears mentioning the G1000, GNS 430, and GNS 530 aren't the only products that Mindstar produces.  RealNavdata is used in other Mindstar avionics packages that most of us will never see, much less use.

 

Todd

Is this supposed to be for this Friday the 19th, or was it last Friday the 11th?

 

Was first posted on the 10th.

I'm not worried about when it will get finished, but just wondering how we will know when it's ready.