Recommended Posts

Hi guys.......can i know why pfpx uses dct points also at flight level 320 in the italian airspace? 

this does not always happen, but with the dct point pfpx it is very confusing.
I last airac cycle 1801 and I downloaded PFPX RAD Restrictions and Directs 1801. Everything is updated, but it keeps making mistakes. The early versions of PFPX worked well, now, it's about two years or so, which is no longer the one-time program.
do I lose something?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It might help if you were to post your computed ATC flightplan as various directs exist.

 

Are you referring to PFPX using an FRA direct below FL335 or published RAD en-route direct which may well be below this level.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ej.3.thumb.JPG.1f0265b38b05f40dccf497a10d752e5a.JPG

 

ej.1.JPG

ej.2.JPG

 

two examples of incorrect LIRN to LIMC flight plans.
in the Italian air space above the fl335 you fly for DCT Points, PFPX is almost always wrong and I do not understand why.
The route if it is done with FIND ROUTE or with ADVANCED ROUTE, PFPX is almost always wrong.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Other than a minor change to a direct and complying with arrivals via GOLAS ( LI2429 ) I have no issues here with NG1801 and David's RAD directs, PFPX v1.28.9i :

 

(FPL-DAERA-IN
-B738/M-SDE1FGHIJ1RWXYZ/LB1
-LIRN0920
-N0453F380 TEA DCT GIKIN DCT AMTEL DCT IBRID DCT LOMED DCT BEROK
 M730 MIVKI T648 GOLAS
-LIMC0059
-PBN/A1B1C1D1L1O1S1 NAV/RNVD1E2A1 DOF/180109
 REG/ PER/C)

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, srcooke said:

Other than a minor change to a direct and complying with arrivals via GOLAS ( LI2429 ) I have no issues here with NG1801 and David's RAD directs, PFPX v1.28.9i :

 

(FPL-DAERA-IN
-B738/M-SDE1FGHIJ1RWXYZ/LB1
-LIRN0920
-N0453F380 TEA DCT GIKIN DCT AMTEL DCT IBRID DCT LOMED DCT BEROK
 M730 MIVKI T648 GOLAS
-LIMC0059
-PBN/A1B1C1D1L1O1S1 NAV/RNVD1E2A1 DOF/180109
 REG/ PER/C)

 

 

Thank you for your attention, but The screenshots  speak clearly. If you can write me as you did, step by step, it would be better. But pfpx keeps making errors in the flight plan, I hope if there will be an update that will improve the program.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Tom A320 said:

What exact PFPX version (including hotfix) do you have installed?

 

Capture.PNG

 

I have the last versión pfpx

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please answer my question: what exact version do you have installed. Best post a screenshot of your PFPX About window, like I did. Thank you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, Tom A320 said:

Please answer my question: what exact version do you have installed. Best post a screenshot of your PFPX About window, like I did. Thank you.

 

Cattura.JPG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

LIRN to LIML a DCT at FL320 on italian airspace?? this in not correct.

NG1801 and David's RAD directs, PFPX v1.28.9i everything is updated. pfpx needs a serious update, I am more and more convinced of it

Cattura 1.JPG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, srcooke said:

Perhaps you should show your planning sequence snapshots.

 

1......

1.JPG

2........

2.JPG

3......

3.JPG

4.......

4.JPG

5.......

5.JPG

6........

6.JPG

 

all the photos published give me reason, but I hope to make something wrong in creating the route.
IF I realize the route with advanced route option, the result does not change, in fact it is worse.
PFPX does not work, there is a need for a revolution and serious updating in this program.
sin!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

PFPX is a planning tool and not necessarily a one pass solution.

 

My understanding is that the automatic route generation is based on a FL range for the aircraft in question and the distance flown. In this example it will encompass the upper airways and FRA directs that you have installed.

 

It is only when you compute the flight that an actual planned level is achieved, for you this is below the FRA level. I'll agree it would be beneficial for a warning to be displayed similar to that of airways indicating you are ' below the minimum enroute altitude' instead of waiting until validation. Maybe the developer can consider this.

 

The solution to your problem is to re-plan the route, having identified you cannot make the FRA, using a flight level cap below FL335. When I plan your route using an Airliner Performance A320 profile and your weights my computed level is FL360 and therefor FRA.

 

As noted previously there are currently 134 directs below FL335 in Italian airspace so in some instance you may well still find valid directs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Stephen, I understand the frustrations some folks may feel, but your first sentence is very relevant.

 

It's one of those "simmerisms" where flight simmers believe that flight planning systems always produce 100% "accurate and correct" plans at the touch of a button. If only that were the case. Our real-world systems costing tens of thousands of dollars in licensing every year need ops/navigation guys and gals to check, revise and tweak the databases, routes and the input and output. Entering a from and to and then pressing a button simply doesn't happen, unless the system is already loaded with pre-approved routes (which still have to be regularly updated) - sometimes with several routing options which are then compared against performance, weather and operational restrictions to establish the optimum solution on the day.

 

PFPX is a Euro 40ish product and exceptionally good at what it does for the price, like I said above you can pay many multiples of that price and people still complain.

 

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, BW901 said:

Stephen, I understand the frustrations some folks may feel, but your first sentence is very relevant.

 

It's one of those "simmerisms" where flight simmers believe that flight planning systems always produce 100% "accurate and correct" plans at the touch of a button. If only that were the case. Our real-world systems costing tens of thousands of dollars in licensing every year need ops/navigation guys and gals to check, revise and tweak the databases, routes and the input and output. Entering a from and to and then pressing a button simply doesn't happen, unless the system is already loaded with pre-approved routes (which still have to be regularly updated) - sometimes with several routing options which are then compared against performance, weather and operational restrictions to establish the optimum solution on the day.

 

PFPX is a Euro 40ish product and exceptionally good at what it does for the price, like I said above you can pay many multiples of that price and people still complain.

 

An explanation without any logic. What does real life have to do with PFPX ?? I have only shown with some photos, that the program has problems and does not work as it should, indeed, if there are customers like me who report, we must be thanked. Useless comparisons. Now the question is up to you: why a customer should spend 40 euros with a product that does not work well? I am a pfpx customer, and if there is something that does not work to whom I have to turn! Clear I open a post ........ And they are not complaints

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, airbusitalia said:

What does real life have to do with PFPX ?

 

Is that not the whole point of your post, complying with real world procedures ?

 

I would not be so inclined to go knocking those in the industry that have indicated that these issues arise in real world planning also, that is why despatchers exist.

 

Have you tried my suggestion, having established an optimal flight level and asking PFPX to find the route at that ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, srcooke said:

 

Is that not the whole point of your post, complying with real world procedures ?

 

I would not be so inclined to go knocking those in the industry that have indicated that these issues arise in real world planning also, that is why despatchers exist.

 

Have you tried my suggestion, having established an optimal flight level and asking PFPX to find the route at that ?

I tried, and as I said in the comments above, it's a real disaster. I'm sorry and I would like to be here to say otherwise, I would like to be happy like when pfpx came out, but I'm not.
Personally I do not know if a new version will come out that is all this, but I hope in an update that can attract the attention of the customers.
I repeat, if there is someone who claims that I am wrong, I would be happy and happy ........ I am here to learn the error and to show me how and where I am wrong, step by step.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

downvote is the only useful thing about this forum, is it ever possible? I posted photos of the preoblema, I asked for explanation and help, I said that there are problems with PFPX. And in the end what do they do ???? downvote:D:D  

maybe it's the only constructive answer that you know, I have no other explanation:lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Airbusitalia.

I for one have not down voted you. Your posts say you are unhappy because PFPX is not doing things correctly, and In the absence of any other info I presume you meant correctly as compared to the real world.  PFPX IS actually more true to life than most simmers would imagine.

 

Stephen has been very helpful to many forum users. I guess it's his own time he's freely giving to answering queries. I've enjoyed reading his posts over the last few years and I'm sorry that you seem to have taken things the wrong way.

 

PFPX allows manual direct entry and manual modification of a route. If you're not happy with the automated first output, then you can quickly and easily manually edit it. That's what I do when using PFPX and its what we do for real, relevant or not ;-).

 

I'll end by simply saying that PFPX will give results which are spot on with what our real Boeings are achieving, which is pretty astonishing for a home entertainment software.

 

Cheers

Jon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Having established on 'compute' that you are unable to achieve the FRA flight level, cap you altitude below that and FIND the route once more

 

lirn-liml-1.thumb.jpg.35ab212e740f0dce430383168dc02fb7.jpg

 

lirn-liml-2.thumb.jpg.bc07d718deabf1f9cb819180e19886d4.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, srcooke said:

Having established on 'compute' that you are unable to achieve the FRA flight level, cap you altitude below that and FIND the route once more

 

lirn-liml-1.thumb.jpg.35ab212e740f0dce430383168dc02fb7.jpg

 

lirn-liml-2.thumb.jpg.bc07d718deabf1f9cb819180e19886d4.jpg

thanks Stephen ....... I trust you, and I look forward to a real and great update of pfpx. I hope it will be there.
thank you so much

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now