Sharky

Hallo Reinhold, soweit ich weiß, werden Transitions zumindest in Europa nur nach Anweisung von ATC vergeben. Standardmäßig wird im Flugplan nur eine STAR mit angegeben. Wenn Du online fliegst, aber für den Zielflughafen kein vATC während Deines Anfluges anwesend ist, dann obliegt es dem vPiloten sich eigenständig zum Endanflug zu navigieren. Entweder durch geeignete Vektoren, Fixes oder dem Ausfliegen einer Transition - je nach Vekehrlage. Für Flughäfen in den USA kann man in PFPX zur STAR wiederum auch eine Transition angeben, welche allerdings in den meisten Fällen nur als Verbindung zur STAR dient. Insofern simuliert PFPX nur das Verfahren, wie es vermutlich genauso in der Realität gehandhabt wird - zumindest was den Flugplan ageht. Reale Piloten / ATC Lotsen / Dispatcher mögen mich gerne korrigieren, wenn mein Hobby-Flusi-Wissen in einem der Punkte falsch liegt.. Gruß David

Hi, "moving" the rule LF4232 from Altitude/FL Restrictions to Route Restrictions plus one additonal adjustment will generate the route, Stephen mentioned above, straight away without any manual changes required. I'll check for similar rules and adapt them as well. The changes will be included in the upcoming update for RAD Restrictions and Directs 1906. Regards David

Hi Eric, if you update the nav database for your aircrafts and PFPX every AIRAC, it's recommended to get the current update for RAD Restrictions and Directs for PFPX from the download section as well. At least when you often fly in Europe. Not only because of expanding Free Route Airspace, as Stephen said, but also new/renamed/deleted airways and fix. Not seldom these updates contain fixes to ensure correct routing, too. Regards David

Hi, I quote myselfe from this thread of yours from nearly three weeks ago: "Regarding the third restriction, maybe PFPX wants to use Z104 MISGI T894 BITBU Z110 BETEX instead of Z104 AGBUL T894 BITBU Z110 BETEX. With this adaption only ED3468 is left." Also ED2990 states in the document for "Operational Goal": Only available for CDA approaches by ATC As a workaround I would change this rule in PFPX to not allow any traffic for this airway segment. Regards David

Hi Pedro, as far as I know PFPX is only able to plan routes via airways and/or pre-defined directs. When you click the DCT button on the map, you can see, there are no directs connecting the island with the oceanic area. You can create your own user directs in the User Waypoints & Airways section, so PFPX can use these to create a route for this city pair. Regards David

Hi, not sure, why PFPX complains about the first restriction, as airway T161 is not even used. It just shares a few miles with Z104 from LEPSA to PSA. But for the second one, if I put NONKO into "Via" text field, it passes without complaint on this rule. This change will be included in update for RAD and Restrictions 1903. Regarding the third restriction, maybe PFPX wants to use Z104 MISGI T894 BITBU Z110 BETEX instead of Z104 AGBUL T894 BITBU Z110 BETEX. With this adaption only ED3468 is left. IMO, regardless the changes that need to be taken here, it's more important the route passes IFPS validation for the day of flight, which it does. Regards David

Hi I think I found the issue, it's rule ED2409 in Route Restrictions. The official RAD PAN Europe document says: KUMIK Y854 BOMBI Only available for traffic 1. DEP EDDK Via GIGET/HAREM/OMOGI Above FL245 The rule was added so. But PFPX v2 seems to misinterprete this rule. When you set the Requested Flight Level (RFL) flag for those three entries, it can route via KUMIK and generates the follwoing route instantly: KUMIK Y854 BOMBI UN850 ABUKA UL607 UTABA M738 NATAG DCT ADOSA DCT GAVRA Y345 RITEB I'll add this work around for next RAD and Directs 1903 Regards David

Bzgl. der Route EDDF nach EHAM scheint es entweder einen Fehler in einem Restrictions Eintrag zu geben oder PFPX v2 interpretiert einen gewissen Eintrag etwas anders als unter v1. Ich werde mal schauen, ob der Fehler bis zum nächsten Update von RAD and Directs 1902 nächste Woche behoben oder zumindest mit einem Workaround umgangen werden kann. Für den Moment kann man eine geeignete Route finden über Find -> Advanced -> Haken bei "Ignore Route Restrictions" setzen. Gruß David