Marc_H

and another example RF and AF are the two arc functions we'd need :)

Hi Alec, most of us fly with Navigraph cycles. Navigraph has a contract with the EAG (European Aeronautical Group) now navtech. They get the whole ARINC424 conform database and Richard "scales" this infomration down to the differen Add-On-File-Formats. If PMDG would decide to implement the full ARINC set, Navigraph could provide us the most real (**THE** real) navdata. But it would be just fine PMDG implents the arc funtions only. I attach a very prominent approach which utilizes the RF-Function (and which is completely unable to fly with PMDG jets). I overlayed the way PMDG (LNAV) flys the proc (in red) and in blue the way the aircraft will over- or undershoot: Most agencies publish the RF artificial fix coordinates. The navdata provider include they into the database. Via Navigraph (EAG -> navtech) we have access to the required information.

There is a standard how procedures like approches, SIDs, STARs... are encoded in the NavDatabase. This standard is commonly called ARINC424 that describes a so called Path/Terminator-concept (e.g. fly path XXX° until XXXD is reached). That's the way all modern airliner fly today. PMDG told me years ago they plan to implement an version of the RF function (Radius to Fix). So you could program the AP shall fly a given radius from an artificial fix. Not the very unsatisfying workaround to program every 10° a fix (like for an arc, there is a arc function as well specified in ARINC424). I saw a lot draft versions for new approach procedures utilizing the RF-leg type. I attach a draft version of a new approach procedure as sample:

Hi PMDG, can you tell if the upcoming 777 supports RF-Legs? I hope it will because you can't model tens of thousands of new procedures with this leg type.

Hi PMDG,could you please include presets of airline options for the 777?I mean a list of airlines and you can select one and all applicable options are set.It's quite frustrating to search airliners.net or such databases for the required information...

please upload part 2, 3 and 4.I think Rob was quite funny, unfortunately I wasn't able to attend because of a photography workshop the same day in Munich :(

- Lufthansa- dba (now *s*h*i*t*t*y* Air Berlin :( )- United

777-300ER or the 777-200LR :(

wait for a -300ER, saxey beast :(

Can we download an abstract of RSRs speech from München?

I hope as well for an full ARINC424 Support!!More complex (other than DCT-to-DCT) RNAV-Procedures are at this stage totally unable to fly with PMDG-Products.The EAG (Navigraph) can supply a worldwide coverage of ARINC424 coded procedures.I hope PMDG will implement the whole set, and not just only TF-Legs or such simple things.

>1) What does that mean exactly and why is this aural warning given?Hi Susan,the warning sounds under the following conditions:-a continous movement of more than 2

Hi Dan,that sounds good, the AF-leg is imho quite important!I hope as well they will remove the mandatory runway fix "RW__".I know many procedures which include a visual segment to the runway (eg. Madeira, LPMA) without a runway fix:real Airbus | PS1.3 B744 SimulatorMaybe it's too early to ask, but get to "old" aircraft (737NG v1, 744, MD-11) as well an ARINC424-update?BRGSMarc

Hi PMDG,will the upcoming 737NG support the full set of the in ARINC 424 specified so called "path and terminators"?Especially RNAV-procedures, eg. with arcs around "virtual" center fixes, would profit from this featrure.The solution at the moment is no bad, but nevertheless, it's far(!) away from the real world.BRGS,Marc

http://www.jetphotos.net/viewphoto.php?id=209045andMarc