Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

8 Neutral

About Cloudster

  • Rank
    Flight Student - Airwork

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I did a comparison of loading up the flightplans in my PMDG 747-8's EFB and noticed that PFPX's version doesn't save the PDF file with the table of contents, while Simbrief's version does. I would like to request this feature for PFPX as well, as it makes viewing multipage OFP's much easier and is much more organized. I have attached a sample showing how a flight plan pdf file looks when loaded into the EFB. As you can see it has a table of content for the different sections. Whereas the PFPX version is just one big page after another.
  2. Actually tihs plane uses some format that I've never even heard of before called corte.in, which ALL of its flight plans are stored inside of this one file. I hope PFPX will add official support to export to this corte.in file in the next update. Here's an article that I found that explains it in detail: Flight Plan format “corte.in” With the release of the Flight Factor/StepToSky A320 Ultimate, I’ve also seen a new flight plan extension. The A320 Ultimate comes with a flight plan file named corte.in. At first, I thought … oh my goodness, what kind of extension is that and how to deal with it. While searching the Web, I found some useful information at AVSIM and later I found out that Little Navmap, a awesome freeware program, was able to handle and deal with this new flight plan format. That Little Navmap can do a bit more then just creating flight plans and save them in many formats isn’t important for now. Important is that a created flight plan with Little Navmap can save your flight plan in corte.in format. When you look with a text editor in the corte.in file, it looks like that we’re dealing with a kind of RouteFinder txt format, but sorry to say, it’s a bit different and not “1 to 1” transferrable although it is possible. Find below the listing of which components are mandatory (bold) in this file and what’s optional. <RTE> <NAME> <ORIGIN> [RWY] [SID] [SID TRANS] [FIX [[AWY|DCT Fix] …] FIX] [STAR] [STAR TRANS] <DEST> [APPR] [APPR TRANS] [ALTN] [CI] [FL] <> – mandatory fields [ ] – optional When you know what everything means, you could also edit a corte.in file yourself. but keep in mind that there’s only one corte.ini file that holds all the flight plans. In other words, as an example, the following formats are possible and can be read by the FF A320 MCDU:
- RTE LFBO01 LFBO LFBO – RTE LFBO02 LFBO AGN LFBO – RTE LFBO03 LFBO TOU DCT AGN LFBO I’m aware that these proposed flight plans are very limited, but what I want to make clear is that you always start with RTE, followed by the name of the flight plan, here that’s LFBO01 (02 and 03) but that could be also LFBOEHAM thus the departure and arrival airport. In the LFBO02 I added one waypoint (VOR AGN) while in LFBO03 I added two waypoint (VORs TOU and AGN) connected to each other via the DCT (DIRECT) command, but that could be (not for this) also an airway. When you understand this, then you can expand your flight plan, keeping in mind the rules to follow. I think I mentioned this before, but it’s important enough to highlight it once more. You can edit your own flight plan directly with a text editor, but in my humble opinion it’s much easier to use Little Navmap to generate the flight plan you want and then export it as corte.in. Just leave the name as it is thus corte.in. It will add the created flight plan to the corte.in file. Something needs to be highlighted although it’s an optional field; Cost Index. Little Navmap can export if you with everything of the mandatory field and the optional fields except for the CI. After consulting Little Navmap I was informed that it doesn’t support CI. Then you have the possibility to enter the CI via the MCDU what seems to me more logical. It’s in my humble opinion not normal to have a flight plan that offers already the CI value and other values like a SID, STAR and so on. To me, a flight plan should be a collection of the departure airport, waypoints and the arrival airport. Runways, SID, STARs TRANS(itions), cruizing ALT as well as this CI, should be added once a “clean” flight plan is loaded in the MCDU. This makes a flight plan universal for every flight, at least, that’s the way I see it! Now that we know this, where can you find the corte.in file? Look into the aircraft sub-folder data. Another option for creating a flight plan is of course using the MCDU and enter waypoints and/or airways section by section and save the entered flight plan.
  3. For those of us who don't use Active Sky or any other weather stuff but rely solely on the default weather in X-Plane only. Is it possible for PFPX to grab weather from X-Plane when creating flight plans?
  4. Does anyone have an aircraft profile for this plane and also will there be support for exporting and loading flight plans into this plane? I don't think it uses the default X-Plane fms format or directory.
  5. I know it works with FSX/P3D versions but I just want to make sure first before I buy it.
  6. Thanks for bringing that up. I also agree, and hope to see that the developer(s) for PFPX will update this if it's not already included in the new release PFPX v2. Updating PFPX to export to the new XP11 format would be great. In terms of the X-Plane legacy v3 format verses the new X-Plane 11 format, what differences are there? I think you should list them here, since it'll make it easier for the PFPX developers and community to see and perhaps they can respond quicker as having to go to another forum.
  7. Will this work for X-Plane? Can it export to X-Plane formats?
  8. I never said I was an expert. Don't start assuming things. You're missing the point. I just wanted to add some ideas to the table because there hasn't been any significant changes in PFPX for quite some time now. I feel like it's missing its charm. I mentioned that others have this feature because if they can do it, then why can't PFPX?
  9. There's alternatives to mapping services out there, other moving map apps use them. Google isn't the only one.
  10. I already know PFPX has a moving map, but it can be done better. It's very basic right now. I mentioned in my post on how the moving map feature could be further improved upon.
  11. I did mention some of the things I would like see added: Nightmode (where it inverses the color, check out Navigraph Charts or the new Aivlasoft EFB v2) It makes thing dark and easier to look at during the night. Have TOPCAT builtin for performance calculations Refine the User Interface and make it cleaner and simplified, modern UI design. It looks outdated. Incorporate an EFB feature where you can use it as a PDF viewer to load up documents, charts, etc. Moving map of our plane in relation to the world, and have different types of maps/terrains selectable by the user, Such as satellite, google maps, terrain, etc. SID/STAR features like in Aivlasoft EFB. Those are just some ideas. I would love to have 1 app that does this rather than buying numerous apps. Thanks to know that development is still going on, but can we get some news on whats being improved or worked on at least? Instead of leaving the customers in the dark like this. It would be nice.
  12. When PFPX was first announced it was a wonderful tool for the flight sim community, but it seems to be like things have been so stagnant over the past year or so with just minor updates which include mainly bug fixes. I want to know or hear from the developer(s) of PFPX are we going to get any updates that will add more features, improve things, perhaps have different versions of PFPX for other platforms such as Mac, iPad, etc? Would be great if we can get some news or updates regarding this. I hope PFPX isn't dead. I would love to see a night mode perhaps and the incorporation of an EFB built in and perhaps a GUI overhaul so that it looks a bit more clean and modern.
  • Create New...