KSBA GAUCH3 Departure Shown as GAUCH2 Within Web-Based Flight Planner Navdata. Conflicts with Reality & in-Sim Flight Planner

Bug Reporting Hub ATC, Traffic & NAVAIDs
, , ,
1

Using the template below will greatly help the team reproduce the issue and ease the process of fixing it. Before posting, search for an existing report. If you are not sure it’s a bug, please first report in User Support Hub.

2 tags are required - add them in the tag section next to the title above:

Feel free to delete this quote section after adding your appropriate tags.

ISSUE DESCRIPTION

Description of the issue:
The GAUCH3 Departure at KSBA is being shown as GAUCH2 in the web-based Flight Planner Navdata. This conflicts with reality and the in-sim Flight Planner, which shows it correctly as GAUCH3.

If applicable, which aircraft is experiencing this issue:

[PC Only] Did you remove all your community mods/add-ons? If yes, are you still experiencing the issue?
Yes & Yes

FREQUENCY OF ISSUE

How often does this occur for you (Example: Just once, every time on sim load, intermittently)?
Every Time

REPRODUCTION STEPS

Please list clear steps you took in order to help our test team reproduce the same issue:

  1. Using real-world charts look up the GAUCH3 Departure at KSBA and verify it is GAUCH3
  2. Using the web-based planner set up a route with KSBA as the Origin and browse the available Departures
  3. Note GAUCH2 is listed as an available choice
  4. Launch the sim and go to the World Map
  5. Open the EFB
  6. Enter KSBA as the Origin and browse the available Departures
  7. Note GAUCH3 is listed as an available choice

YOUR SETTINGS

If the issue still occurs with no mods and add-ons, please continue to report your issue. If not, please move this post to the User Support Hub.

What peripherals are you using, if relevant:

[PC Only] Are you using Developer Mode or have you made any changes to it?
No

[PC, MSFS 2020 Only] Are you using DX11 or DX12?

[PC Only] What GPU (Graphics Card) do you use?

[PC Only] What other relevant PC specs can you share?

MEDIA

Please add a screenshot or video of the issue occurring.

Screenshot 2024-12-29 092651
Screenshot 2024-12-29 092651638×1104 86.7 KB

Microsoft Flight Simulator 2024 12_29_24 09_26_13
Microsoft Flight Simulator 2024 12_29_24 09_26_13770×1048 52.5 KB

[END OF FIRST USER REPORT]

:loudspeaker: For anyone who wants to contribute on this issue, Click on the button below to use this template:

Do you have the same issue if you follow the OP’s steps to reproduce it?
•

Provide extra information to complete the original description of the issue:
•

If relevant, provide additional screenshots/video:
•

2

Do you have the same issue if you follow the OP’s steps to reproduce it?
•

Provide extra information to complete the original description of the issue:
• Let me add that this is causing the GAUCH2 Departure selected via the web-based Flight Planner to be dropped by the in-sim EFB when loading the flight plan saved in the web-based Flight Planner and the user must manually re-select the GAUCH3 Departure from the EFB and add it to the loaded Flight Plan.

If relevant, provide additional screenshots/video:
•

3

Just a heads up that as of 12/26 it is now the GAUCH THREE departure. They added a transition to SPLNT and removed SPEEK on the MQO transition. Also changed the waypoints a bit on the runway 8 departure course.

Looks like the flight planner website hasn’t been updated.

1 Like
4

I see that. I just looked it up on Sky Vector and checked the current FAA chart.

I’ll revise the text of my OP.

1 Like
5

There is no question that the web-based flight planner is not jibing with the in-sim EFB planner. Obviously, it’s a matter of updating the airac cycle in the web-based planner, as it seems that the in-sim planner is current, while the web-based planer is out of date as charliefox noted, hence GAUCH2 vs GAUCH3. I can only imagine that this will be an easy fix once someone from MS/Asobo gets to it. This is possible another reason that currently you run into problems when creating a flight plan with the web-based planner while having the airac cycle in your community folder. Since I’ve been enjoying the new web-based planner, I am keeping the airac cycles out of my community folder.

6

The latest AIRAC cycle has been out since 26DEC24 and this issue still exists with the web-based Flight Planner.

I’m pretty stunned that the Flight Planner is utilizing outdated navdata. That seems very un-Working Title.

7

Is the web-based flight planner a Working Title app?

8

Yes. Matt from Working Title showcased it on the last dev live stream.

I’ve conversed with them about a prior issue with it on their Discord, too.

9

We will be updating the navdata this week. Unfortunately, resources were very tight over the holidays and the scheduled navdata did not drop in the way that was intended.

Apologies for the delay!

2 Likes
10

What I am, now, finding crazy is that I was, apparently, the only person (with @CharlieFox00 to confirm) to notice the navdata was outdated for nearly 2 weeks?

I have seen no mention of it elsewhere.

11

I’ll admit, I didn’t notice it!

1 Like
12

Not that crazy, really. There’s very little change cycle to cycle for the most part. Being one cycle behind, even in the real world, is rarely a dealbreaker, and happens from time to time for operators.

That being said, it’s not a habit we intend to get into! :sweat_smile:

2 Likes
13

That is certainly not something I would ever have been worried about! One of my favorite aspects of Working Title (beyond your fantastic products) is how approachable you are.

On a related note, do we have a ready means to see what cycle the web-based Flight Planner is using? You know, something akin to the initialization page on the G1000 or a status page in an FMS?

14

Not at this time, but it’s a feature we can consider.

As for the cycle itself, we got it updated around 1850Z, so you should see current data for a few hours now.

1 Like
15

Thank you!

Moderators, this bug can be closed now that the navdata has been updated.

1 Like
16

Closed since a solution has been marked and as per OP request.