NavData 1304 STAR problem

[cessna729]

Hi Richard (NAVData), welcome and nice to see you

cessna729.

[ephendi]

Hi, I've just got home and checked my sim with CRJ-200 (32-bit) and the current AIRAC 1304 Rev1 Navigraph FMS Data.

Sovled it!!!!

In the Real World at LZKZ there are SIDS and STARS with exactly the same Names!!

Navigraph is using a shortened form of these names in their 1304 FMS Data for the CRJ-200.

This is as provided by Navigraph (note duplicate NAMES)

LZKZx.jpg

 

Unfortunately the CRJ does not seem to like this, and as the SID definitions appear before the STAR definitions, any STAR with a name that has already been allocated to a SID, does not appear in the LZKZ ARRIVALs pages on the CRJ's FMS.

AS demonstrated here:

LZKZ1.JPG

If I rename all the STARS except DEDI1B by adding 1 letter after the 4th characterin of each of the STAR's names.

eg. DEDI1A => DEDIS1A, EBEN1A => EBENI1A, KEKE6A => KEKED6A and NOKR1A => NIKRI1A

That makes all the STAR's except DEDI1B unique, and guess what, all the stars except DEDI1B will then appear in the FMS.

LZKZ2.JPG

 

If I then make the remaining STAR DEDI1B unique, by renamining it to DEDIS1B, *ALL* the STAR's appear in the FMS.

LZKZ3.JPG

 

So what I don't know, is  whether the RW data is wrong (SIDS and STARS at the same airport with the same names)? or wether it's a minor bug in the CRJ-200 that dosn't like identical names at the same airport. But on this occasion I don't think we can blame Navigraph IMHO.

 

I don't know if this "feature/bug" is limited to just LZKZ , how many airports have identical names for the SIDs and STARs?

 

But I can't find any LZIZ.xml and LZZI.xml only has APProachs listed, No SIDs or STARs.

cessna729.

Sorryyyyyy it is LZKZ.xml! just error when i quickly type here. 

[philipp]

I think we got the wires crossed here: 

-navigraph didn't invent the XML format, it was Level-D simulations for FS9/FSX

-Aerosoft navdata is not better/different than Navigraph data here, as they encode the same format

-The 6-character limitation is correct, but in fact not enforced by the format, as you can see at airports like EDDF, where the procedures are named XXXXX.YYY where YYY is the runway identifier.

 

So it is not Navigraphs fault, it is our fault from four years ago choosing the Level-D XML format and making design decisions that were reasonable at that time.

 

Philipp

[Emalice]

Ok, but who cares whose fault it is, really ?

 

Indeed the choice was probably reasonnable at the time and nobody is questionning the judgment of the developpers for making it.

The only thing that matters now is this : is there any practical way this issue can be fixed ? I don't know, through a patch to the CRJ, with an update to the formats the FMC can read, who knows.

Is there a potential solution, and if yes, is it ever going to be applied ? Yes or no will do, but we, as users, want to know where we stand and don't want to modify our XML files with all the necessary careful backup and all if a fix is underway, right ?

 

Thanks again,

Tristan.

[philipp]

There is no quick solution to change the CRJ to use a different format right now.

Instead, I'm currently working with Laminar to change the infrastructure of navdata in X-Plane as a whole. This will hopefully one day benefit all users of X-Plane who care for IFR and procedures. Groundwork has been laid with the 777. 

There is no isolated short-term solution for the CRJ.

Navigational data is like the foundation of every navigation system, as it defines all the data structures from the ground up. You cannot exchange the foundation of a building without changing the building itself.

[cessna729]

A little NOTAM for CRJ-200 Flyers,
Only tried on Windows 7 (64-bit), with X-Plane 9.70, 10.20 and 10.21r1, using navdata cycles between 1202 and 1305 to check each LZKZ.xml.

There are a number of duplicate SID/STAR names at Airports in the FMS data that the CRJ uses (see previous posts).
This occours a total of 570 times at some 118 airports.(which is a very, very small % of the total airports with procedures, note these numbers are taken from the 1305 dataset, which is almost the same as the current 1304). The other thing worth noting is that this "bug" may have been present for some time, but hasn't been picked up because most of the airports affected are remote.
But this could mean some STARS not appearing in the ARRIVALS page of the CRJ's FMS.
So if you think your missing some STARS, feel free to check the full list and see if your Airport and STAR are listed.
Luckily most of the affected 118 airports are off the beaten track and inculde places like NDJILI INTL, BOLE INTL, HURGHADA INTL, LUXOR INTL, TABA INTL,SHAHID BEHESHTI INTL, SARDAR-E-JANGAL and BANDAR ABBASS INTL.

If you feel the need to have a few of those STARS back, there is a simple (but unofficial workaround, heed the warning first. see here)
Duplicate Proc Idents.txt

Update: Reformated the table CRJ_FMS_Data_NOTAM_001.html

cessna729

Edited April 25, 2013 by cessna729

[cessna729]

I'm currently working with Laminar to change the infrastructure of navdata in X-Plane as a whole. This will hopefully one day benefit all users of X-Plane who care for IFR and procedures. Groundwork has been laid with the 777.

  When you get round to needing any beta testers? Sign me up!

cessna729.

Edited April 24, 2013 by cessna729

[ephendi]

Me too

[philipp]

  When you get round to needing any beta testers? Sign me up!

cessna729.

 

No need to sign up anyone especially, when the time has come, it will be in a normal X-Plane beta, just as you'd expect for any new X-Plane feature.

[cessna729]

Philipp said:

..when the time has come, it will be in a normal X-Plane beta, just as you'd expect for any new X-Plane feature

That's good, something to look forward too! CHECK BETA option is ON

cessna729.

[Emalice]

I'm currently working with Laminar to change the infrastructure of navdata in X-Plane as a whole. This will hopefully one day benefit all users of X-Plane who care for IFR and procedures.

 

As far as my knowledge of IFR and procedures goes (which is not much, I conceed), you can do a fair amount of that in Xplane as it is, well, provided of course you have a few third-party plugins, standalone (XFMC/UFMC) or embedded in a plane (CRJ, 777...).

So what do you feel is missing from the current state of things ? Is the "change in the infrastructure of navdata" going to bring new features to the users directly, or will it make it easier for developpers to make "procedure" airplanes (which in turn is going to bring new features to the user, but indirectly) ?

 

This is a very naive question, but the more I fly the more I love IFR, and I am very excited to think that the simulation can still go deeper in that area.

 

Thanks,

Tristan.

[cessna729]

This is just an update for the Table I posted earlyer #31, as I still can't figure out how to do it inline

CRJ_FMS_Data_NOTAM_001.html

cessna729.