Recently we have seen a lot of codes used to unlock our products being offered for discounted prices. Almost all of them are bought using stolen credit cards. These codes will all be blocked by our systems and you will have to try to get your money back from the seller, we are unable to assist in these matters. Do be very careful when you see a deal that is almost too good to be true, it probably is too good to be true.

Jump to content

EGSC9

members
  • Content Count

    18
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by EGSC9

  1. It is actually as fundamental as EDTO (ETOPS) or take-off speeds calculation, but ignored by most people flying flight simulators. Per legal requirements, to put is simply, you have to ensure that aircraft will be capable to operate by at least X margin (typically, 1000 feet) above terrain elevation along any point of your route (plus some width margin buffer) with one engine inoperative (for twins), given actual planned weight. If this criteria is not met, you either reduce takeoff weight to achieve it, or re-route to avoid high terrain. These requirements vary from authority to authority. You may find more about this subject by googling terms such as 'net level off altitude' and 'drift down analysis'. PFPX implementation is simple and does allow second method (full drift down analysis), but it is good enough. To manually determine compliance with this requirement you would take net level off weight chart from FPPM (for Boeing aircraft) and terrain elevation data; PFPX automates this process to a certain degree. Another area which is really missing in PFPX is oxygen profile (you have to ensure that in case of decompression, aircraft will be capable to descent to X altitude within specific time limit, considering actual terrain profile along your route).
  2. First of all, thanks for the version 2, many things been corrected and many new handy features added. I would like to ask for an easy feature request. It is good that NOTAMs can now be filtered by their relevance - time window relevant for the actual flight, however, these filtered NOTAMs are only displayed within application interface itself, not in OFP (so one would still get hundred pages in OFP for a typical pan-European flight). So the only practical use for NOTAM filtering is during flight planning, but as a pilot I would like to be able to scan relevant NOTAMs as well. Unfortunately, as I also used to do in the past, I still have to use some external service for NOTAM filtering based on their applicability and generate a document, in addition to PFPX OFP. Also, it would be nice to mark NOTAMs in OFP by their category, as in application itself (e.g. 'airspace', 'runway', 'airway'). Anyone who actually uses NOTAMs knows what a headache it is to scan through dozens of NOTAM pages, 90% of which are either irrelevant due to time applicability or some non-sense messages, easily missing among that garbage a NOTAM about closed runway for example. Please, consider these things for the next update. Thank you!
  3. FS9/2004 export changed, but flawed again. Example: N56┬░ 15' 49.00" E040┬░ 35' 58.00" exported in previous versions as N56* 15.49', E040* 35.58' (no conversion to decimal minutes) exported in this version (1.28.9i) as N56* 15.00', E040* 35.00 (decimal minutes completely omitted)
  4. From my understanding PFPX was never intended to be used in-flight (apart from actual printed OFPs), this is flight planning tool and there are still a lot of flight planning features to be added/refined.
  5. I noticed that "Ignore route charges" option has been added in route construction dialog. This feature is not documented, could you explain it's usage? It's great to see such enhancements. Also, is it possible to define runways for custom airfields (i.e. it is possible to define properties of custom airfields - entry/exit points, etc, but not actual rwys)?
×
×
  • Create New...