7 minutes ago, JRBarrett said:

I thought one of the other posters said DND is NOT in LIDO. (It is in Jeppesen). I have never tried the default LIDO charts in MSFS since I use Navigraph.

I also use Navigraph but LIDO simply has the better layout than Jeppesen. Whenever I fly Airliners I use LIDO.

I do like the appearance of LIDO charts. At one point in the past, Navigraph did use LIDO charts.

6 hours ago, JRBarrett said:

I do like the appearance of LIDO charts. At one point in the past, Navigraph did use LIDO charts.

Me too, that's the main traction to me towards LIDO. My difficulty for the moment is to retrieve the key infos: Missed Approach Altitude, DH, Fix altitude... Also the SID/STAR seems incomplete vs Jeppesen. Probably due to my ignorance, I have to study that further...

3 hours ago, Simicro said:

Me too, that's the main traction to me towards LIDO. My difficulty for the moment is to retrieve the key infos: Missed Approach Altitude, DH, Fix altitude... Also the SID/STAR seems incomplete vs Jeppesen. Probably due to my ignorance, I have to study that further...

Uhm the missed approach altitude is right at the bottom box of the approach chart, in bold blue text. It's significantly easier to find than on the Jeppesen charts, how can you miss that? DH is right there too. SIDs/STARs are complete (although they put more SIDs/STARs on single plates while Jeppesen usually does one plate per SID/STAR).

@Fiorentoni Thank you. I had a quick look in flight in the ini A350, but as I said, I have to look/study more thoroughly offine.

Okay so I am learning the LIDO logic and how to read them.

On 7/8/2026 at 11:00 PM, Fiorentoni said:

Although they put more SIDs/STARs on single plates while Jeppesen usually does one plate per SID/STAR)...

As a consequence I have to spend a bit of time to scroll/open the plates to find the suitable one.

Another dificulty I have is that the waypoints shown by the FMC do not correspond to the ones on the LIDO plates. Concrete example : approach to EGKK/26L. The FMC displays CF26L and FF26L, which are on the Jeppesen approach plate but NOT in the LIDO ones. LIDO chart displays: D5.5 IWW, D4, D1.

Any comment or advice is welcome.

I can see that you live by EDDF, which happens to be my base airport (Aerosoft) at the moment (very nice airport and surrounding) 😃until LFPG comes out.

5 hours ago, Simicro said:

Okay so I am learning the LIDO logic and how to read them.

As a consequence I have to spend a bit of time to scroll/open the plates to find the suitable one.

Another dificulty I have is that the waypoints shown by the FMC do not correspond to the ones on the LIDO plates. Concrete example : approach to EGKK/26L. The FMC displays CF26L and FF26L, which are on the Jeppesen approach plate but NOT in the LIDO ones. LIDO chart displays: D5.5 IWW, D4, D1.

Any comment or advice is welcome.

I can see that you live by EDDF, which happens to be my base airport (Aerosoft) at the moment (very nice airport and surrounding) 😃until LFPG comes out.

Yes that's because the approach waypoints are not official waypoint but are created custom waypoints by the charts provider. If you had a LIDO navdata they'd be called like on the LIDO charts, but since Navigraph is Jeppesen, they follow the Jeppesen conventions in the FMC.

@Fiorentoni I understand, thank you. I become more and more familiar with LIDO 🙂

12 minutes ago, Simicro said:

@Fiorentoni I understand, thank you. I become more and more familiar with LIDO 🙂

For most people switching from Jeppesen to LIDO (including myself) it was:

At the start: Ugh, so many colors, too many things put onto a single chart
After some time: Oh actually a lot of the important info is presented in a much better and clearer way!

I find the approach and ground charts vastly superior with LIDO, like leaps and bounds. SIDs/STARs I like Jeppesen a bit more, but only slightly.

1 hour ago, Fiorentoni said:

I find the approach and ground charts vastly superior with LIDO, like leaps and bounds.

I specifically find the LIDO taxi charts easier to interpret. Jeppesen tends to put the taxiway letters off to the side of the taxiway, which can be slightly ambiguous for complicated taxiway layouts and require a fair amount of conscious thought to make sure you're associating the right letter with the right taxiway. LIDO, on the other hand, places the letter onto the taxiway, which makes things unambiguous.

21 hours ago, Simicro said:

Another dificulty I have is that the waypoints shown by the FMC do not correspond to the ones on the LIDO plates. Concrete example : approach to EGKK/26L. The FMC displays CF26L and FF26L, which are on the Jeppesen approach plate but NOT in the LIDO ones. LIDO chart displays: D5.5 IWW, D4, D1.

The "FF" in FF26L stands for "final fix" and is an abbreviated way of referring to the final approach fix (FAF) - or, more accurately in this case, the final approach point (FAP), as this is an ILS. Lido charts designate this by a "P" in a circle; Jeppesen charts designate it by the "Maltese Cross" symbol. The Jeppesen chart also gives the name FF26L that is used to refer to the FAP in the FMS, but this is just supplementary information - as noted, the FAP can be identified from the symbology.

CF26L is an FMS-only waypoint that isn't part of the official approach procedure. As far as I can tell, it is not depicted on the Jeppesen chart either. I've seen different explanations for what the "CF" stands for - "center fix", "course fix" or "centerline fix". The idea is that this fix can be used as an aid for intercepting the final approach course.