Hello Forum

I would like to update the reality XP database for the GARMIN 430.  I'm currently mid-way through IFR training and I'm using my SIM to fly approaches.  I noticed the reality XP database is out of date.   Is there anyway to update the database to include current approach nav data? I'm currently manually adding way-points as a work around but it would be beneficial to have an updated database for IFR training purposes. 

Regards

Georgi Hall

Check your PM

What was the resolution to the above ? I have the same issue.

I also have access to a Garmin 430 in my friend's plane. He updates his data base via the Jeppsen service. Is there a way to benefit from access to this update to update the RealityXP GNS 430 data base ?

46 minutes ago, Bashar said:

What was the resolution to the above ? I have the same issue.

I also have access to a Garmin 430 in my friend's plane. He updates his data base via the Jeppsen service. Is there a way to benefit from access to this update to update the RealityXP GNS 430 data base ?

The simple answer is: Yes.

Contact me via PM with your email address.

Why is this allowed?  It's illegal.

11 minutes ago, WarpD said:

Why is this allowed?  It's illegal.

Show me your badge?

2 hours ago, WarpD said:

Why is this allowed?  It's illegal.

 

For an actual aircraft owner, I do not see why he/she should not be permitted to copy their purchased navdata to their personal Trainer copy..

As for sharing expired navdata for flightsimming... Garmin themselves do this on a regular basis when they update the GTN Trainer..

Edited January 29, 20206 yr by Bert Pieke

Adrain123, read the AVSIM ToS.  It's something you agreed to abide by... that's the "badge".

Bert, while I agree it is legal for a pilot who has their own legal Garmin data subscription to update the trainer's database, obtaining a copy of the data from a friend is not within the licensing scope of the Garmin data.  As for Garmin sharing expired navdata for flightsimming... they don't.  They provide a copy with their trainers.  It is not intended for use with flight sims.  That's a stretch... I believe you're using the "silence is consent" doctrine to justify it all

However, my question is more basic...is the sharing of how to skirt the legalities not a ToS violation?

Hi Bert. Hope you're well. I'm in the same situation. doing my IFR right now. if you don't mind i've also sent u a pm. thank you :)

On 1/28/2020 at 11:04 PM, Bert Pieke said:

I do not see why he/she should not be permitted to copy their purchased navdata to their personal Trainer copy..

RXP EULA "1.6. You may not alter, ......or otherwise modify any portion of this software"

In the spirit of AVSIM it's a slippery slope.

58 minutes ago, FPStewy said:

RXP EULA "1.6. You may not alter, ......or otherwise modify any portion of this software"

In the spirit of AVSIM it's a slippery slope.

The trainer is a stand-alone program produced by Garmin. The RXP units depend on the trainer, but it is not an RXP product, and if an end user updates the trainer’s own database, that does not modify anything on RXP’s side. Garmin might object if the database is not licensed to the person who does the update, but it really doesn’t affect RXP.

Edited January 28, 20215 yr by JRBarrett

On 1/28/2020 at 9:03 PM, WarpD said:

Why is this allowed?  It's illegal.

I'm sorry to ask but you got me wondering what are you objecting to in particular?

Are you suggesting Bert is helping someone figuring out he can use a subscription and this is illegal or against the TOS?

or

Do you read Bert's private messages and you're alluding he is writing something in these messages which is illegal or against the TOS?

or?

Unless I don't understand English properly, which is possible, the only thing Bert is saying he is going to send a PM with some information we don't know the nature of to someone asking something which might be subject to licensing, but there is nothing telling Bert will tell how to circumvent any licensing right. As a matter of fact, he could PM the person asking: "Yes you can but it is against the licensing agreement and I can't help you further".

I believe you should have kept these remarks in a PM message directly to Bert, instead of publicly tainting him an unlawful person, but this is just my opinion and I have the right to have one.

 

 

Edited February 18, 20215 yr by RXP

Goodness... necromance much?