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:
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
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