Jump to content

Fatman

Members
  • Posts

    29
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Fatman

  1. Look here for OFP formats: https://forum.aerosoft.com/index.php?/files/category/48-pfpx/
  2. Will, what I would do is select RAYNR in the field below "Waypoint" and type 310 into the "Altitude/FL" field. This would give you FL310 from very first waypoint. What is your step altitude at what waypoint? Subsequent step climbs seem to take a "benefit" from enroute winds. However, sometimes, step up at later stage provides you with a better fuel management. After VAULT, there are too frequent change for my liking. Once you selected another waypoint, where you wish to step climb, you can then manually select desired step altitude (eg. 330, 350 -> for respective flight level). Here is a sample of my "Advanced Tab" after I created flight from EDDK to KMIA. During my flight planning process, "From Waypoint" and "To Waypoint" option is used for speed (mostly). I don't tend to utilize Fixed Altitude option here. This way, I don't have to deal with initial lower FLs (e.g. FL240) on departure from EDDK (as specific low level airways are designed for it). Then I selected initially calculated step climb points with desired FL change. Sometimes, when I play around with this, I can reduce fuel consumption. Today, PFPX did very good job. Hope this helps. Andrej
  3. I presume that this depends on the Flight Plan format maybe? Can you not add OAT (edit; I do know how)? My format is PFPX and looks like this (ISA deviation):
  4. For past few days, I did not encounter any issues with the server. I am located in the UAE. But there were issues in the past (all fixed - at least for me).
  5. Will, I usually play around with desired flight levels on the "Advanced" tab. I know the general FL idea and conducting test-and-trail, I find proper fit between FL and fuel consumption. There you can choose OPT, MAX, or a direct entry (helps with flights in China RVSM). For NAT crossing (but not only for that) you can play around with Fixed Speed as well. Easy fix may be selected "Open MAX" and "Open OPT" flight level Usually after these edits, my FLs are set straight. Also, make sure that the route allows for certain FLs. For example in Italy, direct routing is used above FL305 (that is my experience; happy to be corrected). Cheers, Andrej
  6. Thanks Captain. I concur that is not a big deal, but I still find it odd (FL302 is closer to 9200m vs. FL301). My approach is to amend generated flight plan to reflect "correct" FL (matter of a few seconds). That way, ATC is happy and I am happy as well.
  7. Thank you Stephen. I concur that the calculation wise, 9200 M = 31200 FT is much closer than 31100 FT. We will have to wait and see if the developer will be able to make this adjustment. If not, solution is simple. Generate OFP and then manually enter correct FLs. Cheers, Andrej
  8. Hello all, few months ago, I started a thread regarding Chinese and Mongolian RVSM. However, today, I am coming back with a new find. My recent flight from Hong Kong to Cologne, my initial flight level was assigned as FL302 and setp to FL322. However, as per Chinese RVSM** assigned FL should be FL301 and FL321. I know that a difference of 100' is not much, but is there any way to apply this rule to correctly reflect accurate FLs? The fact is that Meters wise, PFPX is correct (FL301/302 = 9200M, FL321/322 = 9800M). K0928S0920 BEKO2B BEKOL A461 YIN G586 SJG B330 ELKAL W179 RIRKI W232 WFX W179 OMBON B330 ELPAN/K0916S0980 B330 SUNUV W197 ANDIM B215 IBANO G470 IPMUN W192 FKG A368 SARIN/N0482F340 M166 KRG A95 ATBAN G111 LODEZ/N0481F360 G111 TITUR N985 ORTIM L158 IRGOS T613 DOGOB M864 DURTI L29 TEGLU DCT LAFAT DCT VABER DCT SUWGI DCT ALUKA DCT POVEL Q201 PODER Z189 RUNER T858 KOPAG KOPA32 **sources: https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/ato/service_units/mission_support/ato_intl/documents/cross_polar/CPWG26/ANSP/CPWG_PM1_PPT_ANSP_Update_ATMB.pdf https://www.vatprc.net/en/rvsm-en If this is not possible, no worries, I just have to make amendment of FLs myself. Thanks! Andrej
  9. Alex, I am also planning the same. It is a shame that the Topcat will not be supported as it would make the switch much easier. However, not sure if you do use PFPX. If yes, you can link Topcat performance to B744 there and substitute for Topcat. I am not sure if aircraft performance for the Topcat is sourced and navdata is used from PFPX database (it would make a sense), or if Topcat supplies navdata as well. Nonetheless, Aerosoft has at least two new customers, thanks to their open mind and willingness to cooperate with Hardy (and the best sim out there). Andrej
  10. If you use real world weather (either add-on or default one; and it is accurate) then yes, it would have an effect on flight planning as one does not have most recent forecast. As this impacts all users that have subscription to the online weather, I am certain that fix is coming. Just hope it is sooner rather than later.
  11. Same here, no SIGMETs and similar TAF issues.
  12. Hello Stephen, quick example: ZBAA - EDDK K0921S0980 IDK9YD IDKEX B339 DEGIR/K0909S0960 B339 UDA A575 DARNO/N0493F340 A575 IDGAR/N0494F360 A575 UNKIS P982 BADIK N181 BAPUN N869 INBUK/N0495F380 N869 DURTI L29 ALUKA DCT POVEL Q201 PODER Z189 RUNER T858 KOPAG KOPA1N Also look at Mongolian AIP: https://ais.mn/files/aip/eAIP/2020-06-18-AIRAC/html/eAIP/ZM-ENR-1.8-en-MN.html It has a very nice graphical representation of FL changes (Russia vs. Mongolia).
  13. Hello all, is there any way to change RVSM rules? Every-time I fly to / from China, the RVSM FLs are opposite. Where it should be, for example, FL361, the PFPX offers FL371. This happens every time I plan a flight. Usually, I manually override these FLs. Source of correct FLs: https://www.vatprc.net/en/rvsm-en I am using latest AIRAC (2102), v.2.04, and my subscription services run till 2022. Thanks! Andrej
  14. Hi Omar, thanks for another amazing update! My wallet and I are ready.
  15. Very true, but at least OP has OFP in a desired version. Having been first introduced to the FAA format some 20 years ago, I prefer the ICAO one.
  16. So if you want to see .. instead of DCT in the flight plan, go to the Configuration -> Panning / Units, in Route Format -> Output Format change from ICAO to FAA Then you need to find and/or select proper OFP format that is formatted for the FAA direct presentation. I belive that PFPX default has DCT option only (as this is global standard). I would suggest to search US airlines OFP files on the aerosoft forum. Look for UAL, DAL, or SWA. Maybe there is a specific FAA format (for domestic operations).
  17. As far as I know, direct are used in the US airspace regularly (for US flights). Instead of WAYPOINT/NAVAID DCT WAYPOINT/NAVAID, it is presented WAYPOINT/NAVAID..WAYPOINT/NAVAID or just WAYPOINT/NAVAID[space]WAYPOINT/NAVAID Here is an example of UAL2264 flight scheduled on May 7, 2020: NEWEL J60 HCT VOAXA Q136 RUMPS OAL INYOE DYAMD5 https://flightaware.com/live/flight/UAL2264/history/20200507/1710Z/KEWR/KSFO
  18. Thanks for another update and awesome shot! Yak-40, the original regional jet.
  19. Hello, this is a screenshot from my Export options. XPlane is there. In regards to your second question, I humbly believe that it is a good (great) tool. I own it since version 1.0 days. Hope this helps!
  20. Thank you for your reply. I really like what I see, hence rest assured that if you ever come to X-Plane, I will be buying all your work (especially LZIB, LZKZ, LZTT) and any new additions. When I was young boy, I was fortunate enough to fly on Yak 40 as well. LKPR - LZIB - LZKZ. But this was some thirty years ago. Sincerely, Andrej
  21. Hello Aikadil, I humbly believe that this software is still (very much) relevant. I have been using it since version 1.00 and update to 2.00 took a lot of time. As Dave stated, it is a flight planning product, stand alone one. I still believe that it is the best flight planning software out there. It is very complex and it is challenging. But it is also very rewarding to plan a flight plan (proper one to say). For one, I like that the fact that you can have various cruise speed settings (e.g. from CI, to fixed Max, to ECON / LRC; I know several airlines actually have such "fluid" cruise speed in a single flight). Try to update RADs with each navdata updates and you have very relevant product. It has many features and details that may be not very clear at the beginning, but are used by dispatchers. I am certain that once MSFS 2020 is released, PFPX will be updated (if necessary) to support its files. For 90% of my flights, I use Aerowinx PSX (B744 simulator), and developers were able to add its flight plan files (early on). Cheers, Andrej
  22. Looks incredible, Omar! Looking forward to any and all updates.
  23. Looks amazing! Great job Pavel. I wish your work was available for X-plane.
×
×
  • Create New...