Seattle Avionics vs Garmin GPS175 published appoaches

[cbretana]

I have Dynon HDX, SV-GPS-2020, Dynon autopilot, and a Garmin GPS175 certified IFR navigator hooked up to the Skyview with SV-ARINC-429. I subscribe to Seattle Avionics with for all IFR data, including all IFR approach plates.
Since all published approaches are published with expiration dates, if I do not get the approach plates in the GPS175 updated regularly, and I want to fly an approach that are in both databases with the same name/identifier, (but where the Garmin version is out of date), will Skyview use the one from Seattle Avionics that is current, or will it use the one from the GPS175 that is out of date?

I hope the answer is that Skyview is smart enough to check the expiration dates.

Then, second question, will Skyview let you couple the Autopilot to a flight plan with an expired approach plate? Shouldn't it prevent that?

 

[Marc_J._Zeitlin]

I have Dynon HDX, SV-GPS-2020, Dynon autopilot, and a Garmin GPS175 certified IFR navigator hooked up to the Skyview with SV-ARINC-429. I subscribe to Seattle Avionics with for all IFR data, including all IFR approach plates.
Since all published approaches are published with expiration dates, if I do not get the approach plates in the GPS175 updated regularly, and I want to fly an approach that are in both databases with the same name/identifier, (but where the Garmin version is out of date), will Skyview use the one from Seattle Avionics that is current, or will it use the one from the GPS175 that is out of date?

I hope the answer is that Skyview is smart enough to check the expiration dates.

Then, second question, will Skyview let you couple the Autopilot to a flight plan with an expired approach plate? Shouldn't it prevent that?

I have essentially exactly the same setup you do, Charlie. The HDX doesn't use approach plates to drive anything. If you're flying an approach loaded in the 175, then the Skyview A/P is being driven by the waypoints and altitudes in the 175, whether or not the approach itself is up to date. The SA plates are for visualization purposes ONLY, on the HDX - the Skyview knows nothing about approach waypoints or altitudes. If you don't regularly update the 175 (yeah, it's expensive) then there's a possibility you may be using an approach that's changed - it's on you to determine if the specific approach you're using changed since the last time you updated the 175 database. The chances are small, but nonzero, that something has changed.

So the answer is that the Skyview cannot fly an approach by itself in the same way it can when driven by the 175. You can certainly manually put in the waypoints into the SKYVIEW flight plan, and the A/P will fly the course, but it can't manage the vertical guidance at all - you would have to hand fly vertical, and without vertical guidance on the CDI.

the answet to your second question is yes, because the 175 will drive the A/P no matter what the state/date of the approach in its database. If you have not updated the 175, it will yell at you on bootup that the databases are out of date, but you can still use them and take the chance that the one approach you're going to fly hasn't changed. Even the 175 doesn't know whether a specific approach has changed - it doesn't compare the previous database to the current one and say "hey - these 13 approaches have changed - I'll yell at this idiot if he tries to use one of them, but not one of the other 1472 approaches". So the Skyview, which knows nothing about approaches other than having the ability to display them georeferenced, certainly can't warn you about it.

 

[cbretana]

Marc,

Thanks, I was afraid of that. Next question, you may not know, but will drive my next steps.
Is the reason that SkyView is coded this way simply because when originally released, it did not have a certified IFR navigator, and therefore had no way to utilize the capability to parse the data in an electronic published IFR approach into a flight plan that was compatible with the Autopilot? Why spend the money to develop this capability when there was no market for it?
Or, .... is there some FAA or contractual (with Garmin perhaps), arrangement that binds Dynon from providing this capability?

Dynon, can you answer this?

As a software architect with 30 years of experience in multiple industries, I can fairly confidently say that this capability is one that could be implemented totally within the domain of the Skyview system, and should not require hardware or software modifications to any certified IFR navigator that was feeding position data to the Skyview, regardless of what other data, (approach plates, DHs, MDAs, IAF/FAFs, course deviations or whatever) was also in the data stream. The code to drive the Autopilot based on course and glide slope deviation data must already exist in Skyview, as it does coupled ILS approaches. The code to generate course and GS deviation data might currently be in the SV-GPS-2020, (not in Skyview itself), but can't be that complex and could easily be added to the Autopilot module in Skyview.

I don't know how many Dynon customers are similarly equipped, and would appreciate this capability, but those of us with an IFR navigator hooked up to the Skyview likely already subscribe to Seattle Avionics and have all IFR approach plates in our systems. Garmin subscription rates are onerous. This is a capability that would save us considerable resources for data we are already paying for.

And, I would posit that it is inherently dangerous to code a aircraft flight control system in such a way to allow it to be coupled to an out-of-date IFR Approach plate without at least displaying an on screen warning that the approach is out of date.

Thanks!

 

[Marc_J._Zeitlin]

Is the reason that SkyView is coded this way...

Can't possibly answer this, and I'd expect your hypothesis to be at least the starting point for an answer. Since the SV isn't a certified navigator and knows NOTHING about approaches (it just follows the guidance output from the certified navigator), it has none of those capabilities.

As a software architect with 30 years of experience in multiple industries, I can fairly confidently say that this capability is one that could be implemented totally within the domain of the Skyview system, and should not require hardware or software modifications to any certified IFR navigator that was feeding position data to the Skyview, regardless of what other data, (approach plates, DHs, MDAs, IAF/FAFs, course deviations or whatever) was also in the data stream. The code to drive the Autopilot based on course and glide slope deviation data must already exist in Skyview, as it does coupled ILS approaches. The code to generate course and GS deviation data might currently be in the SV-GPS-2020, (not in Skyview itself), but can't be that complex and could easily be added to the Autopilot module in Skyview.

You're assuming that the SV is doing something other than just taking course and vertical guidance from an outside source to drive the CDI, and it isn't. It's not acting any differently than any other standalone A/P or CDI, neither of which will tell you anything about whether an approach is up to date, or even whether it's ON an approach - ALL that information is in the certified navigator. Whether Dynon COULD implement code that does these things is immaterial - there are no EFISs that do that (not even Garmin's G3X, which DOES have the ability to fly an approach even without a certified navigator (IIRC from my 4 Garmin panel installs), although not legally.

... those of us with an IFR navigator hooked up to the Skyview likely already subscribe to Seattle Avionics and have all IFR approach plates in our systems. Garmin subscription rates are onerous. This is a capability that would save us considerable resources for data we are already paying for.

You're missing the point that "plates" are not "approaches". They do not populate the SV flight plan with waypoints, and they don't give any vertical guidance. They're ONLY georeferenced visual representations of an approach - they're NOT an approach in the SV database.

And, I would posit that it is inherently dangerous to code a aircraft flight control system in such a way to allow it to be coupled to an out-of-date IFR Approach plate without at least displaying an on screen warning that the approach is out of date.

Dynon would have to reinvent all of what a certified navigator does in order to be able to do what you're asking, and that's not going to happen.

Your argument is with Garmin (or Avidyne, assumedly), which will allow an out of date approach to drive an external CDI/AP. Yell at Garmin/Avidyne to have an internal check for the few approaches that change every cycle and show you what they are before you choose to update or not - if you never fly to east BF, Montana, or west armpit, NV, then you wouldn't need to buy the update. But you can see why they have no incentive whatsoever to do what you're asking.

And since the VAST majority of experimental Dynon users are VFR only, you and I are not representative of the larger market. There's no money in what you're asking for for either Garmin, or moreso, Dynon.

Pay the $500 for the yearly subscription if you want to be safe - yeah, we're getting raped by Garmin, but what's new? In the grand scheme of the $10K that my plane costs to run ($100/hr for 100 hrs/year) per year, it's not a lot, and I know that all approaches are always up to date.

My $0.02.

 

[airguy]

Lots of questions there for an answer, and I don't work for Dynon, but...

The Dynon system does not now, and never has, had a certified IFR navigator. We've been asking for it for many years, and occasionally I've gotten someone with Dynon to smile about it when I ask, but they have never made an official announcement of anything except "We don't have one available and we don't comment on a product that may or may not be in development until it's released."

Skyview charts are for reference and situational awareness only, similar to the printed paper charts of old. The AP can only be guided on an IFR approach by a certified IFR navigator, and the "certified" piece of that puzzle is the onerous one. Getting the certification, by current methods and standards, is a very tall hill to climb and is the primary reason so few companies have it available today. I have used both the G430W and the Avidyne IFD440 in my HDX system, and as noted above you must maintain the database on the certified IFR device ($$$) in order to fly the approach using guidance from the IFR device. The Seattle Avionics charts are displayed and georeferenced for situational awareness only, they do not provide any AP guidance.

IFR databases for certified navigators are expensive because it's a captive market. The data from the government is free, but the format to get it into the certified device is proprietary, so you don't have a choice. You pay their price if you want the data.

As to your last statement - it is currently the case that you cannot control an aircraft through a certified IFR navigator with an out-of-date database without a visual onscreen warning that you must acknowledge on boot-up before using the device. Skyview simply accepts guidance from that device - you as the pilot are responsible for making sure the certified device has an up-to-date database, and if it does not the device will warn you of that, and require a button push to acknowledge, before it continues with the boot process.

 

[CanardMulti]

Hi Charlie-

My setup is not quite the same as yours, but it is analogous. I have an Avidyne IFD540 feeding flight plans to Skyview thru the SV-ARINC-429 box. I was also lucky enough to purchase one of SA's lifetime chart subscriptions before they quit selling them. I'm unfamiliar w/ how the big G packages and $ells their data, but in Avidyne world subscriptions come from Jeppesen. Jepp does not force me to buy their approach PLATES (excellent) in order to buy the enroute IFR chart and approach nav DATA. That data is a granular 3D electronic description of the airways and approach procedures. I think of the chart data (sectional, IFR enroute, and approach) from SA as simply accurate electronic pictures. They're just a more convenient form of the paper charts.

I flew my IFD540 with an out of date data base for over a year while I got to know it, but *strictly* VFR, and I always had the current SA database for currant sectionals and for practice in VFR only, currant approach charts. Yes, Jepp data is expensive, but if you don't buy their approach charts (pictures), you can save a modest amount on the data subscription. You already paid for approach charts from SA.

When we as pilots go poking our airplanes into clouds, it is time to be multiple orders of magnitude more serious about having all required legal and current data on board - that we are trained and proficient to use. Being anything less invites disaster. Both Avidyne, and I would expect Garmin, treat you like a professional and warn you if your database is out of date at boot up should you desire to continue. Having been warned, they no doubt expect you to regard it as advisory only. I would advocate that it's not their job to be your nanny after that.

Ken

 

[swatson999]

SkyView is not a substitute for an IFR navigator, has no awareness of approaches and never should be used as the primary means of navigating while flying IFR.

User's Manual

 

[cbretana]

I'll only say it once, and then, if anyone else posts irrelevant comments here, you can continue among yourselves. The GPS175 IS a certified IFR navigator. So any and all comments pointing out the obvious fact that Skyview, with only the SV-GPS-2020, is not a certified IFR navigator either did not read or do not understand the simple question I was asking.

 

[Marc_J._Zeitlin]

I'll only say it once, and then, if anyone else posts irrelevant comments here, you can continue among yourselves. The GPS175 IS a certified IFR navigator. So any and all comments pointing out the obvious fact that Skyview, with only the SV-GPS-2020, is not a certified IFR navigator either did not read or do not understand the simple question I was asking.

I answered your questions, Charlie. See posts #2 and #4. You may not like the answers, but what questions do you think weren't answered either by me or the other folks that reiterated the same response?

 

[CanardMulti]

I realize this is rabbit tracking somewhat, but I'd like to understand if Garmin users have the same option that Avidyne users do, to subscribe to just data updates, and not the Jepp charts (pictures). It doesn't save a ton of money, but every bit helps.

Perhaps someone here might be kind enough to clue me in to how users of the various Garmin IFR navigators purchase their admittedly expensive data subscriptions. Is the purchase made from Garmin or from Jeppesen? Are the downloads done from a Garmin website or from Jeppesen?

I gather that Garmin uses proprietary data cards that, after being updated, must be returned to the unit and remain there. Is that correct? Avidyne uses ordinary usb flash drives to download updates directly from Jeppesen. The flash drive is then used to transfer all of that data into the navigator, after which the flash drive should be removed. In fact, the unit will boot into maintenance mode if it senses a flash drive left in the usb slot at boot up.

Ken

 

[n144sh]

I have a Garmin GPS175 in one plane, IFD540 in another. Both subscriptions for NAV data only are $299/yr.

 

[Marc_J._Zeitlin]

Perhaps someone here might be kind enough to clue me in to how users of the various Garmin IFR navigators purchase their admittedly expensive data subscriptions. Is the purchase made from Garmin or from Jeppesen? Are the downloads done from a Garmin website or from Jeppesen?

I gather that Garmin uses proprietary data cards that, after being updated, must be returned to the unit and remain there. Is that correct? Avidyne uses ordinary usb flash drives to download updates directly from Jeppesen. The flash drive is then used to transfer all of that data into the navigator, after which the flash drive should be removed. In fact, the unit will boot into maintenance mode if it senses a flash drive left in the usb slot at boot up.

Ken

Garmin uses an SD card (or microSD card in an SD card adapter). You update it on your computer using proprietary Garmin software (free) from the Garmin website and the unit will sense if the databases need to be updated on bootup with the card installed. It will yell at you if the databases are out of date, as indicated above.

You can leave the card inserted - I don't think it has to be there, but it's a convenient place to store it. I've been paying for the NAV data, obstacles, and Safe Taxi ($599, IIRC), because I'm an idiot and didn't even think to check that it was redundant with the obstacles and airport diagrams in the Skyview HDX. So next year, when I renew, I'll just get the NAV database. As long as that has the approaches in it (which it does), I'm set. Can't believe I've been paying an extra $300/yr. I didn't need to pay... Thanks, @n144sh for pointing that out to me.

P.S. - is that you, Ken S.?

 

[cbretana]

Marc,⁶
Yes, you did answer several of my questions, and I thank you that. I guess I had three questions in my original post. First - how does it work? Specifically, if the same approach plate was loaded in SA and in the GPS175 Which would it use? Second if it works as it does (as you explained), then is it smart enough to look at the respective expiration dates and use the more current of the two if they differ? You answered that as well.
But the last question, still not answered, is why Dynon chose to do that.

Stating that the SkyView is not a certified GPS Navigator (as someone did), is not answering that question at all. Implying that I would intentionally do something that violates FARs or ignore safety considerations is not an answer to that question . Stating that the Skyview "has no awareness" of approaches also does not answer that question. I'm not even sure of what that means You'd have to define "awareness" to understand that, but if it is intended to imply that you can't perform IFR approaches with the only a Skyview, without a "certified IFR navigator" then that is patently incorrect, but more important irrelevant. I was not and am not asking to do that. And, I remember performing precision IFR approaches to 200/ 1/2 in night IMC conditions using nothing more than the FAR required IFR instrumentation, and a radio, (GCAs) long before any electronic aids existed. And I execute full IFR precision ILS approaches right now with my Skyview and an ILS Nav receiver. without a "certified GPS Navigator". And, as I understand the FARs, it is perfectly legal for me to shoot VOR/DME approaches using the Skyview GPS as a substitute for the DME. In none of these cases do I have a "certified IFR Navigator".

What I am talking about here, specifically, is IFR GPS approaches. And yes, that requires a "Certified IFR Navigator" - I know that. I never said that I thought Skyview was a certified IFR navigator, or that I was trying to figure out how to do a GPS approach without one. I am just asking about one part of the necessary tools to do this. Clearly, one required tool is the accurate GPS position and altitude data necessary to pinpoint aircraft position within space accurately and reliably (and warn the pilot when the accuracy is compromised). The GPS175 is a "certified IFR Navigator" and fills this requirement. To use this data to actually perform the approach, you need an instrument to display calculated deviations from the desired flight plan ground track and glide slope. The Skyview does this using it's built in CDI and GS indicator. These two instruments are not, and do not, as I understand the definitions, form a necessary component of the "certified IFR Navigator". The only other third component necessary is the data to define the desired ground track and altitude/glide slope. This data is what must be in the published approaches from Garmin that are released on a regular basis.

So my question, which I think is a perfectly reasonable one, that does not involve any impossibilities or FAR violations or safety issues, is why Dynon has not coded the Skyview system to allow it to consume the position data from a "certified IFR Navigator" from one vendor, and the approach data from another vendor.

In one of your posts, I think, you actually posited one possible explanation, which is simply that Dynon, when they originally architected and designed Skyview did not conclude that a sufficient market for this existed to make it worthwhile. Another possible explanation is that the SA plates are simple images jpegs, or some other image format, and are not data files, where specific data elements, like waypoint lat/longs and altitudes for the various points depicted on the plate can be extracted programmatically, as the Garmin approach plate data files must be. If the FAA does not convert these approach plates to a format that can be used as a data file, then it would be up to individual vendors to do that, and that would be an additional expense.

But the bottom line is that I think this is a perfectly reasonable question, not as yet answered. (I grant that from what I've learned from this thread, I think I now know the answer), but with your initial answer, (and Ken's) excepted, I didn't get much of value from the others, (I felt like they didn't really understand what I was asking), and although I apologize to all of you for the tone of my last response, I will offer up the lame excuse that I am in bed with a severe case of Sciatica that is driving me nuts, and my patience level is very low.

On a postscript, one of my motivations for this inquiry has been the truly exorbitant price for an annual subscription from Garmin, as compared with SA. But if you can get what you need for the approach plates for only $300 or so, that removes much of the sting. And, if Garmin has to translate FAA published approach plates from image files, into programmatic data files that can be consumed by software that drives an autopilot, for hundreds of approach plates, every month, that price actually begins to look quite reasonable.

Charly

 

[CanardMulti]

P.S. - is that you, Ken S.?

Yup. Canards rule.

Thanks for enlightening me re Garmin methodology. I've seen ads for the older 430 and 530 units making a big deal about having unusual looking data cards included, but I guess that's one "profit center" Garmin found harder and harder to justify.

As I said above, I was lucky enough to buy a lifetime SA subscription before they quit selling them. The cost was less than just 4 individual years. At the time IFR navigators were not yet on my radar. When I upgraded, It struck me as , um, 'unwise' to pay for the same data twice, so I went looking for ways to buy only what was needed - just the data.

One other tip to save a few bucks some folks might not know about: If you renew in person at O$hko$h there's usually some sort of deal. Worth checking out.

Ken

 

[Marc_J._Zeitlin]

... but if it is intended to imply that you can't perform IFR approaches with the only a Skyview, without a "certified IFR navigator" then that is patently incorrect...

What I am talking about here, specifically, is IFR GPS approaches.

Since the title of this thread is "Seattle Avionics vs Garmin GPS175 published approaches", I was only addressing GPS approaches, since that's all the 175 can do. You are obviously correct that you don't need an approved GPS Navigator to do VOR, LOC, or ILS approaches.

... Dynon, when they originally architected and designed Skyview did not conclude that a sufficient market for this existed to make it worthwhile. Another possible explanation is that the SA plates are simple images jpegs, or some other image format, and are not data files, where specific data elements, like waypoint lat/longs and altitudes for the various points depicted on the plate can be extracted programmatically, as the Garmin approach plate data files must be. If the FAA does not convert these approach plates to a format that can be used as a data file, then it would be up to individual vendors to do that, and that would be an additional expense.

I don't know how Jeppesen, Garmin, Avidyne, Bendix King or anyone else gets the data that ends up defining the approach in their IFR Navigators, but I know that the SA plates are just georeferenced images - there's no "data" there. So there's nothing for Dynon to "read" and interpret - they're just throwing a picture up on the screen that acts like the georeferenced map. If you purchase the IFR Low/High or VFR Sectionals from SA, they're also just georeferenced, but Dynon HAS a database of all the airways, airports, intersections, waypoints, etc. that can be accessed whether you have the SA charts on screen or not. So I think you've answered your own question here - between there not being a large market for Dynon to do what you're asking for (and which certainly would be nice), the SA charts can't provide that info either. So Dynon would have to then reproduce everything that Garmin, Jeppesen, Avidyne, Bendix King, etc. do, AND then have access to what's inside those boxes to compare data.

That's a crapload of <duplicate> work and since Dynon doesn't charge for their data updates, they'd have to hire folks, do a lot of work, and then charge <you> a lot for it. Worth it? Not to me, no, since I have to have the 175 anyway to shoot the GPS approaches.

I'd just pay the $300 for the NAV database for the 175, $120 for the SA charts, $240 for Foreflight and call it good - WAY easier than updating a bazillion paper charts like in the old days. It's two full tank's worth of gas for your Long-EZ - $5 - $10/hr of flight time.

Use the HDX as the CDI for the 175, let it drive the A/P, and relax. I shot 3 approaches today with the HDX/175 system.

 

[swatson999]

So I know a bit about how that data is packaged by the FAA and distributed, and what's required to create a *legal* IFR database.

First, as noted above, the charts and plates from SA are simply georeferenced images, NOT IFR approach data. That's what georeferencing is...the ability to precisely position an *image* with reference to real-world positions. If they wanted, they could georeference satellite imagery and use it, or ocean bathymetry, or anything, really. But there's no approach course information contained in the image itself. They're actually .png files, and you can load them into any image viewer if you want and edit away...this example is pasted in directly from the download folder SA uses on my computer (after a bit of editing in Paint ):

Second, the entirety of the National Airspace System data is, or at least was when I worked on aviation GPS receivers, available as ARINC datasets. One or more lines of data per item, where an item can be an airport, a navaid, a fix, an intersection, an airway segment, and on and on and on. The manufacturers develop their software to convert those gazillion entries to their database formats, and *that* software has to be certified, as well, and proven to accurately transform the data without error. Then, the software on-board (as well as the hardware) to read, display, select, manipulate and manage that data has to be certified.

An approach, in the ARINC format, consists of multiple lines of data which specify references to the entries for the fixes, the altitudes, airport, navaids, and so on. Those entries are somewhere in the database, not replicated for each approach or airway or whatever that uses them. So you can see this gets fairly complex (not overly so, but it's not like each approach in the database contains within itself everything about that approach). Same goes for SIDs and STARs.

That's in stark contrast to what, it appears, the Dynon Nav data contains: A single entry for everything it displays (granted, with a LOT of info on most of them, like airports), but not the higher-level structure.

Could Dynon create a certified GPS navigator, including the database? Sure, anybody can. But it's ***expensive*** and time-consuming, usually years of design, development, verification and validation, and certification.

The simple answer to your question "why Dynon has not coded the Skyview system to allow it to consume the position data from a "certified IFR Navigator" from one vendor, and the approach data from another vendor?" is that there is no approach data from another vendor, if what you're referring to is the SA approach plates. (And just to be thorough, the CDI and GS display on the Skyview is getting that information from whatever certified IFR navigator you're using, via the ARINC box...it's not computing anything on its own. Check out the ARINC messages that your navigator is sending to it, and you'll see XTE and such in the set).

ETA: Let me also correct this statement: "If the FAA does not convert these approach plates to a format that can be used as a data file, then it would be up to individual vendors to do that". The FAA doesn't convert approach plates to a data file. They *start* with the data files, and then those are turned into data plates (images) either by the FAA or whatever the national cartographic service is these days. These then get published as the TPPs in PDF format. This is exactly the same thing Jepp does for their paper or electronic plates, AFAIK. (I believe the FAA TPPs are vector-based PDFs).

 

[swatson999]

BTW, your original question was

I subscribe to Seattle Avionics with for all IFR data, including all IFR approach plates.
Since all published approaches are published with expiration dates, if I do not get the approach plates in the GPS175 updated regularly, and I want to fly an approach that are in both databases with the same name/identifier, (but where the Garmin version is out of date), will Skyview use the one from Seattle Avionics that is current, or will it use the one from the GPS175 that is out of date?

As we've explained, the SA data is NOT "all IFR data". It's a picture, with no data at all that a computer can understand about the approach itself. That answers your original question about SV using the data from SA to fly an approach. No data there to use to fly.

Hope that all of this clarifies things.

 

[swatson999]

Dynon HAS a database of all the airways, airports, intersections, waypoints, etc.

Does Dynon have airways?

 

[swatson999]

This is what I get for reading forums late at night ...I had to go find the database info to satisfy my curiousity and refresh my memory, here it is:

https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/flight_info/aeronav/digital_products/cifp/download/

You can download the dataset, in ARINC-424 format. It contains all of this information:

The Coded Instrument Flight Procedures (CIFP) currently provides the following record types:
• Airports and heliports (PA and HA)
• Runways (PG)
• VHF Navaids (D)
• NDB Navaids (DB)
• Terminal Navaids (PN)
• Localizer and Glide Slope Records (PI)
• Path Point Records, Primary and Continuation (PP)
• MSA Records (PS and HS)
• Enroute Waypoints (EA)
• Terminal Waypoints (PC and HC)
• SIDs (PD)
• STARs (PE)
• Approaches, including Level of Service continuation records (PF and HF)
• Airways (ER)
• Class B, C, and D Airspace (UC)
• Special Use Airspace, Primary and Continuation (UR)
• Grid MORA (AS)

Enjoy! I spent more hours than I know writing code to parse these things into something our receivers could use...

 

[Rhino]

I spent more hours than I know writing code to parse these things into something our receivers could use...

Better you than me.