Feature Request Saving SID,STAR etc.

[jackjoe]

Hi,

 

With LittleNavmap I can create a FPL complete with SID STAR and APPR.
Exporting it to AivlaSoft those mentioned elements are omitted.
Saving these elements later in the EFB is also not possible.
On the other hand if I save a MSFS *.FLT with the PMDG B737 all elements of the FPL from DEP to DEST are saved along (not to mention the complete aircraft setup).

 

Somewhere I had read ... 
If AivlaSoft were to include pre-selected SIDs and STARs in the saved FPL, it could lead to inconsistencies with real-world data. Therefore, these procedures are intentionally left out.

 

As a retired pilot in real life I know that SIDs STARs and APPRs are dependent on several conditions in real life.

But this is not real life, this is a simulator. 
In a real life full flight simulator with motion the instructor DECIDES about the "real-world data" and SIDs etc. according to training needs.

 

I choose SIDs etc. also according to what I like to train, or sightseeing I like to do, or the kind of weather I want to have.

 

I wish there would be the option the user could decide upon what elements she or he wants to be saved in the FPL.
In case of SIDs and other elements a warning could be given about the risk of "inconsistencies".

 

Hopefully and with regards

Hajo

[aivlasoft]

The current software architecture and internal data structure does not allow it. Changing this would require to rewrite major parts of EFBv2 which is very unlikely.

 

I personally don't see a real benefit of saving a SID, STAR, or APCH with a flight plan, because from my experience in most cases when using a saved flight plan again at all, either the situation (mainly winds) has changed and I have to select another SID, STAR, APCH, or even waypoints (fixes) have changed or are no longer available. In other words, it takes more time to check and update an existing flight plan than creating a new one according to the current situation and its requirements. Just my opinion.

[jackjoe]

Hi Urs,

 

thank you for the reply!

 

Quote

... in most cases when using a saved flight plan again at all, either the situation (mainly winds) has changed and I have to select another SID, STAR, APCH, or even waypoints (fixes) have changed or are no longer available

 

Yes agreed ... If the situation changes ... But again: in the simulator it's a matter of users decisions and authority to change the situation.
 

But thank you for an excellent piece of software !!!

 

Regards
Hajo

[aivlasoft]

2 hours ago, jackjoe said:

But thank you for an excellent piece of software !!!

Thank YOU.

[jackjoe]

Hi Urs,

 

for years I have used the EFB only occasionally and without creating a FPL.

 

And now I must confess it's such a gem and pleasure when it comes to route planning.

 

As such it would be the cream on top of strawberries to save the whole work including SIDs etc.

 

I hope other readers of this thread would support my suggestion.

 

Regards
Hajo

[Balu69]

Hello Hajo

I don't need it myself.

As alternatives, Navigraph, LittleNavMap and even SimBrief store the SID and STAR. You then have to choose the approach yourself. Maybe this will help?

[lonewulf47]

Gentlemen,

 

I still fail to understand why you would want to store procedures. Planning a specific route with a modern tool like SimBrief or Route Planner takes less than one minute. EFB comes into play thereafter offering full flexibility to attach every possible SID, STAR and APPROACH within shortest time. Such a completed routing is valid exactly for that moment of planning. Even next day you might encounter different weather conditions requiring different procedures. Furthermore even the basic route without procedures is only valid throughout the present AIRAC cycle. You might have realized that even MSFS is nowadays updating navigation data within each AIRAC cycle of 28 days. So, whatever you are planning, it is useless if you don't use actual AIRAC data. There will ALWAYS be a mix-up if different AIRAC cycles are used, even with the basic route.

 

Still looking for reasonable arguments to store completed routings. I simply don't find one and believe me, after 20'000 hrs of RW flying in airline and instruction businenss IFR and VFR, my aviation background is good enough to judge that...

[jackjoe]

Hi Balu69,

 

I'm also aware of these alternatives but I favor the EFB for its moving map.

 

For me saving SIDs etc. is also not essential but a matter of convenience and of completeness.

 

I have a flight I love the most and do it at least once a week.
The routing I have saved as .PLN in MSFS and I can instantly load it and I don't have to bother with route planning.

Very convenient and time-saving. I just wish the same for the brilliant EFB.

 

If I am the only one with that wish I understand and have to respect that it won't be fulfilled.

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

 

Hi Oskar,

 

naturally you are absolutely right IN CASE you use actual weather and always have the latest AIRAC cycle. And naturally in case of flying in the RW.

 

But I beg your pardon as I had said before, I as the user of the simulator make the decision for a weather change or not. I also decide if I use the actual AIRAC cycle or not.
I sometimes had only spent money once or twice a year for the latest cycle.

 

May I also ask for what reason the EFB has the possibility to save a FPL at all? After all I can create a FPL right from the scratch and don't need ANY saving.

 

I hope you understand my point of view only of convenience.

 

Hajo

[lonewulf47]

Well, aren't we Simmers always keen on having things "as real as it gets"? That's at least my impression after having attended many FlightSim Conventions and -Exhibits. And that's exactly where EFB has been positioned. In today's simming you can't get away without actual AIRACs and thus actual valid routes. Storing routes with all procedures will thus create a lot of "inconveniences", in general referred to as loading inconsistencies or even errors. What will be the benefit of a warning due to an incompatible procedure? If it is incompatible, it just doesn't fit! And once again, full compatibility can only be achieved when ALL parties affected are using the SAME DATA. It's as aimple as that. Storing a route with all procedures attached means, that you will not be able to update your simulator data ever. Otherwise you will lose your stored routings and/or procedures.

For me storing a route with all procedures attached means that I have given up any flexibility, and that's not really what makes flight simming interesting, does it?

[jackjoe]

 

Yes in general I totally agree with you. But in particular ... Okay let's leave it at that.

 

Hajo