30 minutes ago, YMMB said:

and not really P3D either...

??? But WHAT ???

13 hours ago, Chapstick said:

True, but at the same time, it's obvious to anyone who understands the current environment that most "simulation enthusiasts" are using Navigraph. 

We've been Flight Simming since FS95 and Flight Sim Developing since FS98 and FS2000, FS2004, FSX, and P3DV3. All are ESP Based 32 Bit Platforms.

In addition, we've used MS Default or Navigraph in most of our 32 Bit Product Line. Pre and Post Pandemic has seen much change to the FS Community.

Post Pandemic we have set a course for LM 64 Bit Platform Development and have chosen Real Nav as our DB for SIDS/STARS and WAAS/LPV for our unmatched PL21 Avionics Suite.

We fully understand that Flightsim Enthusiasts have personal preferences and personal purchase decisions to make, and we are fine with whatever personal choices are made.😎

Edited August 25, 20223 yr by N400QW

Hello!

I wish you all the best regarding your product. I'm a P3DV5 user and intend to be one for a long while. I'm pretty content with p3dv5. Anyhow I'm very new to this hobby and this is the first time I hear about you. What will be the system depth of your product? Will it be called a study level aircraft? Failures maybe?

Thx in advance...

On 8/24/2022 at 7:27 AM, N400QW said:

Thanks for your feedback ggerolamo. It would appear that no developer can please all simulation enthusiasts.😎

We're all already paying for Navigraph. If you seriously expect people to shell out $1000 a year for full nav updates then I can only say godspeed.

I can only hope you have some lucrative corporate contracts! because if you can't please all simulation enthusiasts you've clearly decided that pleasing none is better than pleasing some.

2 hours ago, StAgre said:

We're all already paying for Navigraph. If you seriously expect people to shell out $1000 a year for full nav updates then I can only say godspeed.

I can only hope you have some lucrative corporate contracts! because if you can't please all simulation enthusiasts you've clearly decided that pleasing none is better than pleasing some.

Let's not exaggerate, last I checked the home subscription for real nav is 39.00 for 4 airac cycles.  The higher prices are for the professional products meant for use on FAA approved simulators.  

2 hours ago, jalbino59 said:

Let's not exaggerate, last I checked the home subscription for real nav is 39.00 for 4 airac cycles.  The higher prices are for the professional products meant for use on FAA approved simulators.  

Yes it's $39.99 for 4 cycles - Navigraph give you every cycle for a similar price. If you want every realnav cycle (which you would if you fly on Vatsim) it's $1000.

Nevermind that everyone is already paying for navigraph - I certainly have no interest in paying another $40 on top of that for a worse product.

  

On 8/23/2022 at 1:11 PM, N400QW said:

Our understanding is both Navigraph and Real Nav use the same basic data source. The differences appear to be in the "marketing/packaging".

That said, Eaglesoft is committed to using Real Nav as it supports certain features more easily from a code writers perspective than the Navigraph Package.

In other words: "We are saving cost and development time by using RealNav and will instead pass that cost onto our customers"

Edited August 26, 20223 yr by StAgre

I have to say I'm a bit surprised about the choice of RealNav when most users are already paying for a Navigraph subscription.

For 40$ you only get a quarterly update which for VATSIM/IVAO users could be "OK" but might leave you for 3 month with an out-of-date procedure which is annoying when you are paying to get just that... up-to-date procedures...  (granted you might as well use your other airplanes ijn the mean time while RealNav pushes the update)

Essentially it increases the overall price of your addon by a fair bit.. unless you are targeting the professional market?

Edited August 26, 20223 yr by Flyingfrog

On 8/25/2022 at 2:56 PM, cadetski said:

Hello!

I wish you all the best regarding your product. I'm a P3DV5 user and intend to be one for a long while. I'm pretty content with p3dv5. Anyhow I'm very new to this hobby and this is the first time I hear about you. What will be the system depth of your product? Will it be called a study level aircraft? Failures maybe?

Thx in advance...

"Study Level" is a term simulation enthusiasts use as sort of "shorthand description" for complex aircraft. We don't use that term. We provide a full PL21 FMS System w/PFD/MFD/FGC/RTU which operates like real world Corporate Pilots operate within a Flight Simulation Environment. That means flying SIDS/STARS/Enroute Airways/WAAS/LPVS Procedures. If these terms are unfamiliar we suggest doing a bit of homework prior to purchase.😎

Edited August 27, 20223 yr by N400QW

5 hours ago, StAgre said:

We're all already paying for Navigraph. If you seriously expect people to shell out $1000 a year for full nav updates then I can only say godspeed.

I can only hope you have some lucrative corporate contracts! because if you can't please all simulation enthusiasts you've clearly decided that pleasing none is better than pleasing some.

We aren't arguing relative merits/costs with any simulation enthusiast. Personal preferences and purchase decisions remain with those who use their hobby for pleasure.😎

Edited August 26, 20223 yr by N400QW

3 hours ago, N400QW said:

We aren't arguing relative merits/costs with any simulation enthusiast. Personal preferences and purchase decisions remain with those who use their hobby for pleasure.😎

I have one question, I'm sure you know the RXP/Flight 1 GTN 750 which is based on the airac cycle of the real Garmin GTN Trainer software, which gets updated once a year or something like that. Even if it is not up to date most of the time, you can still enjoy it and fly without any issues, even though it doesn't support Navigraph. Will your FMS at least provide a current airac cycle, which will be updated maybe all 3 years? Because some other developers require Navigraph, and if you don't have it you have an airac from 2013, which is super old. If this isn't possible, may you add a RXP/Flight 1 GTN 750 integration, for users of this one? If you need a RealNav subscription just to fly this plane, it is much too expensive, as you have to pay double the pric for Navigraph and RealNav. If there is an airac cycle provided, which is at least not too old, then you can make use of the plane for sure. 😀

Regards,

7 hours ago, N400QW said:

 That means flying SIDS/STARS/Enroute Airways/WAAS/LPS Procedures. 

Hot Start's Challenger 650, which includes hands-down the most accurate rendition of a PL21 system, does all of this using Navigraph.

Have you guys finished with the pitchforks yet? I need to sort out some hay in next door's barn.

53 minutes ago, Chapstick said:

Hot Start's Challenger 650, which includes hands-down the most accurate rendition of a PL21 system, does all of this using Navigraph.

As you said, it would be the best, if the plane had Navigraph support, but now it is already too late, as they already developed everything with Real Nav. It would be the best if they could add a Real Nav airac to the AddOn which is not too old, so you can fly it even without an active Real Nav subscription. But Navigraph would still be the best solution.

1 hour ago, Christopher Low said:

Have you guys finished with the pitchforks yet? I need to sort out some hay in next door's barn.

A payware dev is using this forum to promote their product, which is fine. But then they’re basically trafficking in misinformation by implying that only their nav data product supports various procedures. This needs to be called out. If you don’t like this, feel free to stop reading or replying to this thread.

He did not specifically state that the procedures mentioned are only possible using their product. He simply stated that it is capable of complex procedures that would place it firmly in the "study level" category (as defined by flightsim enthusiasts).

Oh, and please do not tell me where or what I can post in this forum.

Edited August 26, 20223 yr by Christopher Low