Announcement

Collapse

PMDG Forum Rules

1) SIGN YOUR POSTS. Since 1997, we have asked users to sign their real name, first and last, to all posts in the PMDG forum. We do this in order to keep conversations personal and familiar. You took the time to be here, we want to get to know you. This is one of the few rigid rules that we enforce regularly. We do so because we feel that forums in which users must engage one another personally are generally warmer, more collegial and friendly. Posts that are unsigned will be quietly removed without comment by the moderators, so to make your life easy- we recommend enabling your forum signature so that you never need to remember. Do this by clicking the username pull-down at the top right, then selecting "User Settings." You will find the signature editor on the ACCOUNT tab, about half way down the page. Look for "Edit Post Signature." Be sure to click the "Show Signatures" box.

2) BE NICE. We are all simmers here and no matter our differences of opinion, we share a common love of aviation, computing and simulation. Treat everyone else in the forum with respect even when you disagree. If someone frustrates you, walk away from the conversation or ask for a moderator to get involved. Speaking of Moderators, they prefer not to be treated as "The Thought Police" but if any behavior infringes on the enjoyment of another user or is otherwise considered to be unacceptable in the moderator's judgment, it will be addressed in keeping with our view of ensuring that this forum remains a healthy environment for all simmers.

3) BE LAWFUL: Any behavior that infringes upon the law, such as discussion or solicitation of piracy, threats, intimidation or abuse will be handled unsympathetically by the moderators. Threats and intimidation may, at the moderator's discretion, be provided to law enforcement for handling.

4) BE FACTUAL: When you post, always be factual. Moderators will remove posts that are determined not to be factually accurate.

5) RESPECT COPYRIGHTS: Posting of copyrighted material such as flight manuals owned by Boeing or various airlines is not allowed in this forum. If you have questions related to copyrighted material, please contact a forum moderator for clarification.

6) RESPECT PMDG: We love to hear what you like about our products. We also like to hear what you think can be improved, or what isn't working. Please do tell us and we will always treat your feedback with value. Just be sure to treat the team respectfully, as they do put a significant amount of effort into building and maintaining these great simulation products for you.

7) RESPECT PMDG DEVELOPERS: All of the developers will spend some time here. Given the ratio of developers-to-users, it simply isn't possible for us to answer every post and private message individually. Please know that we do try to read everything, but developer workload is simply too high to manage personal contact with tens-of-thousands of users simultaneously. In most cases, members of the development team will stick to conversations in the forum and will not answer private messages.

8) RESPECT OTHER DEVELOPERS: PMDG has always advocated for a strong development community and we have many friends within this community. Every developer offers something unique that helps to make the simming community larger and more vibrant. We insist that you treat our friends respectfully.

9) RESPECT MODERATORS: Moderators have a tough job, and none of them enjoy having to stomp out negativity. If a moderator has to weigh in to keep a thread peaceful, please respect that effort and refrain from giving the moderator any grief.

10) If you require official support for any of our products please open a support ticket through the support portal, https://support.precisionmanuals.com

11) This forum is designed primarily as a vehicle for the PMDG development team to interact with our customers, and for customers to interact with one another in a manner that is positive, supportive and assists in the general advancement of understanding the simulation and helping to make this and future simulations better. Any other use of this forum is not permitted, including but not limited to discussion of pricing policies, business practices, forum moderating policies, advertising of non-PMDG products, promotion of events, services or products that are not approved in advance by PMDG or any other topic deemed unacceptable by any forum administrator

12) HAVE FUN: This is the whole point of it all.
See more
See less

Missing option to use the MSFS2020 own AIRAC database instead of the Navigraph AIRAC database

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Missing option to use the MSFS2020 own AIRAC database instead of the Navigraph AIRAC database

    Hello,

    I noticed that you cannot use the default AIRAC data base of MSFS2020 but that you are forced to use the Navigraph AIRACdata base of +/- $10,0 a month.
    I also understand that people will say that Navigraph is the best etc. etc. etc. but that is not the point here.
    My point is that after paying a lot of money for the PMDG aircraft, I would expect that you could select between the MSFS AIRAC default data base or the payware Navigraph AIRAC database.

    My suggestion would be to add an option under PMDG setup menu to select between MSFS default AIRAC and Navigraph AIRAC

    Friendly regards Lox
    Jos Huntjens

    #2
    Originally posted by Lox View Post
    Hello,

    I noticed that you cannot use the default AIRAC data base of MSFS2020 but that you are forced to use the Navigraph AIRACdata base of +/- $10,0 a month.
    I also understand that people will say that Navigraph is the best etc. etc. etc. but that is not the point here.
    My point is that after paying a lot of money for the PMDG aircraft, I would expect that you could select between the MSFS AIRAC default data base or the payware Navigraph AIRAC database.

    My suggestion would be to add an option under PMDG setup menu to select between MSFS default AIRAC and Navigraph AIRAC

    Friendly regards Lox
    From another thread.
    "No we do not support default MSFS Navdata."

    Hello and I am sorry in adv if this topic has been posted here before, I am new here. My question is my navigraph subscription is about to end with last version as 2205. Even though I want to renew it but because of some new policy in my country I cannot make a subscription based payments anymore. I want to ask what version of


    Hello and I am sorry in adv if this topic has been posted here before, I am new here. My question is my navigraph subscription is about to end with last version as 2205. Even though I want to renew it but because of some new policy in my country I cannot make a subscription based payments anymore. I want to ask what version of


    Comment


      #3
      Hello Nameless,

      Please remember to include your full name on your posts. It is the first of the forum rules that you agreed to follow when you signed up (see the top of any page on the forum site). We would hate to see your posts disappear because you are not following the rules.

      Unfortunately, the default navdata in MSFS is insufficient to support the capabilities of PMDG's 737. The aircraft comes with the navdata that was current at the time that it was released, and you can continue to use this navdata without a Navigraph subscription. You will see a message that the navdata is out of date, but you can clear the message and continue with the existing navdata if you wish.
      Tim Lincoln
      My YouTube Channel

      Comment


      • Swezam
        Swezam commented
        Editing a comment
        Want2BFlyin I never said that the sim data is better than the one from navigraph. I’m a subscriber to navigraph for a reason. However, you are implying that the reason that the PMDG 737 doesn’t support MSFS nav data is because PMDG is too advanced and complex for that data when in fact it is the opposite. The navdata used by MSFS is a newer format and too advanced for the PMDG 737 to handle. There is a difference.

      • Want2BFlyin
        Want2BFlyin commented
        Editing a comment
        Swezam It has previously been mentioned both in this thread and elsewhere in the forums that PMDG is already working to update the format of the navdata that they use. It won't be long before this is a moot point. Maybe when PMDG has converted to the newer data format, then default MSFS navdata will be able to be used. I think that is unlikely. Is that the only reason that you believe that the MSFS navdata is superior?

        My biggest concern with the MSFS navdata is that it seemingly does not get updated on the regular AIRAC cycle. Instead, updates to the navdata are included in sim updates, which means that the navdata could potentially be three months or more out of date. Personally, I will gladly take an older data format that is reliably updated over a newer data format that is less frequently updated.

      • Swezam
        Swezam commented
        Editing a comment
        Surely for users who don’t want to pay for a Navigraph subscription like you and me it would be better to have nav data that is updated every 2-3 months instead of always being stuck with Navdata from may 2022.

      #4
      Keep in mind that PMDG addons are highly sophisticated and deeply simulated addons which would simply use a lot of their capabilities if they would (be able to) use the simplified navdata that comes with MSFS. As said above you can use the data that comes with the airplane and if you don‘t intend to fly on Vatsim it is completely sufficient. There is a way to even get rid of the „out of date“ message, just search the forum.
      Ryzen 9 5900X, RX 6900XT, 32GB DDR4 RAM @3600MHz, 4k
      Marc Eland
      GFO Beta

      Comment


        #5
        Let's face it, there is some irony to the fact that it's claimed the MSFS navdata is "too simplified" for PMDG; and yet it's modern AIRAC 424 navdata that supports things the PMDG can't do, like RF legs. 😉

        Maybe once PMDG is finished modernizing their navdata support, they WILL be able to use the default MSFS data.
        Andrew Crowley

        Comment


        • Ephedrin
          Ephedrin commented
          Editing a comment
          Lol I thought the very same when I wrote it but to use the „other“ data I guess the whole system would have to be written differently.

        • Stearmandriver
          Stearmandriver commented
          Editing a comment
          Yep. Based on the current navdata format that PMDG uses, it's true that the MSFS data is missing necessary elements. Fictional "pseudo waypoints" that define RF segments, etc. Hopefully soon we will not need these. It's been surprising to me how long this is taking, reference other addons that contained full -424 support at launch. We'll see how many more stages it gets splintered into before it's actually done.

        • Benjamin.M
          Benjamin.M commented
          Editing a comment
          Also, maybe Navigraph will sell subscription in the future for Xbox users, but I doubt it, PMDG will need to adapt.

        #6
        I'd like to go back to the OP though - There is *NO* requirement for you to pay for anything other than the PMDG 737 itself. It comes with a NavData database. MSFS does *not* update its nav data every AIRAC cycle, so you're not missing out on anything by having the included NAVIGRAPH data, so I'm not sure why this is an issue in the first place? You're arguing that you're missing out on something that doesn't exist.

        Now, you're right, if you want to keep it 100% up to date, you need to buy a NAVIGRAPH subscription, but I'm not aware of anyone providing full nav database updates for free, so again, you're asking for an option that doesn't exist.
        Chris Trott

        Comment


        • CAPFlyer
          CAPFlyer commented
          Editing a comment
          I never said it doesn't get updated, I only said it doesn't get updated *every* AIRAC cycle. I know they update it occasionally, usually with the System Updates, but it's not guaranteed. That was the point.

        • Want2BFlyin
          Want2BFlyin commented
          Editing a comment
          Yep, I misread what you had mentioned. Sorry about that.

        • CAPFlyer
          CAPFlyer commented
          Editing a comment
          No worries. I'm just tired of people arguing that what they get for "free" through MSFS is equal to what Navigraph offers. Yeah, 85 Euro is expensive. At least it's well less than the *actual* cost of a full AIRAC service from Jeppesen or NAVBLUE (much less Garmin - ugh). And you get it for *ALL* platforms and *ALL* addons that use their data. Anyone else, you're paying 1 subscription for the planning AIRAC and Charts, and then *ANOTHER* subscription for *every* aircraft you're updating the GPS/FMS on. What you get for that ~80 Euro a year is nothing compared to what gets charged to someone who actually flies or owns an airplane. It's just a major point of contention for me because people want stuff like this just given to them for free and bitch and moan when they actually have to be adults and real people and realize that it's not a "zero sum" game.

        #7
        Hello,

        I have read all the comments to my question, and I would like to respond to CAPFlyer comments.

        - There is *NO* requirement for you to pay for anything other than the PMDG 737 itself. It comes with a NavData database.
        That is correct, but PMDG 737 comes with an outdated NavData base, that is incomplete

        -MSFS does *not* update its nav data every AIRAC cycle, so you're not missing out on anything by having the included NAVIGRAPH data
        MSFS does regularly update its AIRAC cycle, done by NAVBLUE, and this update is an official world AIRAC update

        -I'm not sure why this is an issue in the first place?
        MSFS does have an updated AIRAC, which I can't use in PMDG aircraft.

        -You're arguing that you're missing out on something that doesn't exist.
        You are incorrect, I am arguing about something that's there (MSFS AIRAC) and I have no option to use the MSFS AIRAC for the PMDG aircraft

        Note: In Salty B747-8I, you can use both, the MSFS AIRAC and the NAVIGRAPH AIRAC cycles, also NAVBLUE works with 195 countries around the world to gather the data via various sources (Aeronautical Information Publication (AIP), NOTAMs or other proprietary government data

        Friendly regards Lox
        Jos Huntjens

        Comment


          #8
          Originally posted by Lox;n228370

          Note: In Salty B747-8I, you [U
          can [/U]use both, the MSFS AIRAC and the NAVIGRAPH AIRAC cycles, also [/I]NAVBLUE works with 195 countries around the world to gather the data via various sources (Aeronautical Information Publication (AIP), NOTAMs or other proprietary government data

          Friendly regards Lox
          The Salty 747 is also about a tenth of the complexity of PMDG aircraft.

          The underlying issue is PMDG aircraft are too complex to use the MSFS AIRAC data. I for one rather that PMDG didn't dumb down their products,

          Also please note rule one at the top of the forum
          Joe Colehouse

          Comment


            #9
            PMDG has definitely neglected switching to the new navdata format for far too long. The fact I've had to define whether an altitude restriction is above or below for over a decade now is beyond ridiculous. If PMDG aims to offer the best 737 simulation you can get, this is hardly acceptable.
            Mark Tegge

            Comment


              #10
              Originally posted by meurkel View Post
              PMDG has definitely neglected switching to the new navdata format for far too long. The fact I've had to define whether an altitude restriction is above or below for over a decade now is beyond ridiculous. If PMDG aims to offer the best 737 simulation you can get, this is hardly acceptable.
              Yes and PMDG has said the same thing. RSR has publicly admitted the update to navdata format is way overdue. There are reasons but the fact is the conversion to the FMS code is currently underway. Things would move a lot faster if they didn't have to back track everytime an update breaks something. I'm confident we'll see it soon.
              Dan Downs KCRP
              i7-10700K 32GB 3600MHz 3080Ti

              Comment


                #11
                Meanwhile, the kid that started out with this does not give much of a crap and is instead loving every minute flying the PMDG!
                subLOGIC Flight Simulator 1 for Apple II - the first ever!!! - YouTube
                Mark "Crabby" Crabtree AAL311 | PHL
                I7-9700KF | 2070 Super | Honeycomb Alpha/Bravo | MFG Crosswind

                Comment


                  #12
                  Hello,

                  For Your Info- I am using PMDG aircrafts from day 1, II started flight simulation in 1982 with Sublogic Flight Sim for PC and continued with all the Microsoft flight Sim releases. (Also, P3D) through the following years. When PMDG came out with their B747 for FS9, I have collected all the different versions (and other PMDG aircrafts), then I did the same thing for FSX, P3D and now for MSFS2020.
                  I am a huge fan of PMDG and, PMDG did an excellent job with all their released aircrafts to get to full realism as far as possible, but ......now we have MSFS2020 with its own AIRAC cycle.
                  Even the 'simplest' aircraft Salty B747-8I can use the two different AIRAC formats. PMDG can't

                  Friendly regards Lox
                  Jos Huntjens

                  Comment


                  • Crabby
                    Crabby commented
                    Editing a comment
                    After admitting that an aircraft is the "simplest" out there, then in the next breath comparing it to one of the most complicated (operationally, developmentally etc), is, well just weird. This should be a sticky: Comparing two different aircraft from two different developers and/or slight, heavily or non-modified default aircraft is at best futile and at worst asinine. It is the flight sim equivalent of comparing an Aston Martin to a Ford Pinto, as is comparing Navigraph with default navigation data.

                    Especially by someone who can't or won't read and can't or won't follow the forum rules.
                    Mark "Crabby" Crabtree

                  #13
                  [QUOTE=Lox;n228503

                  Even the 'simplest' aircraft Salty B747-8I can use the two different AIRAC formats. PMDG can't

                  Friendly regards Lox[/QUOTE]

                  The Salty 747 can use because it is a simple aircraft, also the 'Salty' 747 is still by large the default Asobo 747, so of course it's going to have been originally developed with the ability to use the default database.

                  PMDG is one if not the most complicate, complex aircraft on any flight simulation platform and therefore can't. This is summed up by a quote from Chris "Would mean abandoning a lot of custom coding in FMC, and make a simple FMC with not many applicability present" from https://forum.pmdg.com/forum/main-fo...sfs#post221100, that is the reasoning from a month ago, it won't have change since.

                  PMDG aircraft are not going to use the default nav data unless they are significantly dumbed down, at that point you might as well use Captain Sim products.

                  Do any of the other high quality aircraft like the Fenix A320 or Leonardo MD80 allow the default database to be used?

                  Also Lox read the rules, posts must be signed with full names.
                  Last edited by EasternT3; 01Dec2022, 09:55.
                  Joe Colehouse

                  Comment


                    #14
                    Originally posted by EasternT3 View Post
                    Do any of the other high quality aircraft like the Fenix A320 or Leonardo MD80 allow the default database to be used?
                    Only the JustFlight BAE 146 can (and actually can't be updated via Navigraph), and that's because they use a custom version of the WorkingTitle CJ4 FMS.
                    Regards,
                    --Joe Markowski

                    Comment


                      #15
                      Originally posted by Stearmandriver View Post
                      Let's face it, there is some irony to the fact that it's claimed the MSFS navdata is "too simplified" for PMDG; and yet it's modern AIRAC 424 navdata that supports things the PMDG can't do, like RF legs. 😉

                      Maybe once PMDG is finished modernizing their navdata support, they WILL be able to use the default MSFS data.
                      I really doubt PMDG will be able to use the default MSFS navdata after their conversion to ARINC 424. I've spent a fair amount of time with navdata in many formats, probably because I have a personality disorder and USAF tried to make me a navigator but I opted for engineering. A comparison of the SDK definitions for MSFS native navdata with any recent CIFP (FAA Coded Instrument Flight Procedures ARINC424-18 format https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/flig...products/cifp/) quickly reveals that much is missing from the SDK. Primarily, the SDK only includes departures, arrivals and approaches contained within an airport container loosely based on ARINC424-16. The SDK does not define how one is to create an enroute environment although I assume one uses the same attributes for stuff like LEGS or CommonRouteLegs outside of the Airport container (this is what I believe the Navigraph navdata bgl's to be).

                      I suspect such things as landing zone elevations, critical to RNP or GLS approaches, are not included in the navdata but rather the elevation of the runway centerpoint or worse the APC would be used in the simulation. ARINC424 format of course includes this information.

                      I hope PMDG never dumb's down the FMS to accomodate the stock data, it's bad enough that we are still using a legacy format that is worse than stock data but that will change.
                      Last edited by DDowns; 01Dec2022, 22:44.
                      Dan Downs KCRP
                      i7-10700K 32GB 3600MHz 3080Ti

                      Comment


                        #16
                        Originally posted by DDowns View Post

                        I suspect such things as landing zone elevations, critical to RNP or GLS approaches, are not included in the navdata but rather the elevation of the runway centerpoint or worse the APC would be used in the simulation. ARINC424 format of course includes this information.
                        Take a look at the runway data in wpNavAPT.txt. You'll find that every single runway at an airport uses the same threshold elevation, and it is the elevation of the airport center. We've never had proper threshold elevations used in PMDG navdata, for any approach. It didn't matter in FSX and P3d because airports were flat. In MSFS it very much does matter, and this is the reason you'll often find an RNAV approach brings you to the threshold a little high or low. It can be fixed by manually editing the runway data in that file, but will be overwritten during your next navdata update. It's one of many things I'm looking forward to being fixed (surely it's going to be fixed... right? 😁).

                        Basically, PMDG navdata still treats airports as flat, even though they aren't in MSFS.
                        Andrew Crowley

                        Comment


                        • DDowns
                          DDowns commented
                          Editing a comment
                          Absolutely. I expect the Navigraph adaptation of ARINC424 data to include actual threshold elevations as provided by their source, same as you use on the job. Basically, PMDG navdata dates back to early FS9 when simulation was starting to use FMS emulations. It is a long overdue update.

                          Problem with MSFS airport containers is the runway elevation is defined at the center point, and terraforming deviations are added for appearance but these deviations are not precise. They can only be done in DEV mode using cartoon tools and cannot be entered as data. The MSFS stock navdata is probably using the center point as if the runway were flat.
                          Last edited by DDowns; 01Dec2022, 23:37.

                        • Stearmandriver
                          Stearmandriver commented
                          Editing a comment
                          Huh... I've been able to define exact elevations for various positions in scenery projects, so I'm not sure I'd say terraforming is imprecise in MSFS.

                          Regardless, MSFS terraforming isn't related to the problem. When I first discovered this I was working on an RNP approach to Kodiak. The approach was dropping me pretty high at the threshold, and I finally figured out it was because the FMC was computing a threshold crossing height based on the airport center elevation. The actual threshold elevation in MSFS, with a properly set altimeter, exactly matched the current charted threshold elevation for that runway in real life.

                          I don't think it's MSFS scenery or elevation modeling that is the problem. The funny thing is, it could be fixed without any conversion to the new navdata format. I mean we still want that of course for many reasons, but THIS is fixable now, simply by defining correct runway elevations (using real world values) in the existing navdata.

                        #17
                        Stearmandriver two good points. First, SDK revisit I realize that the runway deformations (elevation changes) are specific properties in the runway object and can be set with data in the xml format. This is separate from the terraforming that can only be done in the DEV mode without any ability to specify the effect. Secondly, the legacy navdata format used by PMDG does use the ARP elevation for all runway thresholds because the same format is compatible with FSX/P3D flat worlds. I don't expect Navigraph to revise their algorithms used to convert ARINC data into the legacy format to accommodate separate products. Especially since I assume they have already coordinated with PMDG for the upcoming new data format, which cannot get here soon enough.
                        Dan Downs KCRP
                        i7-10700K 32GB 3600MHz 3080Ti

                        Comment

                        Working...
                        X