Feature Request: RNP/RNAV Navigation Procedures and AIRAC Update for Aerofly FS Global

Hi !Drestx7 BRAZIL

I agree with you.
It would be nice if they could implement the use of Navigraph and Simbrief. Altough they said they don't want to narrow down getting data from one AIRAC provider, it would be accutare. Now, I can not use Simbrief dirctly in Aerofly which is a pitty and neighter AIRAC nor airports are up to date, which makes the sim unfortenately lesser realistic. I'd be realy happy if they implement connection with Simbrief and Naphigraph. That would make Aerofly so much more attractiv to other simmers!

Regards,
Eddeig

Quote from !Drestx7 BRAZIL

(English)

Dear IPACS Team,

I am writing as an enthusiastic user of Aerofly FS Global to request several key improvements that would significantly enhance the realism and fidelity of the flight simulation experience, especially regarding modern navigation and Brazilian airspaces.

I would greatly appreciate it if you could consider adding the following features:

Implementation of RNP AR and RNP Normal Procedures: Adding these high-precision Required Navigation Performance (RNP) approaches, particularly at challenging airports, would be a major upgrade.

Full RNAV Procedures: Ensuring a complete and accurate set of Area Navigation (RNAV) procedures is available for all applicable airports.

AIRAC Cycle Update: Please consider regularly updating the Aeronautical Information Regulation and Control (AIRAC) cycle to keep all navigation data (SIDs, STARs, waypoints) current. Outdated data significantly impacts realistic flight planning.

Improvement to Santos Dumont Airport (SBRJ) Approach in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil: A specific focus on the approach, especially with regard to the challenging terrain and required navigational accuracy, would be highly valued.

General Navigation Data Refinement: A comprehensive review and update of outdated navigation data across the globe, bringing procedures and waypoints up to current real-world standards.

These enhancements are essential for users who wish to practice complex, real-world procedures.

Thank you for your continuous work on this fantastic simulator. I look forward to your positive response to these suggestions.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

(Deutsch)

Sehr geehrtes IPACS-Team,

ich schreibe Ihnen als begeisterter Nutzer von Aerofly FS Global, um mehrere wichtige Verbesserungen anzuregen, die den Realismus und die Genauigkeit der Flugsimulation erheblich steigern würden, insbesondere im Hinblick auf moderne Navigation und den brasilianischen Luftraum.

Ich wäre Ihnen sehr dankbar, wenn Sie die folgenden Funktionen in Betracht ziehen könnten:

Implementierung von RNP AR und RNP Normal Verfahren: Die Hinzufügung dieser hochpräzisen Required Navigation Performance (RNP)-Anflüge, insbesondere anspruchsvollen Flughäfen, wäre eine große Aufwertung.

Vollständige RNAV-Verfahren: Die Sicherstellung eines vollständigen und korrekten Satzes von Area Navigation (RNAV)-Verfahren für alle relevanten Flughäfen.

AIRAC-Zyklus-Update: Bitte erwägen Sie eine regelmäßige Aktualisierung des Aeronautical Information Regulation and Control (AIRAC)-Zyklus, um alle Navigationsdaten (SIDs, STARs, Wegpunkte) auf dem neuesten Stand zu halten. Veraltete Daten beeinträchtigen die realistische Flugplanung erheblich.

Verbesserung des Anflugs auf den Flughafen Santos Dumont (SBRJ) in Rio de Janeiro, Brasilien: Eine besondere Beachtung des Anflugverfahrens, insbesondere in Bezug auf das anspruchsvolle Gelände und die erforderliche Navigationsgenauigkeit, wäre sehr willkommen.

Allgemeine Verfeinerung der Navigationsdaten: Eine umfassende Überprüfung und Aktualisierung veralteter Navigationsdaten weltweit, um Verfahren und Wegpunkte auf den aktuellen Stand der realen Welt zu bringen.

Diese Verbesserungen sind für Nutzer, die komplexe, reale Verfahren üben möchten, unerlässlich.

Vielen Dank für Ihre kontinuierliche Arbeit an diesem fantastischen Simulator. Ich freue mich auf Ihre positive Rückmeldung zu diesen Vorschlägen.

Display More

Updating AIRAC data manually is extremely difficult and complex and requires an external application that can be integrated with the simulator. A very effective solution to solve the outdated AIRAC problem present in Aerofly FS is the simulator's integration with Navigraph, a company specializing in navigation data updates. Navigraph's integration with Aerofly FS has been widely discussed in other topics, but the developers have shown no interest in bringing this important feature to the simulator. This is highly questionable considering that Aerofly FS's AIRAC data is extremely outdated and inconsistent with current departure, arrival, and approach procedures. These procedures change continuously over time, and Navigraph releases updated navigation data every month, designated by a specific code. With outdated Aerofly FS's AIRAC navigation data and the lack of integration with Navigraph, it becomes impossible to keep up with the constant changes in this information, and it is also impossible to create flight plans in SkyVector and Simbrief and import them into the simulator. Due to these issues, users are limited to creating flight plans based solely on outdated navigation data available in Aerofly FS. Refusing to integrate Navigraph with Aerofly FS is completely unacceptable, given that all major simulators on the market have this feature built in. It is extremely important that simulators have Navigraph integrated so that AIRAC navigation data can be updated, ensuring they are consistent with real-world procedures. RNAV/RNP is also an extremely difficult and complex procedure to implement manually in the simulator. Integrating the simulator with Navigraph is mandatory, as this will allow it to be automatically added to both the navigation menu and the aircraft's FMC/MCDU. Creating threads requesting Navigraph integration and AIRAC navigation data updates is a complete waste of time and a waste of effort for any user, given that the simulator developers have no interest in solving these problems in a practical, quick, and effective way to keep up with the constant changes in this information, which are essential for a simulation more in line with reality. Another irritating situation is that the Baron 58 and Cessna 172 have completely outdated and obsolete cockpits without integrated GPS, making it impossible to perform RNAV or RNAV/RNP approaches, since both aircraft only fly via VOR and NDB. These two navigation methods are extremely outdated and obsolete, dating back to the last century and are completely disused today. These navigation aids have been replaced by more modern navigation technologies, such as RNAV, which requires GPS in general aviation aircraft. Commercial aircraft already have this technology embedded in the FMC/MCDU, but the Baron 58 and Cessna 172 lack it due to their cockpits being completely outdated and lacking GPS. Both the Baron 58 and Cessna 172 urgently need to be updated, with their cockpits redesigned to incorporate Garmin GPS to enable these aircraft to utilize the satellite navigation technology better known as RNAV.

Quote from FlyWorld

... but the developers have shown no interest in bringing this important feature to the simulator ...

As I understand it, IPACS already has the interest to integrate such relevant data into the FS versions, but they see problems in being able to pass on the costs to us users.

Basically, from my point of view, there is no way around updating the data at least once a year. These are also needed for the aircraft that display the maps integrated on the displays.

Quote from FlyWorld

Another irritating situation is that the Baron 58 and Cessna 172 have completely outdated and obsolete cockpits without integrated GPS, making it impossible to perform RNAV or RNAV/RNP approaches, since both aircraft only fly via VOR and NDB. These two navigation methods are extremely outdated and obsolete, dating back to the last century and are completely disused today. These navigation aids have been replaced by more modern navigation technologies, such as RNAV, which requires GPS in general aviation aircraft. Commercial aircraft already have this technology embedded in the FMC/MCDU, but the Baron 58 and Cessna 172 lack it due to their cockpits being completely outdated and lacking GPS. Both the Baron 58 and Cessna 172 urgently need to be updated, with their cockpits redesigned to incorporate Garmin GPS to enable these aircraft to utilize the satellite navigation technology better known as RNAV.

I completely agree with you on this point, and this has already been mentioned several times here. If I remember correctly, these GPS were removed shortly after the arrival of FS4. Something incomprehensible.

Quote from ApfelFlieger

As I understand it, IPACS already has the interest to integrate such relevant data into the FS versions, but they see problems in being able to pass on the costs to us users.

Regarding costs, proposals have also been discussed here so that IPACS could initially recoup some of its development costs.
But without any response?

Quote from ApfelFlieger

As I understand it, IPACS already has the interest to integrate such relevant data into the FS versions, but they see problems in being able to pass on the costs to us users.

Basically, from my point of view, there is no way around updating the data at least once a year. These are also needed for the aircraft that display the maps integrated on the displays.

I think they impose many difficulties and obstacles on bringing Navigraph and integrating it into the simulator, which may indicate a complete lack of interest in this feature and in solving this problem quickly, practically, and objectively. As I mentioned earlier, the task of updating AIRAC navigation data manually is extremely difficult and complex, if not impossible, without external assistance like Navigraph. Any attempt to do this manually can result in errors and even worsen the situation. Since there is a clear refusal to bring Navigraph to Aerofly FS, this outdated AIRAC problem could be mitigated by bringing more recent navigation data from other sources and inserting it directly into the simulator. However, this information would still be outdated and inconsistent with current departure, arrival, and approach procedures, as this data is updated monthly and undergoes constant changes.

Quote from Jet-Pack (IPACS)

Same response as the last 20 times this exact question was asked...

If we find an affordable navigation database that we can use for our purposes we're going to use that of course. But we don't want to increase the app price or require users to have a subscription for a third party service to use our sim.

And why not? Do you think other SIM cards do it for free, especially since everything is on the rise these days? That said, it's a choice rather than a solution.

An example: It's very generous of IPACS to provide the ME262 for free, and I think everyone here is grateful, thank you very much! But do you think other simulators would have done the same? I don't think so.
But it remains a choice In summary, what I wanted to say is that everything has a cost, it's a fact, but if it could reduce even a small part of these costs, a solution would still be possible. That's just my opinion. Have a nice day.

Quote from Tomfa

I completely agree with you on this point, and this has already been mentioned several times here. If I remember correctly, these GPS were removed shortly after the arrival of FS4. Something incomprehensible.

Given the long history of Aerofly FS, there was more than enough time to redesign the cockpits of the Baron 58 and Cessna 172 and implement Garmin GPS, allowing these two aircraft to fly RNAV and also perform RNAV/RNP approaches. Since these two aircraft only fly VOR and NDB in the simulator, navigation is significantly difficult due to the fact that the VOR signal range disappears after about 55 nautical miles from the station, and you must quickly tune to a second frequency of the nearest station to avoid getting lost in the airspace. In some countries, such as Brazil, it is practically impossible to fly VOR with the Aerofly FS Baron or Cessna due to the scarcity of VOR stations in the territory. With the Garmin GPS implemented in these two aircraft, these difficulties would be overcome due to the high precision of satellite navigation known as RNAV without depending on ground aids such as VOR and NDB, which are currently in complete disuse with their stations being gradually deactivated throughout the world.

Quote from Jet-Pack (IPACS)

Same response as the last 20 times this exact question was asked...

If we find an affordable navigation database that we can use for our purposes we're going to use that of course. But we don't want to increase the app price or require users to have a subscription for a third party service to use our sim.

This is a highly questionable and unfounded decision, considering that the main flight simulators on the market integrate with Navigraph and leave it as an option for users who want to update their AIRAC navigation data or not. Aerofly FS cannot be left behind and should consider incorporating external technologies to solve problems arising from outdated navigation data. In the main flight simulators on the market, the developers themselves pre-update AIRAC navigation data to the latest version using Navigraph, and subsequent updates are up to the users, whether or not they want to purchase a subscription with that company. You, the developers, could simply purchase a monthly subscription to Navigraph, valid for 30 days, to pre-update the simulator's AIRAC data just once and provide it to users. Once this pre-update is completed to the latest version, you could cancel the subscription to save money. Soon after, Navigraph's integration with Aerofly FS would be implemented and included in the simulator as an option for users who want to pay monthly or annually for the service. Those who cannot afford this service would at least have the latest version of AIRAC on the simulator, which is a previous and standard update made by the simulator developers themselves through Navigraph.

Quote from Jet-Pack (IPACS)

Same response as the last 20 times this exact question was asked...

If we find an affordable navigation database that we can use for our purposes we're going to use that of course. But we don't want to increase the app price or require users to have a subscription for a third party service to use our sim.

So in that case, make it an option… I’m sure there are many users including me that would be willing to pay for an updated navigation database.

No point since navigraph costs money and I doubt much people would pay for it, plus it'll need a lot of work as the aircraft's will need to have a new EFB or system that can connect itself with the internet in order to download a flight plan from simbrief or any other external company, which will also affect being able to play the game offline if the in-game navigation feature is removed. Instead of them focusing on this, it would be better if they focus on other aspects on the game like ground handling or improving current aircraft or adding new features that can be played by the user to the game. But an update of the AIRAC would be nice.

This completely baseless decision to reject the Navigraph feature, which would have definitively resolved Aerofly FS's outdated AIRAC issue, is regrettable. This has been a chronic issue affecting the simulator for years and has never been resolved, harming many users who want a more realistic simulation consistent with real-world procedures. It is extremely outrageous and disappointing to see that this rejection is intended to hinder a practical and objective solution to this problem, to the detriment of other ways to update this navigation data, which may not be the definitive solution and could even worsen this already critical situation.

Well, if the problem is a small team of modelers or other types, why not open a type of training for that? For those who are interested, of course, I think this will help the team a lot And it's less time spent making aircraft and so on... In this case, you could charge a fee for anyone who is interested and then the training can begin.Of course, this all takes time and so on, but I believe that in addition to generating additional profit beyond the game's products, it opens new doors to new resources.

Quote from Jet-Pack (IPACS)

It's a solution for less than 3% of the users... We need a solution that works for everyone, that means getting a newer database but not hiding it behind a third party service.

I disagree with this decision. As I mentioned earlier, the main flight simulators on the market have Navigraph integration, which is available as an option for those who want to update AIRAC navigation data. The developers of these simulators themselves pre-update AIRAC to the latest version using Navigraph and provide it to users when the simulator is sold. It's inappropriate for you not to even consider consulting Navigraph to learn the conditions and costs involved in having the developers pre-update AIRAC to the latest version and also to verify how the integration would work. If you, Aerofly FS developers, purchase at least a 30-day monthly subscription for the pre-update, it wouldn't be so expensive, and you could cancel this subscription after completing the AIRAC pre-update. An outdated AIRAC is very problematic, mainly because the procedures in this simulator database are extremely outdated, preventing flight planning in SkyVector and Simbrief, much less using current air navigation charts that don't match the simulator's outdated procedures. I can guarantee that you, the developers, will encounter significant difficulties if you try to update AIRAC manually or if you try to find more recent navigation data from sources other than Navigraph.