After the recent navdata update as of July 11 2024 I cannot see any legs for procedures for some airports in Greece. I haven’t tried all of them but here are two I have found so far: LGSA, LGPZ. When trying select a SID for LGSA in the A320neo V2 I see the SIDs but when selecting any of them, no legs are added to the flight plan. Something is fishy here! 
When you create your IFR plan to those airports, can you see runways selecting your approach?
Hi,
Check the runway designators in the sim against real world, when they are different, thats the reason.
As your example:
LGSA has 11L/29R in real
LGPZA has 06/24 in real
Cheers
Richard
When departing I was able to select runway only, at arrival no runway nor approach was available. I’m using BATC (Beyond ATC) and it also didn’t find any STARs or SIDs. At departure it gave me radar vectors to the first waypoint in the flight plan and at arrival I got a visual approach. BATC didn’t do a great job when vectoring me to the destination, I got to close to the runway but I landed successfully anyway🙂
Are you sure? I have played with the navdata API using simconnect and it also give me empty SIDs and STARs 
It looks like yes, if the runway designators in the sim are different, we do not have SIDs and STARs. And with every AIRAC update the number of airports without SIDs and STARs available is going to increase until Asobo brings their RW datas to the reality. I have the same problem with URMM airport (reported). The more reports, the better.
Yes, I’m 100% sure
Cheers
Richard
2 Likes
I dug 
into this a bit more! I dusted of my old CPP program which reads all the BGL files and do you know what? There are no runway transition records for any SID or STAR for LGSA and LGPZ! My theory is that there is something wrong with the base navdata unless they have changed the BGL format (which they have done a few times in the past) so that my application cannot find them. By the way, I’m not using Navigraph, just the default sim navdata.
Another double check I did was to refresh Little Navmap’s scenery database from the latest BGLs and I cannot see any procedures there either. So my conclusion is that all aircraft which use the navdata API (for example A320 Neo V2 (just guessing that it is using the API)) get no data because the underlaying BGL files contain no data.
I would guess that Navigraph BGL files have everything, if so there seems to be an issue with the data that MS is pushing out. All my above theories are just my own conclusions, I’ll stand corrected if someone can prove that I’m wrong! 
1 Like
I did some more analysis of this issue using another homemade application, this time using C# , which scans all the BGL files in the Official\OneStore\fs-base and the Official\OneStore\fs-base-nav\scenery folders. Below are the results and a count is shown within parentheses for each item.
There is definitely a bug in the latest navdata from MS. I’m not sure if I dear to create a bug report because the moderators may say that there must be a consensus within the community before I do that, correct me if I’m wrong. Anyway, anyone should be able to verify this in their sim if they are using the MS default navdata.
AIRAC 2407 240711--240807
Airports (40349)
ILSs (3299)
Vors (3964)
NDBs (2299)
Waypoints (214316)
Airports where SIDs contain no legs (75)
ENSB ENSH ETAD ETHF ETNN FBPM HEBA KHRF KOLS KXNA LFAQ LGPZ LGSA LHPR LICG
LRCL LRCV LSGC LTAD LTAW LTBF LTDB LTFJ MMCL MMTG MMTL MMTM O85 OITU OMFJ
PAOR RCAY RPSP S50 SBAC SBIH SBPG SKIP UAAH UASU UATE UAUU UDYZ UEBS UEEE
UGSB UHBB UHMA UHMO UHPP UMIO URKA URMM USTJ UTAE UTAV VIJP WAHP WASS WATT
WBGK WIOS YBWW ZGHA ZHCC ZHHH ZKPY ZLXN ZPPP ZSWH ZSYT ZUGY ZULS ZWTN ZYQQ
Airports where STARs contain no legs (38)
FBPM LFAQ LGPZ LGSA LRCL LTDB LTFJ MMCL MMSM MMTL SKIP UAAH UASU UATE UAUU
UDYZ UEEE UGSB UHBB UHMA UHPP UMIO URKA UTAV VIJP WASS WATT WBGK WIDL WIOS
ZKPY ZLXN ZPPP ZSWH ZSYT ZULS ZWTN ZYQQ
Airports where approaches contain no legs (0)
For the technical interested people, below query using LINQ is used to extract the airports. You should be able to see the conditions for the airports above. Same principle is used for STARs and approaches as well.
var airportChunks = bglImport.airportsByIcao.Values
.Where(a =>
a.Sids.Count > 0 &&
a.Sids.All(s =>
s.Legs.Count == 0 &&
s.RunwayTransitions.All(t => t.Legs.Count == 0) &&
s.EnrouteTransitions.All(t => t.Legs.Count == 0)))
.OrderBy(a => a.Icao)
.Chunk(15);
2 Likes
Personal Comments and Observations
File a Zendesk Ticket with your findings. That gets your information to MS soonest and fastest. You’ll still have to pass Triage and Repro before it gets validated as a bug but at least you won’t be waiting for votes to get this flagged.
2 Likes
Thanks,
A ZenDesk ticket has been created!
Request #218603 Some airports are missing legs for SIDs and STARs
2 Likes
I know that S50 renumbered its runways a couple of months back and a new SID was created. In theory that was a couple of cycles of NAV data ago, but AFAICT MSFS hasn’t updated yet. I expect the waypoints for the old SID no longer exist and this is why it shows up on this list?
Who knows?! As I see it, if this is caused by a runway mismatch, this must be happening on the server side since the downloaded navdata into the sim is missing correct data.
Either there is something wrong with the original data that MS receives from Navblue or there is some logic in the MS navdata publishing pipeline that creates the BGL files and filters out data. For the latter case, you may wonder why any logic should filter out data since it can have no clue of what scenery I have locally where I might have the correct runaways. That could indicate a system error, the poor programmer maybe just did what he was told by some BA guy. 
i just did a short check, and as @NAVData says, the issue is that the runway designators have changed on the airports i checked and show no SID/STAR according to your finds above, and therefore also in the NAVDATA. But MSFS default airports are outdated and still have the old Runway designators.
MSFS should implement a way, that airport data gets updated with the Navdata update.
But do they understand that this? People send them individually reports about issues with one or two airports, but do people at Asobo understand that this is not a single airport issue but a systematic one? For me this is a serious issue to be fixed if not ASAP but quickly enough. More than 100 airports are affected. And more are coming with next AIRAC update.
2 Likes
Personal Comments and Observations
You should probably talk to the Community Members here who were in the World Gateway Hub Alpha.
My understanding talking to some of them:
It’s not as simple as editing the BGL file that houses the airport in question.
The primary key to the airport database remains the Visuals, i.e., terrain tiles that come out of Bing Maps. If the available tile only shows the older airport, there’s no value to changing the runway headings. The VISUALs have to match the runway data. It’s not a matter of overlaying a new airport.
Asobo is well aware of the situation - but this is one of those known but not well understood problems of “Big Data.” You have a massive dataset of airports, but your dependency is the Visual Model. So you can’t influence the airport accuracy by simply changing the runway data. You must address the Visual Model first - i.,e, the terrain tiles. Those tiles are as everyone knows based on Satellite data. Sat data doesn’t get refreshed as often as folks would like - for the obvious reasons, cost, timing, weather obscuring the target area are the bigger ones.
2 Likes
Thank you, now the problem is a bit more clear to me. At the same time Bing visuals are up to date at least for my local airport which is affected among others (URMM). URMM RW data in the Sim do not correspond to Bing Maps. I do not know how old are current Bing Maps for URMM, they look quite modern in the part of RW numbers, but MSFS data is very old, 13 years passed since the new RW was opened and the old one closed and in the Bing Maps this closed RW is clearly marked as closed, however in the Sim it is still a RW.
An easy solution would be to NOT look at the terrain details but just ship the current navdata as is. As they say in the military: if there is a mismatch between the terrain and the map, just blow away those rocks, hehe 
1 Like
Well, this new Sim is a complex and sophisticated one:))) Meanwhile more than 100 airports are affected already. And this is not including those with problems with taxiways not finding their runways.
1 Like
The navdata is being currently shipped “As is.” It’s AIRAC data taken directly from the ICAO monthly update, based on data provided by each nation-state’s respective aviation agency.
The problem is the Navdata is correct (in most cases) but the underlying terrain, specifically the airport layout, is not. Correcting each one on a monthly AIRAC cycle would be unsustainable until the satellite data catches up. Additionally, the terrain drives the Autogen asset creation. Without Blackshark.AI, it would have been impossible to hand create the thousands of airports that exist globally. But Blackshark “sees” an airport layout in the terrain tiles and creates Autogen accordingly. It’s different for a hand-made Deluxe or Premium airport, but that’s how you get to thousands of airports that are mostly correct in layout and correspond to AIRAC.
2 Likes