Jump to content

Aerosoft International Airports


30 topics in this forum

    • 1 reply
    • 34 views
    • 2 replies
    • 80 views
    • 3 replies
    • 195 views
    • 7 replies
    • 528 views
    • 48 replies
    • 1.7k views
    • 24 replies
    • 644 views
    • 1 reply
    • 166 views
    • 7 replies
    • 247 views
    • 5 replies
    • 752 views
    • 3 replies
    • 204 views
    • 10 replies
    • 374 views
    • 9 replies
    • 479 views
  1. EGLC

    • 0 replies
    • 132 views
    • 5 replies
    • 157 views
    • 2 replies
    • 178 views
    • 2 replies
    • 166 views
    • 1 reply
    • 195 views
    • 18 replies
    • 1.1k views
  2. Sky Elite

    • 1 reply
    • 240 views
    • 4 replies
    • 344 views
    • 20 replies
    • 1.1k views
    • 3 replies
    • 276 views
    • 1 reply
    • 252 views
    • 3 replies
    • 499 views
    • 6 replies
    • 524 views


  • Popular Topics

  • Latest Posts

    • Hi,   Flying into KCMO on OMN.CWRLD4.RNAV36L, during the CWRLD4 STAR there's a level segment after crossing LAMMA at 12000. Even though the CDU displays the FMS wants a level segment, indicating that the system understands there's a period  of level flight needed before initiating a new descent later, the VNAV snowflake is showing above profile;     Is this related to the strange heading from RAMEZ bug that's been fixed for the next release, or something else? Crossing altitudes don't seem unreasonable in the CDU like the heading. Thanks,
    • Not if one is flying for Virtual Airlines, which is what I do
    • The Sig Wx Chart is generally used for planning purposes, is a forecast and is issued around 16-18 hours before its validity time. So the chart valid at 12Z on a particular date will have been issued c. 18Z the previous day. SIGMETs are actual advisories of active or expected occurrence of potentially hazardous weather and as noted by Stephen have a much shorter time span of out to 4 hr.    SIGMETs can be thought of as updates to what the Sig Wx chart has forecast. Thus if SIGMET conditions forecast on the Sig Wx chart are still expected to occur, then nearer the validity time a SIGMET will be issued for these conditions but with more precise information as to severity, location, movement etc; conversely if SIGMET conditions forecast on the Sig Wx chart are later not expected to occur then no SIGMET will be issued. Also note that there are differences between what Sig Wx charts depict v. what SIGMETs are issued for (eg Sig Wx charts will depict areas of moderate or severe icing and turbulence whereas SIGMETs only cover severe conditions).      To the OP's question, the fact that the SIGMETs cover a much smaller area (bottom pix) than what is depicted on the Sig Wx chart (top pix) probably means that the actual CB/TS conditions forecast in the Sig Wx chart turned out to be much more localized and SIGMETs were only issued for those specific areas (assumes the two pix are relating to similar time frames).  It could also be a PFPX depiction issue (ie more SIGMETs were actually issued but weren't depicted on the PFPX map) but this could only be verified by comparing with a third-party provider such as Sky Vector or one of the weather agency websites.   In my experience, depiction of SIGMETs in PFPX is fairly spotty, but perhaps it's something to do with my setup.       
    • Thank you for reply,The error message is normal message of crash MSFS ,there is not number of refer ,but a simple message of crash MSFS
×
×
  • Create New...