Lets assume there is an Airport in the world, that does not exist in the vanilla FS2020. And then there are developers that solved the problem with a addon Airport 
.
To have all the navigation Data (SID/STARs, Apps,…)available, they added them manually in the Airport Addon package.
Sounds more like a workaround for me, because i am sure that the Microsofts AIRAC does contain all the necessary data.
Now the question:
Is it possible for Airport devs to reactivate that data from original AIRAC ?
Unfortunately but the MSFS2020 use the Airbus NavBlue navigation database not use the AIRAC… 
Sorry but i dont care if its called AIRAC or NAVBLUE navigation database… Either ways its getting updated by MS regularly and its a pity that this data is unavailable for some Airports e.g. EDDS
Gentlemen,
AIRAC is the name for the standard format, which will be used by NavBlue, Lido, Jeppesen, … It’s the specification how the data will be offered in the source format. This format will be parsed into the MSFS format.
NavBlue, Jeppesen, Lido are the provider for this … The quality/completness depends on provider. So it could be, that Jeppesen has the airport/procedure included but not NavBlue.
To split the navdata information from the scenery is all in all a good idea, because no addon scenery designer must maintaine the terminal procedures, waypoints, … every 28 days.
It’s exactly what we (Navigraph) do. We offer “only” the worldwide navdata based on the AIRAC source from Jeppesen. All 3rd party scenery designer has the focus on the scenery, on the layout and must not be maintaine the navdata. Means, a perfect cooperation 
And Microsoft does the same with the navdata based on the AIRAC source of NavBlue.
So simple is that 
Cheers,
Richard
1 Like
Microsoft does do the same in all “normal” airport’s but not on those airport that are missing totally 
And that was the question how a developer can activate those data. Because it’s nearly impossible that navblue is missing such major airports…
In response to the honourable gentleman speaking about AIRAC, I am obliged to intervene here. AIRAC has nothing to do with private service providers such as NAVBLUE, Lufthansa, Jeppesen, etc.
AIRAC is “Aeronautical Information Regulation And Control” system agreed by ICAO member States. The system is largely based on provisions stipulated in ICAO Annex 15 to the Convention on International Civil Aviation signed at Chicago on 7 December 1944.
There are two AIRAC cycles for publishing aeronautical information: 28 days for minor changes and 56 days for major changes planned by a State. It is the State responsibility to publish such information in advance of the effective date. In many cases, this responsibility is delegated to National Air Navigation Services Providers (Air Traffic Control as ordinary people say).
The AIRAC effective dates are fixed by ICAO for each year.
Thanks for all your explanation especially @NAVData ! But I hope this thread stays focused on the question weather it’s possible or not to activate missing airports in the original Navdata!
And if not? If Microsoft is willing to make it possible 
This answer helps the OP a lot 
But I will specified my answer (I want avoid it due the technical aspect, which wasn´t the question):
The ARINC424 format is the base for all the service-provider Jeppesen, NavBlue, Lido, …
The missing airports are “only” results of bad and/or missing sat images. I´m pretty sure, that NavBlue (thats the data provider from Asobo) has ie. EDDS included in the source database. I assume, when an airport will be added per default, Asobo will add the navdata also for this airport (as they are available in their source). We have seen this in the past with the US update, where many missing airports were added and also (not for all, ok) the navdata.
So, I´m sure that somedays when Asobo has added EDDS (as an expample) you can expect the navdata for this airport also in the original data.
Cheers,
Richard
@NAVData Thanks for your answer
Has Asobo added these US airports to the Cloud Data or are they added locally? Do you have an example Airport that was added ?
Btw I have a navigraph subscription… but I just don’t like that these deficiencies in FS2020 are leading to problems…
Cloud and locally - that´s exactly what I have written. They split sceneries and navdata but let the option open to merge both in one package. I´m not sure, if I can really provide an example, but most of the Alaska airports were missing in the patch before (ie. PAKT, what I can remember). This airport was added in the world-update and they have also added some navdata for this airport (at least runway, ILS and other nav-facilities). Terminal procedures are another chapter and here they are not so “complete”.
Also, Asobo released the AIRAC cycles every 28-days as we do. These files are local files, which contains only the navdata but no scenery information (or nearly no scenery information).
Therefore my assumption:
When Asobo add your example EDDS as scenery, then this scenery needs also navdata and therefore they add EDDS also in the default navdata.
Understood, and I try to give you and objective answer - but you know, I wear my Navigraph-glasses 
Cheers,
Richard
So how does the sim associate a particular piece of scenery with a particular AIRAC procedure? E.g., if I create airport EDDS, with all the right runways, does the already existing navdata for that airport suddenly start working, or does it need to be associated manually somehow?
Taking that one step further… If I add a 1 ft runway and call it RWY A, does the GPS-A (circling only) approach suddenly become selectable in the GPS? If not, is there some trick that could be done to the navdata for something like that to work?
Hi
The general answer is yes BUT 
this is depending, if the data are still included in the default navdatas or not.
So, to be stay on the EDDS example:
When in the default NavBlue data the EDDS terminal procedures still exists, but the airport is missing in the default sceneries and/or you don´t have an airport-scenery, you can´t use/see it - clear. But when you install a EDDS scenery, that you can select it in the worldmap - then the procedures are immediately available - the association is the airport-ICAO code. When this icao code is found in the navdata, you can select the SIDs and STARs.
But again, this assume that the default navdata still includes the EDDS procedures (what you/we not known at the moment). When not, you don´t see these terminal procedures and you must wait, till Asobo add these terminal procedures to their navdata updates - or the scenery designer add it directly into the scenery. Which should be avoid, due the 28-day maintenance, as I have explained before.
Cheers,
Richard
What? I think you’re wrong here.
I’m pretty sure the whole thing works in a way where flight regulation authorities publish ONE unified pack of information which, e. g., is then used by companies like Jeppesen, Navblue and Garmin to adjust their software.
If you take a moment and think about it it wouldn’t make any sense for everyone to use their own navigation base data - aviation would be a dangerous mess.
More on the topic: AIRAC (icao.int)
Edit: Also, there have been updates for MSFS in the past dedicated to updating the AIRAC cycle. Likely provided by Navblue rather than ICAO. I don’t see a chance there would be different information delivered if they had partnered with Jeppesen instead of Navblue.
I think it is the second part of my question that is the more interesting one: If we add a “fake” runway with a suitable name will the sim see it as being associated with a circling-only approach.
They all work from the same raw data, but there are multiple steps between the raw AIRAC data provided by each AIS and the database loaded into the navigation system or other system (such as MSFS). The end result is different in at least two ways:
- Different database providers publish different subsets of the official data
- Different database providers code the same procedures differently when they translate from raw ARINC 424 to the database format used in various avionics systems
For a couple examples:
- stuff excluded from the Jeppesen database, with motivations: garmin_data_exclusions_2014
- stuff excluded from the Garmin databases (which are based on the Jeppesen database): garmin_data_exclusions_2014
- compare the number of procedures supported by Navblue vs. Jeppesen
- compare the same procedures in Little Navmap showing Navblue vs. Jeppesen data, for example approach procedures with holding in lieu of procedure turn. The same procedures are coded differently
1 Like