How's the navdata in Prepar3D?

[Gregg_Seipp 568]

Hi all,

 

How's the navdata in Prepar3D.  Up to date? 

 

Gregg

[simmerhead 885]

Exactly as in FSX sadly.

[kama2004 74]

For me, this is one of the priority aspect to update in Prepar3d for all users that doesn't fly tubeliner where it is possible to update the navdata for the fms.

[mgh 89]

To my understanding, Lockheed Martin have no plans to change navdata. It's not on its "road map" (just as Microsoft never did)  simply because third-parties can supply it.

.

[chrisal 9]

There are some updated files on this site:

http://www.aero.sors.fr/navaids.html

 

They look like they should help to an extent. Has anyone tried them and can they indicate what difference they make?

 

Cheers

Chris

[Gregg_Seipp 568]

That'

 

Exactly as in FSX sadly.

 

That's awful.  They could at least make the core data updatable.

[n4gix 4,947]

That's awful.  They could at least make the core data updatable.

Actually no, they cannot...

 

...at least, not without creating a completely new, fully integrated database solution, as well as coming up with a new method by which airport facilities are generated. It would also be very, very costly both in terms of licensing new data, and the time investment in coding, debugging and testing such a radical change.

 

Such a task could be compared to you having to re-shelve all of the books of the NY Public Library after an earthquake had dumped them all off the shelves into a tumbled, jumbled mess and get them 100% correctly placed... :unknw:

[Alec 370]

That website mentioned made my FS totally up to date. There's not much more I need now! I recommend to anyone. The only thing lacking is SID, STAR, etc

[Brian Doney 127]

Such a task could be compared to you having to re-shelve all of the books of the NY Public Library after an earthquake had dumped them all off the shelves into a tumbled, jumbled mess and get them 100% correctly placed... :unknw:

 

So what you're saying, is that they might as well go 64-bit at the same time then.

 

 

Right ?

[Gregg_Seipp 568]

 

 

So what you're saying, is that they might as well go 64-bit at the same time then.
 
 
Right ?

 

Nice try Brian...LOL.

 

 

 

Actually no, they cannot...
 
...at least, not without creating a completely new, fully integrated database solution, as well as coming up with a new method by which airport facilities are generated. It would also be very, very costly both in terms of licensing new data, and the time investment in coding, debugging and testing such a radical change.
 
Such a task could be compared to you having to re-shelve all of the books of the NY Public Library after an earthquake had dumped them all off the shelves into a tumbled, jumbled mess and get them 100% correctly placed...

 

Hi Bill,

 

You're saying that they can't create the new data in the format that Microsoft created it?  Given that Alexis got his data updated by some website it seems doable that LM could do the same, no? (Haven't tried it yet.)  Or, are you saying that they can't provide a Navigraph interface like aircraft developers are doing?  (I'd, actually, prefer the latter solution if the data could be shared by all add-ons.)

 

Gregg

[n4gix 4,947]

What I'm saying that even with Herve Sors' sort-of-update, nothing is done to the airport facilities themselves, so that ILS/Loc frequencies aren't updated, runway configurations remain the same, and so forth. It is at best an incomplete bandaid solution.

 

I'm also saying that without changing the current "system" (what there is of it and such as it is), it would take a lot of money and a ton of time just to get the entire world somewhat "up-to-date," knowing fully well that when they were finished with the process it would still not be truly current!

 

If they were going to bother with this at all, they would need to design and code an entirely new system. One which would allow for using an available database that could be re-issued in cycles such that subscribers could keep their platform updated fully.

[Gregg_Seipp 568]

If they were going to bother with this at all, they would need to design and code an entirely new system. One which would allow for using an available database that could be re-issued in cycles such that subscribers could keep their platform updated fully.

 

 

I see.  Well, I guess the thing someone has to think about is how long they can, practically, keep that old data without updating it.  

[Nemo 1,305]

What I'm saying that even with Herve Sors' sort-of-update, nothing is done to the airport facilities themselves, so that ILS/Loc frequencies aren't updated, runway configurations remain the same, and so forth. It is at best an incomplete bandaid solution.

 

I'm also saying that without changing the current "system" (what there is of it and such as it is), it would take a lot of money and a ton of time just to get the entire world somewhat "up-to-date," knowing fully well that when they were finished with the process it would still not be truly current!

 

If they were going to bother with this at all, they would need to design and code an entirely new system. One which would allow for using an available database that could be re-issued in cycles such that subscribers could keep their platform updated fully.

 

But it is possible to change some airport facilities using a tool provided by Herve. And most important you can update the core apx files. I have done it at several airports when I became aware that LOC/VOR frequencies have changed. At least it worked in FSX. This method is also useful to avoid conflicts with addon airports.

 

 

Harry

[mgh 89]

You're saying that they can't create the new data in the format that Microsoft created it?

Of course they could create the nave data in the some way as Microsoft by collecting up-to-date for all airports and navaids etc. writing the data in .XML files and then compiling the .BGL as scenery files. The instructions are explained in given in the Compiling BGL section of the SDK for anyone to use. They could develop an new way of presenting the data. The real-data is published monthly and so would be out-of-data.

 

The question is why should Lockheed Martin do it do it - when those who want it can do for then themselves?

[Gregg_Seipp 568]

 

 

The question is why should Lockheed Martin do it do it - when those who want it can do for then themselves?

 

Well, it would be nice if they would.  The way you find out something's wrong is by flying...which is a bit crappy.  I just flew the ILS into KSAN and the frequency was wrong...sigh...had to look it up in FSX while trying to keep my situational awareness.  Never mind the fact that I don't have any idea how to update this stuff.