airvik 2 Posted May 19, 2014 Share Posted May 19, 2014 Hi all! The issue concerning AIRAC and EDDF RNW 36 is well known for already one year. Today I've been confronted with again using 1405. What the hell is RNW 36 at EDDF and who puts it again and again into AIRAC? If you look seriousely at EDDF, there is never, never-ever RNW36!!! RNW18 is a departure-only runway. For the folks affected: just go to ...FSX Install Folder\PMDG\SIDSTARS, look for EDDF.txt and delete the row "RNW 36" (Backup is allways required). But my question is still addressed to the NavDataPro developers: why this misstake is again and again included in the AIRAC file? Does quality check not exist? Regards airvik Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BastiDE 3 Posted May 20, 2014 Share Posted May 20, 2014 Oh my god. This is the end of the world. We will all die... Really? A short and friendly Posting of you would have completely passed. Why do you have it so make a big thing? I'm already flown dozens of times to Frankfurt (use Navigraph) and have honestly never paid attention. Could not tell without looking whether Navigraph has the runway 36 with there now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ogruetzmann 11 Posted May 21, 2014 Share Posted May 21, 2014 I'm already flown dozens of times to Frankfurt (use Navigraph) and have honestly never paid attention. Could not tell without looking whether Navigraph has the runway 36 with there now. Just checked, it's not there with Navigraph. Instead, they have 25R and 07L twice (not sure if this is for a reason or a mistake, coordinates differ a bit). Not a big thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deputy Sheriffs Herman 1591 Posted May 22, 2014 Deputy Sheriffs Share Posted May 22, 2014 The NavDataPro data comes from a real world database owned by LIDO (Lufthansa Systems), a professional developer. While you're right, Airvik, that there is no runway 36 at EDDF in real life, there may be a valid reason the runway end is in the database. As BastiDE noted, a friendly note with your suggestion to delete the line you object to would have been a better approach. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NAVData 8 Posted May 25, 2014 Share Posted May 25, 2014 Just checked, it's not there with Navigraph. Instead, they have 25R and 07L twice (not sure if this is for a reason or a mistake, coordinates differ a bit). Not a big thing. This is correct so far, because EDDF 25R and 07L has two ILS frequencies per runway - one for CATI and one for CATIII approaches, like in the real-world ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Emi 5161 Posted May 25, 2014 Share Posted May 25, 2014 We are not allowed to modify the files we get from Lufthansa System. If they deliver us the files with such "mistakes" in them that means that: 1) We have to leave them in and 2) It is the same in any real world airliner using the same database (and most european airlines + many others do). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArneH 15 Posted June 6, 2014 Share Posted June 6, 2014 We are not allowed to modify the files we get from Lufthansa System. If they deliver us the files with such "mistakes" in them that means that: 1) We have to leave them in and 2) It is the same in any real world airliner using the same database (and most european airlines + many others do). But I hope you are allowed to report obvious errors to them? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Emi 5161 Posted June 6, 2014 Share Posted June 6, 2014 Sure, but they may have their reasons to leave them in and then there's nothing we can do. I am sure we are not the only ones who reported them this yet, but if they don't fix it they have their reasons for it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jan-Paul Schuchna 24 Posted June 7, 2014 Share Posted June 7, 2014 Hi, its not a problem of the raw ARINC 424 database, Both Lido and Jeppesen have the RWY End 36 coded, as you cannot code any rwy without two thresholds. This one seems to be a primary problem of the PMDG 777 itself. As soon the RNW XYZ entry is in the SID/STAR file, without a procedure linked to it the error pops up. Currently there are two ways to fix it: By PMDG: fixing the code of the 777, to behave the same way like 737NGX, 747, MD-11 (they don´t have the problem with that entry) By Aerosoft (Peter): excluding the RNW XYZ entry out of the SID/STAR file, when no procedure is available for that RWY. That solution is linked to the parser output and could of course be used by aerosoft. In that point you are not correct Emi. Of course it is possible to fix it, nobody prevents arerosoft from changing the parser logic. But before that is done, it should be discussed with PMDG if its probably not their fault and they should fix it and not aerosoft. Navigraph has already implemented that solution as far as I know. So if they can do it, this could also be a temporary solution for aerosoft until PMDG fixes that problem ;-) RNWS RNW 07C RNW 07L RNW 07R RNW 18 RNW 25C RNW 25L RNW 25R ENDRNWS Jan-Paul Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.