I am noticing the flight plan looks a bit different when loading it from an MSFS PLN file that I exported with LNM verses manually creating it from inside the TBM 930. When loading in the flight plan file it doesn't seem to show the SID and STAR sections. But they'll show if I manually create the flight plan. Could there be some sort of bug with the export MSFS flight plan feature in LNM where it's not properly tagging the SID and STAR? 

In this picture below, I created the flight plan manually from inside the TBM's cockpit and chose my SID/STAR, and it clearly shows (circled in red) where the SID and STAR sections are in the flight plan.

But if I load the flight plan file that I exported from LNM into MSFS it doesn't correctly show the SID and STAR sections like it should above, however the waypoints for them are there. Instead the SID and all it's included waypoints are listed under the 'Enroute' section in the flightplan.

 

Edited November 5, 20205 yr by captain420

I have included my flight plan files if you want to test it out for yourself.

https://www114.zippyshare.com/v/nYzJ3roP/file.html - lnmpln

https://www2.zippyshare.com/v/dZakFtgU/file.html - msfs pln
 

Thanks for the files but I get a "403 Forbidden".

Hi Alex, I sent you the direct links in PM.

Thank you for the files. Got them.

I see that you're using the LNM 2.6.3 which has an error in the MSFS flight plan export. It does not save the region codes which makes loading plans more stable but the resulting plans do not show any waypoints or other navaids at all. I guess this also affects SID and STAR.

I see that the Garmin shows the manual leg from NAKMA in the plan slightly different when building manually in the device in cockpit. This also differs to the plan built in MSFS. So, MSFS is not consistent in its own. But this is probably only a visual difference.
Normally a manual procedure leg needs ATC intervention to terminate the leg but I doubt MSFS ATC is doing so.

Below are two plans. One made with the upcoming LNM 2.6.4.beta (with correct region codes) and one made in MSFS.

https://we.tl/t-y6Y9MJ6XC9

You can see that MSFS inserts obscure waypoints named A4, A5 and A6 after TALPI instead of NAKMA and EMKAM. No idea what they are doing there.

I think its bad practice in MSFS to include the SID and STAR waypoints. These can always be interpreted in a different way. A better way would be to include SID, STAR and approach names and only en-route waypoints as most add-ons and X-Plane do.

This should work better with LNM 2.6.4.beta. The procedure waypoints should not be shown as en-route.

Alex

Thanks Alex for looking into this matter for me. I am also using the TBM with working title g3000 mod if that makes a difference.

I also notice, not only with this plane but other planes like the FBWA320, C172 w/ G1000 that MSFS also seems to add in stranger USR/USER waypoints into the flight plan as well. It's very obscure and I hope Asobo can fix this. It's making the flight plan unrealistic and very confusing, and sometimes the plane will fly off course because of those strange waypoints that it adds.

I would like to have the flight plan listed in the flight computers realistically, with the waypoints listed under the right sections. But with how it is like in my example, it just throws everything under one section and doesn't properly break it down.

But at least I'm glad to see that the problem is addressed in the upcoming LNM 2.6.4 beta. Since I rather use LNM to create my plans and then just export them into MSFS. But for those who like to manually create their flight plans from inside MSFS, then I believe that this issue really needs to be looked into as well. Because it's also realistic to create a flight plan while in the cockpit of lets say an A320.

Thanks Alex, the LNM 2.6.4 beta fixed the SID/STAR displaying problem for me in the TBM's flight plan screen. Now it looks the same whether or not you create the flight plan while in the cockpit or load the plan into the computer.

But I would like to know why it has RW16L and Altitude as waypoints? This shouldn't appear in the flight plan.

Edited November 9, 20205 yr by captain420

On 11/7/2020 at 10:24 PM, captain420 said:

I would like to have the flight plan listed in the flight computers realistically, with the waypoints listed under the right sections. But with how it is like in my example, it just throws everything under one section and doesn't properly break it down.

MSFS did not recognize the waypoints as a procedure due to missing region code.

On 11/7/2020 at 10:24 PM, captain420 said:

Because it's also realistic to create a flight plan while in the cockpit of lets say an A320.

Pilots also load company routes as far as I understood. But this is probably different from airline to airline.

7 hours ago, captain420 said:

But I would like to know why it has RW16L and Altitude as waypoints? This shouldn't appear in the flight plan.

The first instruction in the procedure says: Fly heading until at or above 950 ft. Then direct to CAVOB. The heading to altitude is not defined by a navaid/fix and the position even depends on aircraft performance. LNM cannot model this and assumes fixed aircraft speed and climb rates. A FMC or MCDU in any sufficiently modeled aircraft will switch to the next leg once at altitude and this independent of position or fix.

MSFS adds user waypoints D0 to D4 in the flight plan file for restrictions like these. But they also replace the valid waypoints with these generic user waypoints. Looks wrong to me.

LNM just uses another name "Altitude". No problem IMO.
About the runway fix: No idea. Not at my flying box right now. Does it any harm? I'd rather keep it.

I see more changes in flight plans saved by MSFS with the latest patches. Speed restrictions and more. Looks like the flight plan loading and saving is still changing (not to the better necessarily).

Alex