The beta manager looks much like the regular FMS data manager, but installs only in MSFS vs the regular one that supports different sims and tools. The Navigraph data gets installed into your community folder like any mod. If you want to get rid of it, you can uninstall from the beta manager, or delete the folder in Community.
And if you already have a subscription, it costs you nothing more. You have nothing to lose by trying it out.
I was hesitant to use it initially as well. I didn’t trust the stability of the sim. Initially, I refused to use and 3rd party mods at all. I was getting enough CTDs without adding more moving parts to the mix.
But I eventually caved. I was tried of trying to get public charts through Skyvector or NavCan and finding out so many instrument approaches were missing, frequencies were wrong, and just bad data at times. If you followed the RNAV 25 at my local airport, it would land you about 1 mile past the end of the runway into Lake Ontario.
I haven’t looked back since taking the plunge. I’ve had no bad experiences with Navigraph. If there were errors in the charts or data (I’m sure there are), it was minor enough for me to not notice it or I just haven’t come across it yet .
Now my in sim data matches real world data, which match my charts, and external tools like LNM. I’m happy.
I’m Happy as well with NaviGraph.
MSFS matches LNM ( both loaded with NaviGraph), and the NaviGraph Charts( Jeppesen )
match, and are CURRENT.
Without NaviGraph, there are Frequencies that are YEARS out of date, as well as outdated procedures in MSFS & Out-of-Date Approach plates (ie Sky Vector)
what you often see is just Nvidia surround … (or AMDs version) … that’s just combining monitors to one logical screen. That is nothing Asobo has to support, despite the higher resolution that comes with it, as its already implemented on a driver level.
Really supporting multiple monitors needs the rendering of multiple viewports (in different perspectives). That way you can place those Monitors as you like (i.e. one for your front view and two tilted 90 degrees left and right of you as “side-windows”)
NVIDIA-“Surround” is actually a really bad name for what they do - they actually expect you to set up all the Screens in a single plane of view (not angled to the viewpoint) what sounds to me like exactly the opposite of “surround”. If you position them even slightly angled the edges look really distorted to the observer.
The thing that is disappointing for most cockpit-builders is, that Asobo clearly stated msfs2020 would be released with (amongst other cockpit builder features) multi-monitor support … and all we got as their “support” is already implemented in the drivers of the GPU (what is actually just support for big but still flat resolutions).
If you want more information, there are some videos about “simultaneous multi projection” from way back in 2016 on YouTube where NVIDIA implemented support for just that … unfortunately besides VR (basically the same technique with two perspectives), developers didn’t really make much use of that since then.
Sweet! I am gonna take the plunge and install it now. I am already a subscriber and am really happy with their data and how it works in P3D, so gonna give them a shot in MSFS too. I did hear some weirdness happens in FMS systems like in A320 - the date shown is still the NavBlue date, but the actual data should be correct.
OK, I’m still confused. First (this is not the part I’m confused about), can you actually tag me when you are responding to me, as the forum software doesn’t always properly inform me (and not just me, anyone), and frankly I just got lucky in noticing your response because I came back to this thread.
Second, (and this is the part I’m confused about), what you’re saying is that out of the box, FS2020 has the capability (thanks to the drivers provided by the GPU makers) to display contiguous images on multiple monitors, correct? That the clamor for “multi-monitor support” is something other than that, to use an extreme example, perhaps one monitor in front with a forward view and one directly behind you with a reverse view.
Did I get that right?
And if I did, just how many people want to do something like that as opposed to what’s already there? I’ve moved to VR, so it’s a moot point for me, but I gotta think that 98.5% (a purely made up number) of people who want multi-monitor support want it to be contiguous, and the ones who want something different, being a very small number, just aren’t feeling the love from Asobo because they can’t do whatever it is they want to do.
One thing I’ve noticed recently is that there are a lot of airports (mostly places I would describe as “tier-2”, but that’s purely my own description of them) are using the wrong frequency for the tower, which is always (that I’ve noticed) the same as ground. At my “home” field of KPIE, for example, the proper tower frequency is 118.3, but they’re using 121.9 (the proper and actual ground freq) instead.
Is this somehow related to the overall topic of AIRAC data and updates? (FWIW, I’m also using Navigraph).
MSFS has no such capability. Using nVidia Surround combines panels into a single monitor. So lets say you have 3 1920x1080 monitors and use nVidia Surround to combine them in a side by side configuation, Windows sees that as a single monitor with a resolution of 5760x1080. MSFS then sees that as a single super ultra wide monitor. MSFS itself has no support for multiple monitors. It can display on a single monitor only.
One of the issues with going ultra-wide or wider in MSFS is lens distortion. The farther you get away from the centre of the image, the more stretched and distorted the image becomes at the extremities with the effect of an ultra-wide fisheye lens. Even with a single UWQHD monitor, I can see this effect at the edges of my screen. This looks terribly unrealistic. Go wider and that view becomes more terrible. This most definitely does nothing for increasing immersion.
Another issue is that nVidia Surround is designed for using monitors “flat” That means all the monitors in the array are on a flat plane with each other. This is not how multi-monitor setups are used for flight sim or other cockpit style sims such as racing, trucking, etc. Typically, the side monitors are angled at anywhere from 40-90 degrees (depending on size of the displays and cockpit style) to give you a full surround view. You want to be able to turn your head left and right and see the same view you would if you were sitting in the actual vehicle and turning your head left and right. You CANNOT get this effect using a single monitor (or nVidia Surround). This gives you a view of the front of the plane only in super ultra wide.
True multi-monitor support allows you to assign a different camera view to each monitor. Your front view is self explanatory. The left and right monitors are assigned a camera that looks as if you were turning your head in that direction. This is what MSFS is currently lacking that X-Plane does so well.
This isn’t just for that 1.5% of people as you think my friend. People are using that contiguous vew now because they have no other option. Introduce proper multi-monitor support to get rid of that ugly lens distortion at the edges of the screen and I can guarantee people will be all over that like white on rice.
Crunch already gave you the long version, so here’s a shorter one:
What you want to achieve with true multi-monitor support is the possibility to look around without panning. If you want to know what’s going on at 3 o’clock, you just look at the monitor to your right which is configured to show the surroundings in that direction. It’s like having multiple fixed cameras rather than one rotating ditto.
I used to play with 3 screens in Elite, ETS2 etc but i don’t do it anymore. Mainly because the 3 screens only work as well as the worst one, so you need 3 good quality screens (ideally the same one) and then the performance loss surrounding over 3 screens is so significant you’re better off with 1 big screen and TrackIR/Toby.
TrackIR always gives me severe headache after a short while. Seems my Brain just cannot get used to Look around in a scenery where turning my head a small angle results in a was bigger angle in the rendered scene.
Totally agreed… and as long as using VR instead means searching for all the knobs, levers and switches in our home Cockpits (cause you cannot see them with a headset on), that is no valid option either.
Agreed. I love playing VTOL VR since it’s all touch control. It’s fun. But I would prefer having physical, tactile controls that I can feel and have millimeter scale accuracy over. The current VR model in MSFS doesn’t work for me. Not only is performance dreadful and makes me physically sick, having to feel around for a mouse to use to work my cockpit robs me of any sense of immersion I get from wearing the HMD in the first place.
Well. I guess I still vote for going VR and learning to use your cockpits blind, or getting used to the mouse controls. Maybe that’s easier for me because I’ve never used VR before, so never got used to anything different than what it is now. But I don’t know what to say about it making you ill, as it simply does not do that to me, even at “lowish” framerates.
But, back to the topic, could an AIRAC error (probably from Navigraph) be why I’m seeing the wrong tower frequencies in so many places that I go, including my home base? I think it’s relatively new, because I haven’t noticed it until recently, but at the same time, I delegate dealing with ATC to my virtual co-pilot, so frequently I’m not paying attention.
Some people are more sensitive to low frame rates than others. If the motion I’m seeing doesn’t match the motion I’m feeling, I get nauseous. Many people can’t do VR at all because of that. For me, if it’s not 60 fps or higher, I get dizzy and nauseous. Considering everything else I have runs at 60+ (most at a locked 90 fps, matching my 90Hz HMD, I never have an issue.
we have improved the airport frequencies with the next upcoming revision. Was not really an error, more a wrong interpretation from our side due the missing SDK documentation. It’s a little bit more a “try & error” process, sorry.
With navigraph installed, when the WT G1000 enters a waypoint, there will be frequent freezing and G1000 crashes. At the same time, it will frequently cause unpredictable problems that cannot establish ILS. This is a very difficult question.
)