We got a new video from World of Aircraft: Glider Simulator and are asking for some alpha/beta testers! Check this post.

 

Jump to content

stewamar

members
  • Content Count

    6
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by stewamar

  1. G'day Jan, I can also confirm the hotfix works in the A320 model as well. Thanks everyone for all your help. Regards, Martin
  2. Brilliant news! Thank you Mathijs, will do. Regards, Martin Stewart
  3. G'day Jan, I too found another RNAV approach without an Approach Transition with 8 legs before the runway at Cairns YBCS R33-W. It loaded up just fine: YBCS Aerosofot nav data 1707: FINAL,R33-W,33,R,8,0, ,0,0,0,0 I will check out the other two airports you mentioned above and see if they load OK or if 8 is the cut off point for a FINAL without an APPTR. The procedure for YLNI has a APPTR's before the FINAL so that one may not count. The NZQN R23-Y FINAL has 9 legs before the runway but it has APPTR's and it loads OK. The EGWU test will be interesting. I have rewritten the ARINC code for a modified NZQN R05-Y and tested it on the Aerosoft Airbus and the FSL A320 and it loads perfectly. It has an APPTR and 5 legs before the runway in the FINAL procedure. I hope this slight change will be accepted by Navigraph in the next AIRAC: This image is a bit messy and fuzzy but it shows all legs display correctly on the ND in the AS A320 and the MCDU in the Flight Plan page. (I can't seem to get a sharp image of the Aerosoft ND.) Anyway, thanks for your advice and help.....It has been a pleasure! Regards, Martin Stewart
  4. G'day Jan, this is good advice (that the Aerosoft Airbus cannot handle more than 8 legs in the final approach) and what I suspected was the case as this FINAL is the longest procedure I have come across. Also consider the fact that all the other add-ons I have tested don't have an issue with the long procedure (Aivlasoft EFB, PMDG and FSLabs). Thank you also Hans for your advice. I will test the "split" procedure on other platforms and request the change in the next AIRAC from Navigraph (as raw ARINC data) if it checks out OK. Thank you both for your great advice. Regards, Martin YBLT
  5. G'day, I am seeking help to resolve an issue where the NZQN RNAV05-Y approach does not load correctly in the Aerosoft Airbus yet loads and flies perfectly in a competitor's detailed A320 (you can guess which one). The data has been in Navigraph's AIRAC's since 1701 and to be honest, I have only flown the Aerosoft 'bus in recent times (1707) and now have experienced this issue. The issue is not in the programming of the route into the MCDU, but it is how the Aerosoft Airbus interprets the data. This procedure does not have an Approach Transition (to match real world charts) and this is not uncommon in the nav data set from Navigraph. The MCDU places the runway in an incorrect position in the flight plan, even though the nav data has everything in the correct order. The Nav data from 1707 is as follows: STAR,ELRU1A,05,5 IF,ELRUV,-44.617189,169.832606, ,0.0,0.0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0, TF,EKVOX,-44.816000,169.331194,0, ,0.0,0.0,0.0,0.0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0, TF,UKLAK,-44.910075,168.911464,0, ,0.0,0.0,0.0,0.0,4,17000,16000,0,0,0,0,0, TF,MABGA,-44.904144,168.737428,0, ,0.0,0.0,0.0,0.0,2,13000,0,0,0,0,0,0, TF,GOSPA,-44.901233,168.654719,0, ,0.0,0.0,0.0,0.0,2,12000,0,0,0,0,0,0, TF,AVGER,-44.961694,168.483822,0, ,0.0,0.0,0.0,0.0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0, TF,IBABU,-44.992811,168.395425,0, ,0.0,0.0,0.0,0.0,4,12000,10000,0,0,0,0,0, FINAL,R05-Y,05,R,12,0, ,0,0,0,0 IF,IBABU,-44.992811,168.395425, ,0.0,0.0,0,0,0,1,220,0,1,0,0.1 TF,QN577,-45.021083,168.314800,0, ,0.0,0.0,220.0,3.8,2,10000,0,0,0,0,0,0,0.1 RF,QN573,-45.126603,168.258731,1,RQN01,109.1,4.9,2,9200,0,1,170,0,0,0,0.1 RF,QN571,-45.161086,168.309714,1,RQN02,61.3,3.7,2,8200,0,0,0,0,0,0,0.1 RF,QN569,-45.157628,168.380089,1,RQN02,37.4,3.7,2,7100,0,0,0,0,0,0,0.1 TF,QN565,-45.139047,168.429822,0, ,0.0,0.0,38.0,2.4,2,6300,0,0,0,0,0,0,0.1 TF,QN562,-45.121078,168.477828,0, ,0.0,0.0,38.0,2.3,2,5500,0,0,0,0,0,0,0.1 TF,OMUBO,-45.065722,168.625181,0, ,0.0,0.0,38.0,7.1,2,3100,0,0,0,0,2,0,0.1 TF,QN555,-45.050000,168.666889,0, ,0.0,0.0,38.0,2.0,1,2440,0,0,0,0,0,0,0.1 RF,QN550,-45.037542,168.686750,1,RQN19,31.5,2.4,1,2040,0,0,0,0,0,0,0.1 RF,QN545,-45.022775,168.717964,2,RQN20,52.8,2.2,1,1480,0,0,0,0,0,0,0.1 TF,RW05,-45.020000,168.735689,0, ,0.0,0.0,54.0,8.0,1,1208,0,0,0,0,3,1,0.1 TF,QN547,-45.016544,168.757728,0, ,0.0,0.0,54.0,1.0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0.1 RF,QN551,-44.987583,168.802617,1,RQN21,290.9,2.6,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0.1 RF,QN553,-44.952706,168.752972,1,RQN22,174.7,1.7,2,6000,0,0,0,0,0,0,0.1 RF,QN557,-45.001775,168.729611,1,RQN82,140.2,2.0,0,0,0,1,170,0,0,0,0.1 RF,QN560,-45.064592,168.753631,2,RQN83,159.1,6.0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0.1 TF,QN878,-45.302217,168.731147,0, ,0.0,0.0,160.0,14.3,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0.1 RF,QN882,-45.351672,168.712475,2,RQN24,181.2,8.0,3,11000,0,0,0,0,0,0,0.1 TF,SUNGU,-45.458381,168.638539,0, ,0.0,0.0,182.0,7.1,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,1,0.1 HM,SUNGU,-45.458381,168.638539,1, ,0.0,0.0,339.0,04.3,1,10000,0,1,240,0,0,0,0.1, The runway is placed at the start of the final procedure group of waypoints and not in it's correct position, 12 legs into the final approach phase. The attached images shows the incorrect flight plan in the Aerosoft A320 MCDU. Referring to the nav data set above and the MCDU images above, the runway NZQN05 is inserted after IBABU when it should be after QN545. All the waypoints are present but the runway gets slotted in the wrong sequence. The result is an usable flight plan: This is an image of the competitor A320 that plots the route correctly that is parsed from exactly the same data source from Navigraph. Considering there are a lot of waypoints in the final approach before the runway (12 in all), is this the limitation of the Aerosoft MCDU and the resulting incorrect flight plan? Do all Aerosoft flight plans require a STAR, APPTR and FINAL of can the approach transition be omitted? I would love to hear your valued opinions to help resolve this issue! Regards, Martin YBLT
×
×
  • Create New...