emko

Yes, FsAerodata does update ILS frequencies.

FsAerodata is paid for (plus you need Navigraph data). There used to be a free option. However I am happy with FsAerodata in P3Dv4.5. Question is, do you really need your internal P3D navigational database to be updated?

AIRAC 2014 is the current one. First two digits stand for the year (2020) and the last two digits are the number of 28 day cycle. This is the 14th cycle released in 2020. Looks like EFB is not updated. I'd check that.

Yes, I second the one month option. When you get it, you can go to a link https://navigraph.com/account/downloads/fmsdm and manually download the data (including ones for Aivlasoft EFB). So you will have a backup when you cancel the subscription.

Sorry, didn't realize that. My country (Czechia) had a useable conventional ATS route (W32) until 2013 or so and it connected all IFR airports here (though not efficiently, it was a relic of the communist era where military "owned" the airspace and civilian traffic was tightly controlled). Hm ... digging deeper into that topic, it looks like I was completely wrong. Sorry 🙂 Can you fly B-RNAV using VOR/DME? From the definitions I dug out it seems that yes. Then it all would start to make sense to me again. From 1998 to 2013 you could use some ATS routes using VOR/DME, DME/DME or GNSS (or some IRU) equipment, which is B-RNAV. VOR/DME or DME/DME is of course too imprecise to be used for P-RNAV, which is mandatory now.

The real competitor of Navigraph is NavDataPro from Aerosoft, not FsAerroData. I haven't tried NavDataPro so take my comment with a grain of salt 🙂 . NavDataPro gets their data from Lufthansa. I like their (Lufthansa) charts and approach plates more because they are prettier to look at and easier to read. There was a problem in the past (back in the olden days when even Navigraph had their data from Lufthansa) that many airport were missing or were hopelessly out of date - Lufthansa was not providing data for airports where none of their real world customers flew to, they had IFR data only (obviously) and they didn't list approach minima for category A and B aircraft because most of the airliners are C or D (BTW Boeing 777 is D, when lightly loaded and therefore flying at a slow approach speed, it makes it to category C). Whereas Navigraph nowadays use data from Jeppesen which provides data truly world-wide (even for those obscure no-go areas like Pyongyang). Navigraph gets only IFR data from them, they don't get VFR data (Jeppesen provides them but for a pretty hefty surcharge and if the country itself does not publish good VFR data, Jepp people can't give you what they don't have). Since I am a long-time user of Navigraph, I would advise to get that, if you want current charts and navigational data. But I can't really criticize NavDataPro because I haven't tried it. FsAeroData is a separate program which uses your Navigraph subscription to update FSX/P3D database with current navigational data. I have it but its real utility is limited. You could have an aircraft using a default GPS and you want to be able to use the latest DB, then it can be for you (e.g. Vertx DA64 use the default database, Aerosoft DHC-6 Twin Otter or A2A aircraft without Flight1 or RealityXP GPS addons can use both FSX default GPS and P3D default GPS (with SIDs and STARs support) and you want to have the latest navaids etc). I sometimes tune a VOR, a DME or an NDB by hand so I appreciate having the updated DB. If you are OK flying with the default FSX/P3D database, which is somewhere from year 2005 or 2006, I'd probably check some internet sources whether I could get charts from that era. The AIRAC cycles (in oversimplified English, the navaid db versions) are in format YYMM where YY is a year and MM is roughly a month (it's some 28 calendar days or so - the current is 2014 (valid from 31st Dec 2020 to 27th Jan 2021) and year 2020 didn't have 14 months ... luckily 😄; exact dates are listed here: https://www.nm.eurocontrol.int/RAD/common/airac_dates.html ). So if you get charts for any AIRAC number between 0501 and 0613 it might be the best option. It's the era before stuff like mandatory RNAV in Europe or Free Route Airspace or LPV approaches and things like that so if you have charts a year newer or older than in FSX it might not be the end of the world.

It offers you two basic things: 1) Updates navigation database (of aircraft FMCs if they are supported by Navigraph or through fsAeroData even the FSX/P3D database) 2) Gives you access to charts and maps (my first two screenshots are from Navigraph, thrid is a RW chart) The navigation database updates are important because the navigation points are constantly changing. If you are happy with the old database which FSX/P3D comes with, it's OK. However a lot of things changed during the past 20 years, e.g. Europe went all RNAV, no more enroute VORs or NDBs due to cost cutting. SIDs and STARs are usually RNAV due to noise abatement. My country has no en-route NDBs anymore and even some VORs were decommissioned (co-located DMEs remained because the big aircraft use them to calibrate their IRUs so you can still tune the frequency, dme would show you a good value but your HSI would not work). This is happening in the USA as well albeit much slower. Charts are important because ... you need to know how to fly an approach procedure, which SID and STAR goes where (and how to choose an appropriate one if you don't have an ATC online), where are the stands at the airport, the taxi routes and a lot of information about the airport itself (restrictions, noise, operating hours...) etc. Chances are that PMDG 777 is so automated you can click a button in your cockpit and it flies by itself, it tunes an appropriate ILS frequency and sets a final course, it can hopefully fly even DME arcs. However if you would have a less automated aircraft, e.g. MJC Q400 or PMDG DC-6, you wouldn't be able to rely on automation and you would need to have the charts and need to know how to read them. At the end of the day, if you know how to program a 777 FMC with a route somebody other told you (or Simbrief spat at you), you've just scratched a surface of IFR flying. If this works for you this way and this is what you want to do in a simulator, it's fine. You probably don't need Navigraph account for it. But this is not even a tip of an iceberg, it's a snowflake on its tip. If you want to dig deeper, you definitely would need charts and updated database. These two links are a good start when looking for more information: https://www.pilotedge.net/workshops (it's from USA but most of the rules are general) https://www.peter2000.co.uk/aviation/ifr-flying/ (the hellholes called Europe and England) And ... ehm ... if you decide to learn the basics, put your 777 aside and get A2A 172 + Flight1/RealityXP GTN750 gps. It makes your life much easier 😉 .

From the charts it should be pretty obvious which one you should take. E.g. here is a Navigraph chart for LKPR In this airport, each runway has its own SID. If I took off from RWY 12, the SID which would take me to VENOX, my first waypoint, would be VENO3H or RWY06 it would be VENO3E or VENO6D. Looking at the SID chart, I can see that VENO3N is available only for propeller aircraft only during the daytime and goes pretty close to LKVO airport. LKVO currently see little traffic (OTOH LKKB is a military airbase so you never know what's going on there). There is a lot of NIMBYs around LKPR and these routings are there mainly for noise abatement reason. You can of course fly "online" on IVAO or VATSIM, if a controller is online, they would tell you which SID to take. The exact rules are available to ATC and not published to pilots. But from this chart, I would expect a jet aircraft to go through VENO3B and turboprop through VENO3N. Since I "flew" this flight in MJCQ400 during the day, I used VENO3N which looks like a shortcut for turboprops. If you fly offline, choosing a SID/STAR is completely at your discretion, you can even use a moving map software to "vector yourself" to a final of an approach procedure. Digging into Navigraph charts can help. However in Europe, you can't get all the information from Navigraph. E.g. VFR routes around LKPR are not published by Navigraph, you need to dig them from the government charts:

It looks like I am a far left-itst as well. Let's see where MSFS is going but I'm a bit skeptical. So far I'm yet to see a good quality add-ons which is what P3D makes interesting for me. Not really the case for X-Plane. I used to run XPL up to version 10.30. Both the sim and its add-ons were littered with half-baked features, every minor update was constantly breaking aircraft and add-on devs usually released aircraft in very unfinished state. Hopefully it changed. From my extremely limited RW experience (a guy took me flying and let me perform a couple of turns in his aircraft) both light GA aircraft and LSA (Zlin 43, Alto 912) felt very stable to me in flight. I have very similar feeling in FSX and P3D (yes, the aircraft really felt like they were "on rails" - you feel what the aircraft is doing "by your a$$" and you subconsciously compensate for it - much like riding a bicycle or driving a car). XPL might be better at simulating physics of the flight however when you have no feeling in your controls and your chair it makes it needlessly hard. I prefer a simulator which simulates the way the aircraft behaves and feels rather than the way how it flies when you have extremely limited ways to compensate for it at home.

Well, I'd say that either v4 or v5 is a huge leap forward from FSX. I'm staying with v4 because it works for me and I'm too lazy to upgrade everything - some of my addons are not supported in v5 yet (e.g. PMDG DC-6). For new users I'd recommend v5 unless there are addons which are not compatible with that version.

Exactly. I spent USD70 for PMDG DC-6 which is even older aircraft, can't be happier with it. The price is for the effort of the creator of the addon.

Hi, I don't know how old the navigation aid database in MSFS2020 is. I use P3Dv4 with updated, current data. In nowadays Europe you navigate using RNAV. The navigation points are no longer tied to VORs or NDBs, they are just a random set of coordinates. NDBs and VORs are being decommissioned at a crazy pace all over Europe. In many cases, DMEs are kept because big aircraft use them for calculating their positions. UK has a huge help for planning a route - Standard Route Document: http://www.nats-uk.ead-it.com/public/index.php%3Foption=com_content&task=blogcategory&id=186&Itemid=258.html It's a spreadsheet where you look up a pair of ORIGIN/DESTINATION airport and it shows you a preferred route by ATC.

Speaking of IFR long halus, another cheater here. For PMDG DC-6 and Aerosoft DC-8, I use time compression (2x or 4x). I need to manage fuel or update the INS (or tune NAV radios if I use them for flying - not really possible anymore over Europe). I usually sit in front of my desk, check the aircraft from time to time and play a guitar, read a book, watch a film ... Speaking of other aircraft than the aforementioned two (some A2A or Milviz GA aircraft, Aerosoft Bus or Mjc Q400) - I see no reason to fly long flights in them. I tend to keep the flights up to 90 minutes. One of the most entertaining flights I've done recently in Aerosoft A318 was from London Biggin Hill to London City 😄 .

This list https://www.aurora.nats.co.uk/htmlAIP/Publications/2020-05-21-AIRAC/html/eAIP/EG-ENR-4.1-en-GB.html#ENR-4.1 contains only 4 NDBs. E.g. it contains Woodley (352 kHz, WOD) which is a part of 4 ATS routes and a couple of EGLL procedures but not Chiltern (211 kHz, CHT) which is only used on some approaches. Both are charted on both Navigraph charts and on real world ICAO 2171CD (Southern England and Wales) Ed. 46 (for year 2020). Unfortunately, SMF NDB is charted on neither of them. May be it really is a history. Since the European VORs, NDBs and even ATS routes (in some FIRS) are being decommissioned at a crazy pace, this wouldn't surprise me. (You can actually see that some VORs were decommissioned but their collocated DMEs remained in service - e.g. Dean Cross - DCS 115.20 MHz.

Wow! I paid USD68 (in today's exchange rate - the rate between my currency and USD changed a lot since then due to the bad Corona (the non-Mexican one 😄)) and still I think that the price was more than reasonable. Especially compared to some 85-ish for Aerosoft Airbus 320 (which was a good money as well, BTW).