Hi,I made this appeal about a year ago in the AVSIM forum and I do it now again.I have sent the following email to most of the aircraft developers/publishers. If you think this is a good idea, please support it so maybe it will become reality. I think it will help Richard Stefan/Navigraph too, since they only need to provide/maintain 1 set of data."Hi all, I posted a simular appeal about a year ago in the AVSIM forums but I guess it was too early then.Now with the migration to FSX and the necessary code changes in the gauges, it might be the proper moment IMHO: Please can you all define a single universal format for Navdata and SID/STARs? This way there's only 1 set of data to be maintained and users don't have to download dozens of files anymore.Also the FS community can help to update SID/STARs much easier (if neccesary).For you publishers the advantages are also evident: You know there always will be a set of data available andyou don't have to worry about updating anymore. Please consider this appeal and sit down with eachother to make it possible. Choose an already excisting format as basis or create a new one you all comply to.I really think it will make things for you and the flight sim community much easier. Thanks for listening, Egbert Drenth"

Excellent idea!

I would like this whole "format" concept explained to me.I find (at fscharts or VATSIM, etc.) and print off (if I want to print them off) the SIDs and STARs and DPs that I use.They are PDF's, mostly.What's this about "format", then? Are you talking about some usage of SID/STAR data with third-party viewing tools?RhettAMD 3700+ (@2585 mhz), eVGA 7800GT 256 (Guru3D 93.71), ASUS A8N-E, PC Power 510 SLI, 2gb Corsair XMS 3-3-3-8 (1T), WD 150 gig 10000rpm Raptor, WD 250gig 7200rpm SATA2, Seagate 120gb 5400 rpm external HD, CoolerMaster Praetorian

Mace: He's referring to nav data utilized by FMCs and flight plan creation software.OP: Here's the problem: Imagine all the developers in a single room to figure this out. Developer A wants the format they came up with... developer B wants to retain theirs... etc... etc.Bottom line, it's not going to happen. Egoes and inflated views on their "importance" to the FS community.I've reviewed all the current formats out there... and to be honest, it's clear not a single one was developed by someone who actually develops databases. They're just not optimal in layout and configuration.

Another reason it won't happen is that all developers would have to re-code their products to use the new format. It could be all developers less one if they agreed to adopt an existing format. Also it would be necessary to continue providing data in the old format as well as the new one in order to support people who'd bought a pruduct before the changeover.O believe that this market is too small to justify the expense of implementing such a change.

If... MSFS itself were to implement realistic SIDS/STARS rather than what the AI makes up on the fly, and included FMCs in their jetliners, then I would think that there would be one standard format: the one that Microsoft chooses. It's just a thought, and certainly not a speculation on my part on the future versions of MSFS, nor is this an opinion that reflects AVSIM.COM's official position (if any) on this topic.Jeff ShylukSenior Staff Reviewer,AVSIM

Is it just an appeal or do you have something in mind? Apart from the developers actually wanting to use it, you'll face several challenges:- Creating a starting point (based upon dafif 0610?)- Defining a common format and interface- Creating tools for the community to create updates to the database- Moderating changes to the databaseSo it would take a couple of application programmers, some web developers, a siteadmin, moderators and of course dedication by the community and addon devs.1000 miles and a single step :)Daniel

>If... MSFS itself were to implement realistic SIDS/STARS>rather than what the AI makes up on the fly, and included FMCs>in their jetliners, then I would think that there would be one>standard format: the one that Microsoft chooses. >>It's just a thought, and certainly not a speculation on my>part on the future versions of MSFS, nor is this an opinion>that reflects AVSIM.COM's official position (if any) on this>topic.>>Jeff Shyluk>Senior Staff Reviewer,AVSIM>Hi Jeff,i agree that FSX has no SIDs, but for all the airports ive checked (e.g. EDDF), the FSX approaches plus transitions looked very similar to the real world STARs. Keep in mind that FSX nav data is from spring 2005 or so ..In the FSX BGL scenery files, approaches and transitions are stored as lists of legs (see FSX SDK), which follows the ARINC 424 standard. That standard describes the binary data format for navdata databases. Navdata providers (e.g. Jeppesen) compile the data from the various local gov authorities into that ARINC 424 format and sell that to GPS vendors (e.g. Garmin) and airlines. I bet, MS Aces gets the Jeppesen data in that format, too. Then they transform it into XML and feed it into the BGL compiler which is part of their SDK.Since most addon developers (like me) already have to decode the BGL files, it would be smartest to compile monthly updated data into BGL, too. That would require no change to the addons, just a reimport of the BGL scenery files.If MS Aces decides to include SIDs in FS 11, 27 or whenever, i'm pretty sure the SID legs will use the very same format that approach and transistion legs already use. All that is needed would be:a) (easy) the definition a new header record type for SIDs, which could be very similar to the already existing transition and approach header record types. :( (easy) support for that SID header in the BGL compiler.c) (not so easy) support of SIDs in FSX builtin GPS and ATC.Required changes in addons would be not too dramatic.Martin

Martin:Great post, you're right! I oversimplified my statement. The GPS provides all kinds of realistic approaches for many airports. I think I was considering that the ATC more or less ignores them. Plus, the GPS, while fairly realistic, it can be a fussy way to get at approaches, especially since the ATC doesn't seem to make reference to them. The FSX Flight Planner doesn't take any of these into account, so you either end up getting a third-party flight planner, or you manually enter the waypoints yourself.Jeff ShylukSenior Staff Reviewer, Avsim