Jump to content

01011100111001

Members
  • Content Count

    13
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by 01011100111001

  1. Thanks for the help. So I understand that PFPX won't have as much detail about the weather when using AS vs using the online weather subscription but does this mean it won't take the weather into account when giving you a route or just not as well as it would if you used the online weather? Basically it would be nice to know that the route I am given should avoid any severe weather or winds.
  2. Sorry to bug you guys again but I am still relatively new to using PFPX and had a few questions regarding flight planning. 1)So I have PFPX connected with ActiveSky and want to plan a route between JFK and Tromso Norway. When I have PFPX find a route for me does it automatically take into account the weather for the route and give a route that will avoid any severe weather or turbulence? Also I can get PFPX to show the wind and temperature charts as well as turbulence but nothing happens when I click the Sigmet button and would like to also be able to see if there are will be any storms along the route. 2) So I sort of understand how NAT tracks work and know how to add them to my route but I don't know if it's always a requirement to fly them when going across the Atlantic. For example when I generate a route between JFK and Tromso it usually take me north from JFK and over Newfoundland and then over southern Greenland and over to Norway which avoids the only current NAT track which is much farther south. So would this be valid route to fly or would I need to use the NAT track? Thanks for the help.
  3. Thanks for help. I know the PMDG model for the 400D has a much lower MTOW and I think a lower MZFW but not sure when it comes to fuel burn what the difference is or how well it's modeled in PMDG. In the FMC for the 400D it will let you load up to around 400,000LBS of fuel however you can really only load around 200,000LBS max without going over the MTOW if your also flying with a low ZFW and even less with more weight. I don't mind using the data for the 400 and just editing the weights as long as it will be accurate enough but not sure how well it will work since I plan to do flights at much lower weights and on longer routes that what it was meant for.
  4. Does anyone know where I might be able to find a performance file for the domestic version of the 747-400 from PMDG? I have the 400 performance pack from FlyPercisely which has all the variants except for this one. From what I understand the fuel burn rate should be similar enough to the standard 400 when it comes to doing short routes with lots of pax but I am planning to fly it as a private plane so most of my flights will be with a light payload and longer range and want to make sure I at least get somewhat accurate fuel calculations. So is it possible to find a performance file for this variant or would the performance data for the standard 400 still work for getting accurate calculations when doing longer routes in it. Thanks
  5. I completely understand. I just wanted to check because that would have been the main reason for buying that scenery in particular. Luckily I was able to find a free program that allows you to do your own scenery from satellite imagery so will try that.
  6. So I am thinking about purchasing the Aerosoft Las Vegas scenery for P3Dv4 and since it has satellite imagery for the Test range around Area 51. My question is does the satellite imagery cover the whole test range or just a few of the areas within the range like Area51 and the Yucca site? I want to do some test flights in the area and have been looking for scenery for that area but want to find something that covers the whole range. Thanks
  7. So your saying I should be getting the correct data just that the developer choose to shorten the display name? Yeah I haven't upgraded cause I hardly use it since I was using SimBrief instead. Want to start using PFPX more since it has much more info and options.
  8. So I am planning a flight for the 747-400ER in PFPX. I have the performance file for this plane and have already created a new aircraft in PFPX using this data. The problem is when Im actually planning the flight and select it as my aircraft type it seems fine but down below where it shows the airline name and aircraft type it just shows 747-400 and not ER. Also, when I printed the plan it shows the same thing on the second page where it shows shows my airline and aircraft. Is there something I am doing wrong? I went to add new aircraft and selected the 400ER as my aircraft type and then edited the weights to match what was shown in P3D aircraft details for PMDG 400ER with my airline. I just want to make sure I am not getting calculations for the 400 instead of the 400ER Thanks
  9. Hello, so I apologize if this has been asked before but I am having issues at Madeira where parts of the terrain just kind of slowly rise into the air. For example there's a thin section of grass next to the taxiway that looks fine until part of it gently slopes up and curves up into the air. As well as few other areas that float into the sky. I've tried a few things like reinstalling the airport running ORBX elevation tool. Anyone know what might be causing this? I will try and add some pics when I get home. Thanks
  10. Hello, I am wondering if anyone knows where I can get the performance profile for the Domestic version of the 747-400 for PFPX? I can't seem to find many details online for this particular variant and want to be able to get accurate fuel planning with this model. I know you can make your own but I don't where to find the info I would need to make one. Thanks
×
×
  • Create New...