XP Garmin RNAV SiDS & STARS

[barcman1967]

Search as I might, I can't find a definitive answer to this.... given that the default X-Plane Garmin 430/530 can't load SIDS and STARS, is it legal to program the RNAV SID/STAR as a FPL and then load it as needed? If not, and I am /G with dual 530s , what are the options?

I do remember Keith talking about flyover vs flyby waypoints during one of the workshops and stated that it's technically not legal to fly a RNAV SID/STAR with a GPS unit vs a FMS unit. But it would appear the Garmin units will flyover vs flyby based on the course change angle and I believe the 430/530 meets the RNP requirements RW?

I am certain this has been answered before, but as I said, i have searched without any real definitive answer.

Thanks in advance.

[barcman1967]

Typical..... 10 seconds after submitting my post...I find this....

http://www.pilotsofamerica.com/forum/ar ... 41797.html

....makes it even less clear!

[RyanK]

There are sections in the FAA's Instrument Procedures Handbook (free download) on RNAV SIDs and STARs. RNAV procedures need to be retrievable by name from the database, so you can't build them manually in the flight plan. The 430/530 can do them as far as I know.

[mm007.emko]

Real world Garmin can. The X-Plane one is somewhat limited. It supports only instrument approaches (incl. LPV ... nice! ), however it doesn't support SIDs and STARs.

A typical workaround is including the SIDs and STARs into flight plan (can't be done when flying online) or using some universal FMC like X-FMC, UFMC or iFMS. And if you aren't assigned an RNAV approach, nothing prevents you from (legally) flying it without the help of GPS.

[barcman1967]

R/W yes, the 430/530 can do it - and I believe some sims other than X-Plane the Garmin is capable. But the XP Garmin only has approaches loaded and able to be selected.

I am thinking that the only workaround on sim is to load and save the SID or STAR as a flight plan. This was part of my original question as my only concern was flyover vs flyby waypoints. As I mentioned, I believe the Flyover vs Flyby is based on the angles involved and if that's the case, Garmin already does that similar to how it manages steep angles on approaches.

[RyanK]

It's not necessarily determined by angles. Here's an example where your GPS's turn anticipation would cut the corner at WESLA if it were programmed manually, even though it's a flyover waypoint. Loading the procedure from the database also ensures you'll have the proper CDI scaling.

https://skyvector.com/files/tpp/1512/pdf/00375WESLA.PDF

[barcman1967]

Great point. Looks like I am dialing in VORs Or using XFMC but in a PC-12 not that realistic.

thanks for the info!

[Keith Smith]

For simulation purposes, I'd say go ahead and put the waypoints manually into the flight plan, noting which ones are flyby vs flyover. If it's a flyover waypoint, then ignore any turn anticipation and ensure that you overfly the fix before changing course for the next one. If you absolutely want to ensure that the turn anticipation doesn't get in the way, then use OBS mode to suspend the sequencing so that it doesn't sequence you to the next waypoint prior to hitting the preceding one.

[barcman1967]

Awesome suggestion! I will give that a try! Thanks!