LIDO 12 Posted July 26, 2014 Share Posted July 26, 2014 Myself and another member have been working on the Airbus profiles. Our A343 is virtually ready, however despite the many workarounds we have made due to the limitations of PFPX we are stuck with the climb and descent. To get a truley accurate profile PFPX needs to be changed, as at present it can't handle the CI in a dynamic way for the CI climb and descent. Basically it will not adjust the target speed as a function of the atmospheric conditions. Can the developer look into this issue? Once this is resolved it is a very simple process to create totally accurate profiles for the total airbus family. Without, the climb and descent will never be correct. Best Regards Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phil747fan 52 Posted July 27, 2014 Share Posted July 27, 2014 hello, it will be hard to get a better profile as the one for Airbus are airbus datas, all the best. Phil Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LIDO 12 Posted July 28, 2014 Author Share Posted July 28, 2014 Hi Phil, We have all the data of course, the cruise is ok.. Although the optimum altitude selection is a bit of a pain and not quite as good as it could be! The problem is with climb and decsent, as the CI will of course modify the speed depending on atomospheric conditions... There doesn't appear to be a way to code this at present within PFPX. This of course means that if one was to plan using a full CI profile (as is normal) the CLB and DSC portions of the flight are inaccurate (signficantly in some cases) in the event of there being any wind. Thanks! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phil747fan 52 Posted July 28, 2014 Share Posted July 28, 2014 hello, you can still a mach profile descent and climb it s still work. i think the ISA can be implemented on climb but not on descent ( the descent profile wont be affected that much anyway) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LIDO 12 Posted July 29, 2014 Author Share Posted July 29, 2014 Yeah... but basically no Airbus operators plan a fixed climb of descent as it's very inneficent way to fly.. Thats why we have Cost Index Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phil747fan 52 Posted July 30, 2014 Share Posted July 30, 2014 Yeah... but basically no Airbus operators plan a fixed climb of descent as it's very inneficent way to fly.. Thats why we have Cost Index the charts i ve seen from FCOM are not with CI charts plus when i dispachted some airbus (long time ago lol) we always used a fixed constraint descent and ATC has his word on your descent plan ... plus i want to see a profile with fixed speed and CI what will be the gain 15 kgs and +5 minutes? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LIDO 12 Posted July 31, 2014 Author Share Posted July 31, 2014 Much bigger Philippe, VS recently did a study in this very area. I don't use the FCOM for making the profiles, I use th performance engineers propgram. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phil747fan 52 Posted August 5, 2014 Share Posted August 5, 2014 ok we re here again with you having more infos but not sharing .... in which world we are now than someone has a bigger one and claiming it .... lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.