Jump to content

MorSe Dude

Members
  • Content Count

    10
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About MorSe Dude

  • Rank
    Flight Student - Groundwork
  1. Hey there, my PFPX software is running 24/7, as is some other flightsim stuff, since i don't wanna restart everything everytime. more or less up until the start of 2020, i could make a route on day D, and see the active NAT tracks for that day, and if i'd make a new route in the following days, the tracks were automatically updated in the world map view. since 2020 (don't pin me on the exact date), i've noticed the NAT tracks are no longer updating. they get updated when i add a route to my schedule, but only then. after restarting PFPX, everything's fine again for that day. any idea what happened a few weeks ago, or better, how to fix this? would be really nice. tia, 27MD (Serge Morabito)
  2. Yeah, that's already a lot closer, great work already! but both still give a weird difference. if you take the route EBBR-CYYZ, eg, then you get by using both pieces of code: OCEANIC ROUTE: 5220N 5230N 5340N 5350N NEEKO OCEANIC ROUTE: LIMRI 5220N 5230N 5340N 5350N while the correct route should be: LIMRI 5220N 5230N 5340N 5350N NEEKO so the actual goal looks a bit like a combo of the two. but this is already very nice to have! grtz, Serge
  3. Super, that's exactly what i want! speed and altitude would be nice, but this is already the biggest improvent, thx @srcooke! just out of curiosity, is there a way to make the appearance of a caption (like 'OCEANIC ROUTE') only appear when there are oceanic fixes? grtz, Serge
  4. Hello, Does anyone know how to provide a sort of 'Oceanic' section in a FP? So something like this: ROUTING: ROUTE ID: KJFKEDDF KJFK/04R KJFK DCT MERIT DCT HFD J42 BOS J575 TUSKY N117B SCOTS N199A NICSO DCT 48N050W 50N040W 51N030W 52N020W DCT LIMRI DCT XETBO DCT CRK DCT EVRIN L607 KONAN UL607 SPI T180 UNOKO UNOK2G EDDF/25L but then only the Oceanic part: OCEANIC ROUTING: NICSO DCT 48N050W 50N040W 51N030W 52N020W DCT LIMRI Mach .85 FL350 preferably with the time when reaching the entry point. grazie mille, 27MD (Serge)
  5. OK, strange, i can't get any validation anymore under 45 secs.....
  6. Since a few weeks, the IFPS validation takes on average about a minute, 90 seconds to complete. Before that, it was a matter of seconds. If you go to the site of Eurocontrol, and input the data manually, it takes about 2 seconds. It seems that the validation's still working perfectly, but the validation through PFPX isn't anymore? no idea wether it's something in PFPX of at IFPS, but do you have any idea what this could cause, and how to solve this one? tia, [BEL27MD] Serge Morabito
  7. OK, thank you for your reply! It's that when i have to adapt the FP, it's very nice to actually see what system to use. enjoy your sunday, Serge
  8. Hi there, since i want to be sure i understand the RVSM stuff, and do it correctly, i wonder where i can find the cruize tables that explain which system we have to use. i can see you have Y0, SA, SO, YY, ..., but i can nowhere find what this is. it would be awesome to finally have those tables tia, BEL27MD (Serge)
  9. Hey David, that's cool, that route is even better than the one the other planner gave my main point is/was that, although anyone who ever checked routes and rads and stuff knows how horribly complicated things can get, i was hoping to forget all other planners and just enjoy PFPX for all my planning. i hope we'll get there eventually, thx for your (quick) help, the workaround, and clear explanation, much appreciated! grtz, Serge
  10. Hello there, First i want to say, i really appreciate PFPX, since it's quite complete, it gives great charts with winds, turbulence, NAT and other routes, ..... Although i must say i was really hoping for an update into 2019 concerning aircraft performances, it's still one of the best routing programs. But is there an explanation why some routes are so weird? All the info is there, AIRACs, RADs, ... but still you get these strange situations. This makes it impossible just to use 1 program, i still use Vroute, Simbrief, and sometimes even Euroflightplan, just to get a route that would work, costs me (and i'm not kidding) hours, which i kind of expect when i pay for a routeplanner. Take this example from a few hours ago: planning a flight from EDDF to LIRF. The 40% overhead is the PFPX route, the 20% an other planning tool. The PFPX route doesn't seem near anything any company would like to fly? I tried to select AUTO+, and asked for the shortest route, which was also this one, and the other one is about 200nm shorter. Am i doing something wrong here, or what's the issue with not generating a decent route? Do i expect too much? Again, still a big fan, if only for the taking into account of the winds when you fly across the ocean, but this really is driving me nuts :s Tia for an answer on this one, grtz, BEL27MD
×
×
  • Create New...