Missing waypoints over Copenhagen

Navigation Data General non MSFS data
1

Hello Navigraph Team,

for some reason with AIRAC 2107 I can not find the waypoint: ADOVI
They are in the EKCH Copenhagen approach sector.

They still can be found here: https://aim.naviair.dk/media/files/5l1spobyr43/EK_AD_2_EKCH_STAR_22_L_2_en.pdf

Is it a bug in the latest airac or were they removed? If they were removed, is there any way to find a history of changes made in the airac?

Thank you and best regards

Thorben

Edit: LAMOX is fine

2

Thanks Thorben, let me check it please …
Cheers
Richard

1 Like
3

Oddly I see LAMOX here (e.g. Navigraph for X-Plane “custom data” and X-Plane 11 native, NG Charts searchable map too).

But not ADOVI. The waypoint is also depicted on Jeppesen chart 10-2K but not present on the Navigraph Charts map either.

1 Like
4

I can confirm that. I did edit my post above. Probably I did a typo when I checked all the waypoints in the arrival charts. So only ADOVI is missing.

5

Hi again,
I have check the source and indeed ADOVI isn´t included but on the other hand, I´m just currious … ADOVI is only needed for lost communication … don´t understand me wrong, missing is missing of course, but for what do you need it and/or what was the reason for this question?

Cheers
Richard

PS: we will check, if this waypoint is included in the next cycle - possible that there is a special reason for that …

6

I’m sorry to intervene here, but it is not used only for lost comms. As you can tell on plate 10-2K, the fix is part of the direct arrival fixes to EKCH that is both used very frequently IRL and on Vatsim :grinning_face_with_smiling_eyes:

7

image
image752Ă—125 12.7 KB

Unless a procedure have been changed that I don’t know about, the document (which is taken directly from Naviairs website) above states that it is used in daily practice.

Can you see if the comm-failure bit is specific to the 2107 cycle or where is that information from?

8

Hi,
thanks for the information. We will see if this waypoint is included in the next cycle.

Thanks for your reports and your help
Cheers
Richard

1 Like
9

Appears included in cycle 2108. Any idea why it was missing from 2107?

10

Reason was a long term parsing error, sorry.

Cheers
Richard

1 Like
11

Fair enough. Thanks for fixing! :slight_smile:

12

This topic was automatically closed 2 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.