That is because a lot of RNAV SIDs and STARs have special leg types that can’t be replicated with manual waypoint entry. AIRNC 424 specifies 23 different leg types such as course to altitude, heading to intercept, radius to fix, DME arcs, etc. Of these 23 legs, only fix to fix legs can be easily replicated by manual entry. If you find a STAR or SID that only has fix to fix routing, there’s no technical reason why you can’t fly it. You can perform the others with some creative flying, but it technically won’t be as accurate as a fully AIRNC 424 capable navigation system. Hence why the regulations require you to select all procedures from the database. Better safe than sorry.

This will be fixed in the next update

@Martyn thanks for the clear response. I'm not nagging, just not as accustomed to flying manually as some people are, hence my reliance on SIDs and STARs in the FMC. That being said I have enjoyed a number of flights in this aircraft already

If an FMC were to eventually be added, I would love to see the LTN-92. This was used by a number of 747-200 operators right up to retirement. Yes, it is technically an INS system - But... It is the pre-cursor to the FMSs we all know and love today. With the LTN-92, the operator can type in airports, navaids, and waypoints using their names (not coordinates as in the old CIV-A INSs). This makes it considerably easier to use than the CIV-A, while still maintaining realism to the original aircraft. These units were not aftermarket additions such as some of the modern-era FMSs you see in some cargo 747-200s, they were factory standard options in the late model 747-200s! Considering the autothrottle modeled in the JF 747 Classic is the original Approach Autothrottle and not the FFRATS authrottle, we wouldn’t be able to take full advantage of all the features of a newer 747-400 style FMS anyways. And for those wondering about the old LTN-92 capability in MNPS airspace, the LTN-92 can be supplemented with 2 GPS signals to make it up to RNP-5 capable. This is why I believe the LTN-92 would be the perfect choice for a future “FMS” if JF decides to add one later on. Cheers, Rob [image: D03-AA58-B-23-C7-41-CC-BE39-D5-FEAF0-E9524.jpg]