How does AIRAC work? Missing approaches.

[manageablebits 11]

5 hours ago, MattNischan said:

We're aware of the gaps in the NavBlue data (which we ingest completely to build the sim navdata, we don't leave any out). Part of closing that gap was including the FAA public navdata, as the US area was missing the most approaches, and that data is complete. We are also looking at other sources for augmenting other regions like we did for the US, but as the rest of the world is basically privatized authorities, it becomes a licensing question and process.

As for KASE, we currently don't load circling approaches due to the inability to represent them in the current BGL format, and RNAV 15-Z is actually a FAA special approach, so is not in the data.

-Matt

Thanks Matt I didn't know WT were involved. That can only be good news.  If there are reasons for missing approaches as you've explained for KASE RNAV 15-Z that's cool. Seems to be a lot of approaches missing which exist even in old LNM Navigraph data though. I stress again I'm just a gamer getting into this so I've no experience and could be asking daft questions.

I just decided I'd fly to the Sunshine Coast AUS.  YBSU is missing RNAV-Z 18, VORDME 18, RNAV-X 18, VORDME 36 and NDB 36.  I'm assuming these would work with Navigraph as they show up in LNM using Navigraph 1801, when I don't set it to only use MSFS.

Cheers!

Edited July 1, 2021 by manageablebits

[Matchstick 1,926]

7 hours ago, MattNischan said:

We're aware of the gaps in the NavBlue data (which we ingest completely to build the sim navdata, we don't leave any out). Part of closing that gap was including the FAA public navdata, as the US area was missing the most approaches, and that data is complete. We are also looking at other sources for augmenting other regions like we did for the US, but as the rest of the world is basically privatized authorities, it becomes a licensing question and process.

As for KASE, we currently don't load circling approaches due to the inability to represent them in the current BGL format, and RNAV 15-Z is actually a FAA special approach, so is not in the data.

-Matt

So ultimately are we saying that the Navblue data just isn't as comprehensive as the Jeppesen data used by Navigraph and it's likely to remain that way ?

[stratone 86]

3 hours ago, Matchstick said:

So ultimately are we saying that the Navblue data just isn't as comprehensive as the Jeppesen data used by Navigraph and it's likely to remain that way ?

Sorry @Matchstick - you are wrong. NavBlue belongs to Airbus and is a big player to offer solutions for all kinds of themes. Dispatcher- and Flightplanning software or Developing of procedures are one of them. For sure they are have all navdata.

On the other hand - dealing with navdata is business. Simple meaning you have to pay for. I have no idea about the contract between MS/Asobo  and NavBlue but I would not expect that actual navdata in the form you can get from Navigraph are part of the contract. 

 

Best regards

[Matchstick 1,926]

14 minutes ago, stratone said:

Sorry @Matchstick - you are wrong. NavBlue belongs to Airbus and is a big player to offer solutions for all kinds of themes. Dispatcher- and Flightplanning software or Developing of procedures are one of them. For sure they are have all navdata.

On the other hand - dealing with navdata is business. Simple meaning you have to pay for. I have no idea about the contract between MS/Asobo  and NavBlue but I would not expect that actual navdata in the form you can get from Navigraph are part of the contract. 

 

Best regards

But that still leaves us with the question of why, if NavBlue data is comprehensive and MSFS is implementing  all of the data that it possibly can, is default MSFS missing data that is present in the add-on Jeppesen/Navigraph data ?

It seems to me from the statement from @MattNischan earlier in the thread that the problem is the NavBlue data is missing entries that could or even should be included:

Quote

We're aware of the gaps in the NavBlue data

 

Edited July 1, 2021 by Matchstick

[manageablebits 11]

6 hours ago, manageablebits said:

Thanks Matt I didn't know WT were involved. That can only be good news.  If there are reasons for missing approaches as you've explained for KASE RNAV 15-Z that's cool. Seems to be a lot of approaches missing which exist even in old LNM Navigraph data though. I stress again I'm just a gamer getting into this so I've no experience and could be asking daft questions.

I just decided I'd fly to the Sunshine Coast AUS.  YBSU is missing RNAV-Z 18, VORDME 18, RNAV-X 18, VORDME 36 and NDB 36.  I'm assuming these would work with Navigraph as they show up in LNM using Navigraph 1801, when I don't set it to only use MSFS.

Cheers!

I should say I realise the things I'm saying my example airports are missing are probably not even accurate or possibly there now. YBSU doesn't have a 18/36 runway now, they use 13/31 but MSFS doesn't have that either.  This is just comparing MSFS to 1801 Navigraph which is what comes with LNM and I think Pilot2ATC.  MSFS regularly seems to be very lacking, not just different.

Edited July 1, 2021 by manageablebits

[stratone 86]

24 minutes ago, Matchstick said:

But that still leaves us with the question of why, if NavBlue data is comprehensive and MSFS is implementing  all of the data that it possibly can, is default MSFS missing data that is present in the add-on Jeppesen/Navigraph data ?

It seems to me from the statement from @MattNischan earlier in the thread that the problem is the NavBlue data is missing entries that could or even should be included:

 

As I said, of course is NavBlue comprehensive. But you can not expect that NavBlue will deliver all navdata to MSFS the way as Navigraph is doing. For a subscription to Navigraph you have to pay for. About 80 euros anno including charts. And obviously there is no way to pay for NavBlue/MSFS for the same service. Simple business.

Best regards

[Matchstick 1,926]

2 hours ago, stratone said:

As I said, of course is NavBlue comprehensive. But you can not expect that NavBlue will deliver all navdata to MSFS the way as Navigraph is doing. For a subscription to Navigraph you have to pay for. About 80 euros anno including charts. And obviously there is no way to pay for NavBlue/MSFS for the same service. Simple business.

Best regards

(A better comparison would be the Navigraph Navdata for 30€ per year)

It's entirely possible that MSFS are only paying for a partial data set but, since Navblue have no consumer level product the MSFS data would be competing against, why would it be impossible for it all to have been provided ? Surely it's not like they would be worried about people extracting the FMS data to load into their A320s.

Edited July 1, 2021 by Matchstick

[manageablebits 11]

I just realised before catching up here that I can get the navigraph data without charts and thats not so costly. So I thought I'd try it. The issues don't end there.  Maybe I'm just unlucky which airports I've been picking 🙂  YSBU removed old runways and put a new one in very recently. So even with LNM, PILOT2ATC and MSFS using the latest Navigraph data, it messed up because the runway doesn't yet exist in MSFS graphically etc.  Unless I'm missing something.  Regarding what you're saying/asking @Matchstick, I agree and would simply ask for clarity on what we can expect going forward. If it's the intention or ever going to be possible to be fairly accurate on runways/approaches without paying for third party data.  If not, what value has the MSFS stock AIRAC 2106 update?

Edited July 1, 2021 by manageablebits

[Matchstick 1,926]

33 minutes ago, manageablebits said:

I just realised before catching up here that I can get the navigraph data without charts and thats not so costly. So I thought I'd try it. The issues don't end there.  Maybe I'm just unlucky which airports I've been picking 🙂  YSBU removed old runways and put a new one in very recently. So even with LNM, PILOT2ATC and MSFS using the latest Navigraph data, it messed up because the runway doesn't yet exist in MSFS graphically etc.  Unless I'm missing something.  Regarding what you're saying/asking @Matchstick, I agree and would simply ask for clarity on what we can expect going forward. If it's the intention or ever going to be possible to be fairly accurate on runways/approaches without paying for third party data.  If not, what value has the MSFS stock AIRAC 2106 update?

I guess the value depends on how you feel about having say 90% coverage that is up to date.

I don't have the numbers to hand but my suspicions is that even with the limitations of the supplied NavBlue data it significanly surpasses the default data in any other sim even before you consider that regular updates are being provided as part of the base package.

[manageablebits 11]

1 hour ago, Matchstick said:

I guess the value depends on how you feel about having say 90% coverage that is up to date.

I don't have the numbers to hand but my suspicions is that even with the limitations of the supplied NavBlue data it significanly surpasses the default data in any other sim even before you consider that regular updates are being provided as part of the base package.

If it was 90% accurate I would definitely not bother paying for different data.  It feels like almost every approach I randomly pick lately is missing ILS or RNAV I want to use to catch glide.