24 minutes ago, ryanbatcund said:

I'm using the freeware GNS mod but yes.  You'll still get the fugly massive arc to track to the first IAF but yeah they show up.  And still no support for hold in lieu of procedure turns (the central fix typically)

KFCM rnav (gps) ry 36 not available in default data

prags by Ryan Butterworth, on Flickr

 

Yes, the problem now is that the internal format of the procedure database in MSFS (no matter what the source), has no data type for holds as a procedure entry. 

21 minutes ago, JRBarrett said:

Yes, the problem now is that the internal format of the procedure database in MSFS (no matter what the source), has no data type for holds as a procedure entry. 

This is not correct. All 24 ARINC leg types are supported by the MSFS BGL navdata format. However, the stock flight plan system does not understand a number of leg types, including holds, procedure turns, intercept legs, vectors legs, and altitude termination legs, and thus you might not see the procedures exactly as indicated in the raw data.

All the procedures you see available in the sim are reflective of the complete installed navdata (whether that be stock NavBlue or Navigraph). The scenery, as mentioned earlier in the thread, is not required to be individually managed for RNAV approaches.

These limitations are things we will be looking at as part of our sim work and as part of getting our flight plan system improvements into the sim.

-Matt

8 minutes ago, MattNischan said:

 

These limitations are things we will be looking at as part of our sim work and as part of getting our flight plan system improvements into the sim.

-Matt

Most excellent.

30 minutes ago, MattNischan said:

This is not correct. All 24 ARINC leg types are supported by the MSFS BGL navdata format. However, the stock flight plan system does not understand a number of leg types, including holds, procedure turns, intercept legs, vectors legs, and altitude termination legs, and thus you might not see the procedures exactly as indicated in the raw data.

All the procedures you see available in the sim are reflective of the complete installed navdata (whether that be stock NavBlue or Navigraph). The scenery, as mentioned earlier in the thread, is not required to be individually managed for RNAV approaches.

These limitations are things we will be looking at as part of our sim work and as part of getting our flight plan system improvements into the sim.

-Matt

Looking forward to that!

To the OP: I think the bottomline is: If you are talking about doing RNAV approaches (or any instrument-assisted approaches) realistically and with little to no issues in MSFS 2020, the only aircraft that can do this atm very reliably and realistically is the Working Title CJ4 along with a Navigraph subscription. In MSFS 2020 If you are referring to any other aircraft, whether default or payware third-party ones, I suggest you give up for now. The amount of frustration is simply not worth it. I've finally found peace by re-installing P3D and XP11 and all their aircraft addons where almost 95 percent of the time, basic things like approaches would work like they would in real life in almost all of their default and third party offerings (this is of course after buying a Navigraph subscription and adding it to P3D and XP). 

Not that you asked for it, but here are some scenarios. I hope you find these helpful:

1. You want to practice instrument-based approaches realistically in a C172 equipped with G1000 or GNS 530: buy or reinstall XP11, then a Navigraph sub, then add Simcoder's REP to the default C172 (this is not necessary at all though but still nice), then practice flying these approaches almost anywhere in the world with little to no issues. Yes, scenery will be utter garbage and nowhere as realistic as MSFS 2020, but you are forced to make that compromise for now.

2. You want to practice instrument-based approaches realistically in airliners such as the PMDG 737 (for P3D) or Flight Factor 767 (for XP11): buy/install the base software, then buy/reinstall these aircraft, add navigraph to it, and then fly them anywhere in the world and fly these approches (rnav, rnp, ILS etc) with little to no issues. Again, scenery will be garbage and never as realistic and inspiring as MSFS 2020 but that's how it is for now.

3. You want to practice instrument-based approaches realistically in a simulated Cessna Citation Jet 4 but in MSFS 2020: you already have MSFS 2020 installed. Now add Navigraph sub to it, then get the Working Title CJ4 mod. 

Basically, when it comes to doing and learning modern IFR flying and instrument-based approaches (ILS, RNAV etc), think of MSFS 2020 as the Working Title CJ4 simulator (subject to change as and when the in-sim or modded GNS 530, 430, G1000, G3X etc receive more love from either MS or Working Title or any other third-parties).

So @EvidencePlz recommends PMDG 737 NGXu for "realistic" RNAV approaches. That thing can't even use the industry standard ARINC424-format (defines path-terminators, leg-types). 

No offence, but if  you want to recommend an add-on for a specific purpose, at least pick one that has the capability.

 

1 hour ago, SAS443 said:

So @EvidencePlz recommends PMDG 737 NGXu for "realistic" RNAV approaches. That thing can't even use the industry standard ARINC424-format (defines path-terminators, leg-types). 

No offence, but if  you want to recommend an add-on for a specific purpose, at least pick one that has the capability.

 

No offence taken. I know nothing about their NGXu, didn't buy it and nor was I referring to it. I was talking about the version of PMDG 737 that existed before the NGXu version came out, which I have for P3D. Regardless, the issue related to the ARINC424 format you speak of existed for many years in all their addons and they weren't able to deal with it for many reasons (money was one of them. data providers were asking for a lot of money. Think millions, and no home desktop flight simmer is willing to pay that.). In 2019-2020 they finally found a cheaper workaround somehow and started working with Navigraph to bring the FMC and navigational data to the modern navdata systems and standards. It's being worked on while the functionality is there, albeit with some issues, and hence I said "little to no issues" instead of "absolutely no issues". They have shown commitment to bring things up to standard and work hard on them (Source: https://forum.pmdg.com/forum/main-forum/general-discussion-news-and-announcements/73673-30jul20-pending-updates-update-and-pmdg-737ng3-for-microsoft-flight-simulator-first-look ), unlike Microsoft where entire functionalities like holds and missed approaches are completely missing from the GNS units and FMCs from day one of release, and the only plane where they work is the Working Title CJ4 mod. In MSFS 2020 after activating approaches, the planes more often than not go back to the departure airport if luckily you don't have a CTD right then! But no...we need frequent world updates and nice shiny POIs and it's been 8 months since release and now we should go on Twitch and admire Buckingham Palace and it's not a problem if planes fly back to the departure airport after activating approach. 

Edited April 9, 20215 yr by EvidencePlz

1 hour ago, SAS443 said:

That thing can't even use the industry standard ARINC424-format (defines path-terminators, leg-types).

Pretty much no addon will use ARINC-424 format directly. Data providers are not exactly jumping at the chance to hand out for a small fee the same thing they provide to operators for a very, very large fee. Additionally, there are big liability concerns that data providers can be subject to.

That being said, data from sim providers like Navigraph and NavDataPro is the exact same information, mostly just reformatted both so you can't load it into a real FMS and so it's easier for developers to work with.

-Matt

Edited April 9, 20215 yr by MattNischan

3 minutes ago, MattNischan said:

Pretty much no addon will use ARINC-424 format directly.

Thanks for the clarification. I stand corrected 🙂 

On 3/26/2021 at 8:58 AM, Chock said:

Another workaround, and guys, guys, hear me out! I know it's radical, but you can actually try flying the aeroplane yourself. 🤣

Literally was about to say the same thing. You've got a yoke for a reason. I just can't for the life of me imagine just sitting there pressing autopilot buttons all day long and then flying the last 30 seconds. 

Simulation simulating real life I guess. 

On 3/26/2021 at 2:23 PM, wims80 said:

This is entirely down to the AIRAC data, isn't it? Perhaps Microsoft should get a different provider that has all the procedures and not just a small portion of them

Yeah, no. I mean people don't quite get this. I'm a recreational pilot and I pay $400 a year for charts. To complain that Microsoft isn't giving them to the entire world for free is absurd. 

2 hours ago, MattNischan said:

Pretty much no addon will use ARINC-424 format directly. Data providers are not exactly jumping at the chance to hand out for a small fee the same thing they provide to operators for a very, very large fee. Additionally, there are big liability concerns that data providers can be subject to.

That being said, data from sim providers like Navigraph and NavDataPro is the exact same information, mostly just reformatted both so you can't load it into a real FMS and so it's easier for developers to work with.

-Matt

The only simulator that I know of that uses an actual worldwide ARINC-424 nav database natively is Aerowinx PSX and the cost of providing that limited it to just one update per year, and the cost has now increased to the point that they can no longer afford provide it.

X-Plane can use the FAA CIFP18  ARINC-424 database which is freely available directly from the FAA web site, but only covers the US, and does not contain all leg types.

Edited April 9, 20215 yr by JRBarrett