Hi to everybody,
After the update to the new aircicle, I the following problem: star and runway are different from Simbrief and listed in Navigraph (and I have loaded the FP from Simbrief).
Do you have some ideas?
An example could be helpful … On which airport, which runway?
Thank ypu
Richard
The flight was from RKSI to ZSPD.
In Navigraph the runway was 16L and in Simbrief was 17L. Also the Star was different
Best regards
Roberto
Scarica Outlook per iOS
Roberto,
I´m not sure, which airport you now mean because both have runways 16L and ZSPD has also a runway 17L. But anyways, I have tested both airports now and I can´t see, any issue - SimBrief and the charts are equal:
RKSI runways (departure) from Simbrief:
and here the real-world charts (from our chart-app):
ZSPD runways (arrival) from Simbrief:
and here the real-world charts (from our chart-app):
You see, all runways are 100% identically between Simbrief and the charts - using AIRAC 2110. Please post a screenshot, where we can see the wrong runway - thank you!
Cheers,
Richard
The flight was in the last week. Navigraph on 16L (loaded from Simbrief) and flight plan Simbrief loaded on MFS2020 was 17L (also ATC the same).
I check with other flight and I let you know if I have same problem.
Best regards
Roberto
Scarica Outlook per iOS
Hi again,
but I don´t understand now the issue - you wrote that there is a “difference between runway from Simbrief and Navigraph”. I have shown you now, that there is NO difference.
Now you are speaking from MSFS … I have also checked the MSFS now:
RKSI is very outdated in MSFS because the two 16L/R - 34L/R are completely missing, but that´s not a Navigraph issue because we may not add/change runways on existing airport. This is a MSFS issue.
ZSPD is correct, so far as I see:
Cheers,
Richard
The problem was on ZSPD: Simbrief was performing on Rwy 17L and Navigraph was performing on the same flight on Rwy 16L .
I hope now is clear the problem .
But anyway if I have other problem between Simbrief and Navigraph, I ‘ll inform you with a photo.
Best regards
Roberto
Please upload the SimBrief flightplan here, which you have loaded in our charts please that we can try to reproduce.
Thank you,
Richard
`Here is an other similar problem. Landing to LFPG. From Simbrief rwy 27L. Loaded the FP from Simbrief to Navigraph and the rwy loaded is 08L. If you wont the photo I got it.
Please upload your Simbrief flightplan file here, that we can try to load it in the charts and that we can look if we can reproduce it.
Thank you,
Richard
Dear Richard ,
please see the following photos and FP from simbrief.
Best regards
Roberto
EDDMLFPG_MFS_11Oct21.pln (10.8 KB)
Hi Roberto,
thank you for the flightplan - but I guess you uploaded another flightplan comparing your screenshots.
When I load it in the charts, I get this:
When you look on your screenshots, the filename is differ (“EDDM-LFPG (MSFS)” comparing “EDDM to LFPG”) and also the route-string is differ. Because when I load the route, you see the read bullet point “VEDUS” and you have a “DCT” here.
So, these are not the same flightplan what you shown us in the screenshots. But anyway - in the flightplan you have set 27L into LFPG and the charts shown 27L, no switch.
Here a last part of the flightplan-file:
The same 27 LEFT … so, I can´t see any switch here or any difference …
Cheers,
Richard
Sorry Richard if I insist.
this is the FP (attached) and you can see the RWY 27L.
FP loaded in Navigraph from Simbrief the RWY is 08L
This is a fact and not an opinion. Here you have all the information you need.
The FP is correct.
There are two different RWYS for the same destination (one in Simbrief one in Navigraph)
Why?
Best regards
Roberto
EDDMLFPG_MFS_11Oct21.pln (10.8 KB)
Hi Roberto,
you show me THREE!! different flightplans now. Look at the route in Simbrief of your screenshot and look of the route-string in the charts:
Simbrief (according your screenshot):
… BOMBI NOSPA UN857 RAPOR UZ157 VEDUS VEDU9H
The route string in the charts (according your screenshot):
… VABEN T893 SOSAD DCT VEDUS VEDU9H
… and last, the route from your uploaded file:
RAPOR UN857 VEDUS UZ157 XEARM VEDU9H
So, I´m not sure, how you load the flightplan into the Navigraph-Charts. Therefore I have tested now your route and again, no change, no difference nothing.
I will show you my steps:
-
Goto Simbrief and plan your flight from EDDM - LFPG (blue label) - route will be generated automatically (green label)
-
Press “Generate Flight” (yellow label)
-
Simbrief generates your OFP
-
switch to the Navigraph charts and click on “Flights” (top/left) - yellow label
-
press on the “+ New flight” button
-
press on the “From SimBrief” button
-
press on your last SimBrief OFP which you have just created
… and as a result you get this:
Absolutely the same route as I planned in SimBrief
Cheers,
Richard
@NAVDataOld , Hi. I know this is an old thread, but maybe I don’t need to start a new one.
I am busy creating a flight plan on Simbrief, departing from URWW
The Runway options in Simbrief is 05/23, but the runways on Navigraph are 06/24.
This is the same runway, but just “rounding” the other way, I don’t know if it was ever changed.
Please let me know if I can send you more information from my Simbrief/Navigraph setup.
Simbrief AIRAC is 2402
Navigraph version is ios12 8.31.0 (I presume AIRAC is latest).
I opened this now, and for a moment thought I had lied to you…
In Navigraph…
The charts for URWW (Taxi Chart, etc), as well as the flight planning show 05/23.
But if you zoom in on the moving map (where you can see the airport layout and taxiways) it has 06/24.
Hi Jonathan,
thanks … Simbrief and the charts are correct. Also when you plan a flight directly in the chart app you will see that you can only select the correct/current runways 06/25 …
The issue is on the tiles on the map. I will forward this issue to the responsible person in our team. This is definitivly wrong and a bug in the tiles.
Thanks Jonathan for the hint and sorry that I have overseen your previous posting to this topic.
Cheers
Richard
Hi, you never missed me, I posted these messages about 5 minutes apart.
Thanks for the reply, really a minor issue that doesn’t affect anything, but thought I could point it out.