We like to know how you feel about the forums and the way we handle them, so if you a few seconds please answer the four questions posted here: 
https://forum.aerosoft.com/index.php?/topic/147548-how-are-we-doing-with-support-on-the-forum-do-read-the-text-below-the-poll/. But please, please, read the text below the poll. If you think we do bad we want to know why.

 

Jump to content

Budlake

members
  • Content Count

    91
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

16 Good

About Budlake

  • Rank
    Flight Student - Airwork

Recent Profile Visitors

1188 profile views
  1. Thanks Stephen, I manually edited the route that was exported to the a/c so that hopefully is OK. I will be arriving at the waypoints soon so I will see how good my intervention has been. :-) thanks again. Mike
  2. I have been working on a route from EGBB to FSIA using both PFPX and Navigraph Charts and have come across a discrepancy. The routing from the Mogadishu FIR/UIR takes me along airway UM651G to ESTOK and from there on UM651 to ANVIX as I have depicted here: MURAL UG651 KUSUB UM651G ESTOK UM651 ANVIX T137 ROUTY This routing appears to be fine in Navigraph Charts and in Skyvector but PFPX shows a discontinuity between the KATHY and ESTOK waypoints and will therefore not accept the route. PFPX will only accept the routing if I insert a DCT between KATHY and ESTOK. Is this an error (or an omission) in the PFPX database? Mike
  3. With this in mind will this A330 be fully compatible with the new MS Simulator because if not P3D could conceivably become obsolete before its time and, as has been argued in this forum, manufacturers like Aerosoft will produce exclusively to the new Simulator? It will also put further doubts in ones mind about moving from FSX to P3D Mike
  4. Thanks Stephen. Unfortunately PSX Navdata is only updated once a year so the SIDs & STAR data is often obsolete before it is even purchased so it is often useless. If the route data contained the SIDs & STARs then they would be inserted into the FMC without being dependent on the obsolete internal Navdata. As it is at the moment the only way to enter the new data is by hand. :-( Mike
  5. Does PFPX export the SID & the STAR when they are selected in the route editor? If it does then how do I switch it ON or OFF because my exported data files do not appear to have included them? Mike
  6. Thanks Tom, thanks Emanuel. It looks like I need to contact Navigraph. Mike
  7. PFPX will not validate the route: ORTIS UN728 CABOJ UG851 MIYEC UT365 SOLMA UR866 OG UR984 LAG UG856 BIDZI I get the IFPS Response: Error code Route139; description: "UG851 is preceded by CABOJ which is not one of its points" This appears to be incorrect as CABOJ is on airway UG851 and the World Map in PFPX confirms this, as does Navigraph Charts. Skyvector.com identifies the airway as UG851G but that identification is not recognised in PFPX. This is not the first time I have encountered this message, I had it with another route but I do recall which one. Mike
  8. Thanks Stephen, I do you have an idea as to why I am unable to open the 1802 and 1803 rar files? Mike
  9. Hi Stephen, Me again! :-( It appears that I might be doing something wrong (although I do not know where) because ALL the route restrictions are marked as having been revised on 25th May 2016. There is nothing more recent even though I have installed, as per the instructions given in the 'read me' file, the 1801 update. I am not sure that I understand how to use the RAD in PFPX so that may be where my problem lies but the manual is of no help at all as far as RAD is concerned! Another issue that I have encountered is that when attempting to repair my PFPX installation using the "maintenance' function of the installation file the ONLY option given is to completely remove the existing installation which is NOT ideal nor is it what I expected or wanted. Mike
  10. Hi Stephen, I cannot open the "Update1803" file, nor can I open the "Update1802" file. WinZip reports that either file "...does not appear to be a valid archive." Earlier files appear to be OK. Mike
  11. While I have your attention Stephen, can you tell me where the 'RAD Restrictions & Directs' file goes please? Thanks Mike
  12. OK thanks Stephen I am starting to understand it now. If FRA gets rid of the seemingly stupid and ill-thought out restrictions in Europe it will be a good thing. :-) Will FRA also include low-level airspace (resulting in no airways at all)? How will FRA affect the FIRs and UIRs, will they remain unaffected? Mike
  13. Thanks Stephen, unfortunately I am none the wiser. Your reply does not appear to answer my question :-( Regards Mike
  14. I am curious to know why PFPX shows the limits of Upper Airways in the LPPC LISBOA UIR as being between FL195 and FL245 when aircraft in the real world, as shown on www.flightradar.com, are clearly flying well above that higher limit. Mike
×
×
  • Create New...