Are there any updates that can be downloaded for departures and arrivals? ENAT requests UDSA2Q but Fenix a320 only has UDSA1Q arrival. It's like it's not updated and running an old system. Any ide?

A subscription to Navigraph keeps everything including the FMS updated to the current AIRAC and has a bunch of other cool features as well.

 

38 minutes ago, dokkemann said:

Any idea?

Do you have a Navigraph subscription to update the FMS nav data of the Fenix A320 (and other aircraft)?

If not, and if you don't want/need the latest charts, you can select a cheaper subscription for the FMS data only.

https://forum.navigraph.com/t/navdata-only-subscription/9714/2

 

If you already have a Navigraph subscription (or you’ve just subscribed), you need to download and run the Navigraph Hub for MSFS, ensuring you update both the Sim's own nav database and the Fenix A320's.

https://navigraph.com/downloads

11 minutes ago, eslader said:

A subscription to Navigraph keeps everything including the FMS updated to the current AIRAC and has a bunch of other cool features as well.

But without Navigraph, shouldn't the Fenix a320 use the default AIRAC from MSFS? It would be strange if addon aircraft require a Navigraph subscription to work properly.
There should be a warning about that on their website for that if it were the case.

6 minutes ago, orchestra_nl said:

But without Navigraph, shouldn't the Fenix a320 use the default AIRAC from MSFS? It would be strange if addon aircraft require a Navigraph subscription to work properly.
There should be a warning about that on their website for that if it were the case.

It cannot use the default AIRAC from MSFS because it's another format (and that MSFS format sucks, by the way, which is why any sane 3rd party developer uses a custom nav data format). It doesn't require a subscription to work properly. You can just fly any other arrival into ENAT, outdated or not, it will get you down just fine. If you fly on Vatsim, well, then you have to have Navigraph, but this is the case for any other 3rd party airliner (except the A300, which however will most likely change to custom navdata format in the future, because the MSFS one sucks, as said).

Should they make that more clear on the website? Maybe. At least there's this: https://kb.fenixsim.com/how-do-i-update-my-navdata-using-navigraph

No offense, you're the first person I've met that buys a study level airliner and has no Navigraph subscription. You should get it, it's worth it and you get to use Simbrief with current AIRAC with your subscription (how do you even plan your flights without Simbrief?).

5 minutes ago, orchestra_nl said:

But without Navigraph, shouldn't the Fenix a320 use the default AIRAC from MSFS? It would be strange if addon aircraft require a Navigraph subscription to work properly.

That's not how it works.

Most payware aircraft ship with their own nav data from a previous AIRAC cycle, which can be updated to the current one using Navigraph.

The default AIRAC in MSFS is updated fairly frequently by Asobo with SU or WU, but again, can be updated through Navigraph. But be careful, the navigation data provided by Asobo in default MSFS will eventually differ from whatever your chosen aircraft's default/non-updated navigation database is sold with.

It's all a bit messy, to be fair.

 

While Navigraph is highly useful and convenient (keeping everything tied in), there are concerns that a third party, charging a non-insignificant subscription fee for people in some parts of the World, have such a sway over keeping nav data in sync.

https://forums.flightsimulator.com/t/the-increasing-reliance-on-simbrief/624687

8 minutes ago, orchestra_nl said:

But without Navigraph, shouldn't the Fenix a320 use the default AIRAC from MSFS? It would be strange if addon aircraft require a Navigraph subscription to work properly.
There should be a warning about that on their website for that if it were the case.

Nothing strange about it.

Many advanced add-on aircraft have highly-customized FMS emulations which require nav data to be formatted in a specific way. The MSFS default data is not compatible. Fenix, PMDG, the Leonardo Maddog and Aerosoft CRJ all use nav data supplied either by Navigraph or Aerosoft NavDataPro. 

However, with a Navigraph subscription you can update as many different add-ons as you want for one price.

37 minutes ago, F737MAX said:

While Navigraph is highly useful and convenient (keeping everything tied in), there are concerns that a third party, charging a non-insignificant subscription fee for people in some parts of the World, have such a sway over keeping nav data in sync.

To me, this is like concerns over the fact that BMW charges extra for heated rear seats. No one actually needs heated rear seats. They're a luxury. If you don't want to pay for them, it won't impact the basic function of the car in any way. When BMW starts charging extra to equip the car with brakes, that's when I'm gonna get mad. 😉

You can sim just fine without current nav data. We all did it for years before updating nav data was possible.

Yes, for some planes this means after you plan a flight in MSFS you will have to write down the waypoints and then manually plug them in to the GPS/FMS, but you will still be able to go from any airport to any airport without having to subscribe to anything.

 

3 minutes ago, eslader said:

To me, this is like concerns over the fact that BMW charges extra for heated rear seats. No one actually needs heated rear seats. They're a luxury.

Navigraph is and isn't a luxury.

Without a Navigraph sub, one can use the Simbrief default (2204 cycle) AIRAC data to plan a flight or the default MSFS flight planner (2401 cycle). However, both methods will throw out errors when trying to import those generated flightplans into various aircraft FMCs/MCDUs, which use AIRAC cycle data from the intervening period.

It also locks out Xbox users from having nav data that syncs up.

Don't get me wrong, I'm happy with my full Navigraph sub.

Nonetheless, supported by one of the largest tech companies on the planet in MS, the default flight planner really should be the one-stop-shop for flight planning in MSFS. Instead, if you want flight plan for a payware aircraft, you'll have to cough-up a monthly fee to a third-party dev or painstakingly perform a trial and error flight plan into your aircraft's box.

I mean, when you get right down to it, the whole sim is a luxury purchase. 😉

As much as I'd like for the sim to be all-inclusive as far as features go, I also recognize that if it ever becomes all-inclusive it's gonna cost $400 which means I will be paying a lot of extra money for features I don't use. I'd rather pay the $100, then use the $300 to customize with only the extras I want.

I think advanced flight planning for "study-level" aircraft is one of those areas where Asobo would spend a lot of time and money developing it, probably still not get it perfect, and then at least half of the userbase would never use it because they don't own the aircraft that needs it in the first place.

 

13 minutes ago, F737MAX said:

supported by one of the largest tech companies on the planet in MS,

That means nothing. I mean just look how awful Outlook has been, for decades.

20 minutes ago, eslader said:

As much as I'd like for the sim to be all-inclusive

Never said that it needs to be all-inclusive. The ability to plan an IFR flight with altitude and speed restrictions, prefered flight level for current winds aloft and finishing with a RF leg should be the preserve of Navigraph paid. A simple IFR plan that uses the MSFS nav data so that it can imported into an airliner's box? No, that should be part and parcel.

Plus, how do you know it would be $400? Economies of scale kick-in. Rather than lots of small independent devs all charging their individual overheads onto their particular solutions to missing/underwhelming parts of the base sim.

 

20 minutes ago, Fiorentoni said:

That means nothing. I mean just look how awful Outlook has been, for decades.

Sure. Yet given MS' size and heft, they could have brought someone in to fix the flight planner. Hardly an Adobe / Figma scenario.

4 minutes ago, F737MAX said:

Plus, how do you know it would be $400?

Because all inclusive means all inclusive. You want up to date IFR capabilities that addon aircraft can use. Another guy wants historical weather. Someone else wants the old arrow system for the early-aviation mail routes. That dude wants all the VOR stations back online. Guy in the corner wants Kai Tak. A sixth simmer wants realtime real-world ship traffic. I've even seen people wishing for stuff like being able to drive race cars on race tracks.

If you bundle everything everyone wants together, you end up with Microsoft Reality Simulator and that, is going to be pricey.

 

Thank the federal U.S. Government for all of this. AIRAC's used to be free until about 10 years ago.

I don't think @dokkemann has the US government to thank for outdated procedures at ENAT (which is in Norway)? 😉