Hey All -

This is a pretty easy question but I just want to be sure before I subscribe to a NavData plan. I have been flying around Just Flight's PA28-161 + PMS50 GTN addon. I am having an issue where some approaches are accurately depicted on the GTN preview but incorrectly load and skip the IAF.

 

My example from last night was flying into Springdale AR and shooting the ILS 18 approach.   The approach appeared fine in preview but the loaded and activated / loaded plan skipped right over the IAF 'TINSE'.  The waypoint was depicted but the loaded p[lan didn't load this leg and it went straight to the FAF.  

 

Is this a function of NavData being out of date or something going on with PMS50 GTN? I am wondering if I need to update the NavData for the simulator.

 

Thanks for the help-

Benjamin

I have seen and reported the same issue at KTPA R01L.. not sure who is at fault..

Interestingly, the G1000 NXi flies the approach correctly, so the underlying navdata must be in place, I would think.  The GTN750 still relies heavily on basic MSFS flight plan management, with all its shortcomings..

Edited November 15, 20214 yr by Bert Pieke

Hey Bert - long time, no chat.  I hope all is well and I am glad to see you are still engaged with the FS community.  My simming took a backseat while working on my rw certificates.   Kind of fun to get back into it now.

I thought maybe there was something buggy as this was really my first full flight with the PMS50 GTN and I ran into this error.  Seems a bit too coincidental out of the thousands of approaches. 

Benjamin

 

1 hour ago, Bman2006 said:

Seems a bit too coincidental out of the thousands of approaches. 

Not sure what is going on.. my home airport CYCD R16 via HADER works correctly, but KTPA R01L via FITPA does not.

It's because that GTN still uses default flight plan management.  

And it's why I'm basically avoiding anything but the NXi (or CJ4) if I want serious rnav(gps) navigation capability.

Edited November 15, 20214 yr by ryanbatcund

I see.  My goal was to remain as true to my in-plane 650GTN for IFR practice but I'll have to deal with it in some fashion if it happens on multiple approaches.  There is no doubt the PMS50 versions is vastly improved over the default navigation. 

I haven't checked out the NXi but it sounds like I should.  It would be nice if they would share in the project with PMS50! 

29 minutes ago, Bman2006 said:

It would be nice if they would share in the project with PMS50! 

WT has explained that their improvements will find their way into the MSFS code base... at that point, the GTN750 should benefit also.

Edited November 15, 20214 yr by Bert Pieke

30 minutes ago, Bman2006 said:

I haven't checked out the NXi but it sounds like I should

Try the Rob Young Bonanza with the NXi to experience the difference..

48 minutes ago, Bman2006 said:

I see.  My goal was to remain as true to my in-plane 650GTN for IFR practice but I'll have to deal with it in some fashion if it happens on multiple approaches.  There is no doubt the PMS50 versions is vastly improved over the default navigation. 

I haven't checked out the NXi but it sounds like I should.  It would be nice if they would share in the project with PMS50! 

You should check out xp11 with rxp GTN 650 - that would meet your needs.  The MSFS one isn't close to the real one yet.

 

Edited November 15, 20214 yr by ryanbatcund

Yeah, the Flight1 GTN 750/650 was great on P3D + A2A PA28-181.  It was about as close as I could get to my plane configuration. 

I have not yet ventured over to xp11. 

 

 

Oh then I'd stick with p3d it that's what you're simulating.  You'll be frustrated with the PMS version after using rxp/F1.

P3D was definitely dialed in.  I did reinstall the base components about a month after 2020 was released  just because it was all show at that point.  Since that time, I refreshed my OS and didn't have anything installed for a while.  I figured MSFS had picked up steam over the year and it has.  However, it is still just a little short of where P3D was in terms of my simulation.  It's getting there and I will just be patient.  If I can get the fundamental procedural practice between Foreflight and the GTN, that's all I really need.   Things begin to break down when IAFs are absent..  

The NXi is really close to the rxp GTN in terms of navigation.  But I agree it's annoying that's it not the GTN. 

35 minutes ago, Bman2006 said:

It's getting there and I will just be patient.  If I can get the fundamental procedural practice between Foreflight and the GTN, that's all I really need.   Things begin to break down when IAFs are absent..  

The GTN is a pretty version of the default Garmin which is slated for an overhaul "2H21-1H22" according to the latest MS development update.  If you can wait that long, you are likely going to be OK, but the P3D GTN, and MSFS NXi options are still there for you while you are waiting.. 🙂

I am totally going to give the NXi + RY Bonanza a go.  

It's all about the logic and process of anticipation.  The exact replica is not as critical as I make it out to be!