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


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About AMJBecker

  • Rank
    Flight Student - Groundwork
  1. I'm trying to plan a step climb with the A320 Pro 1.2.3. Doing so, the flight plan shows a S/C pseudo waypoint, but does not reflect the new vertical profile, as it should do according to the Thales FMS Pilot Guide. Is the STEP ALTS function not yet fully implemented? I have something like this in mind, but couldn't find it in the forum anymore. Performing a step climb during the flight manually by just changing to the new cruise altitude in PROG page and on FCU works fine. Flight phase switches to CLIMB and returns to CRUISE, when the new flight level is reached. So, no issue here. It's a planning and fuel and time monitoring issue only. See the following screenshots: original PROG page Section in original flight plan STEP ALTS defined and accepted (question: what does the message "OPT STEP: ENTER ALT ONLY" mean?) resulting changed flight plan, showing the S/C pseudo waypoint, but an unchanged flight level and no T/C pseudo waypoint, where the new flight level will be reached
  2. This is an extract of the Thales document, I was referring to. It's from part III, chapter 3.4, HOLD Function
  3. By the way, ignore the last 4 screenshots (those without text). I made them, but they aren't relevant for what I want to raise.
  4. If you mean the direct, parallel and teardrop entry? Yes, I'm familiar with that stuff. The issue I have is not about the entry. I have a direct entry, because it is a computed HOLD. My issue is about the extra full circle in case of an immediate exit. I pushed the prompt, when I already was on a straight line to the HOLD FIX. Circling is not necessary, as would be, if I were on the other side of the HOLD loop.
  5. I'm flying version 1.2.3 of the Airbus A320 Family Professional and just training myself for flying HOLD patterns. When I try to IMM EXIT a HOLD, I would have expected that the A/C flies the shortest way towards the HOLD FIX an then procede with the flight plan. That's how it is described as well in the Thales Flight Management Pilot Guide from Dec 2004 (quite old but it's the one I have). But the A/C actually flies an extra circle before turning towards the HOLD FIX. See the following screenshots. Original Flight Plan (NOLG3A STAR to EDDH ILS 23) After inserting HAM and defining HAM as HOLD FIX (computed HOLD) HOLD is shown on ND as expected A/C enters HOLD (direct entry as expected, no surprise, because it's a computed HOLD) and MCDU shows IMM EXIT prompt IMM EXIT prompt posted ND shows extra circle, A/C flies extra circle. This is the issue I'd like to raise. Is this a normal behaviour? I would have expected a behaviour that is described in the Thales document. What is also remarkable: the recalculated path towards the glidepath became too narrow. But this can be corrected by defining a fly-over at DH658. Following ND Screenshot shows path from HOLD FIX HAM to the glidepath after setting fly-over at DH658
  6. That is what I thought as well. It seems that entering the alternate flight plan also enables it from where I stand. In earlier flights I succeeded in rerouting to an alternative destination by not specifying a company route, but only entering the ALTN airport, then enabling ALTN from a specific waypoint and then completing the resulting new flight plan (in the temporary flight plan). That was OK. But loading a company flight plan would simplify defining the new route. Waiting for what you'll find out. Good luck!
  7. I've taken KPHL as the primary destination and KPVD as the alternate airport in your example. Little progress, but not yet completely there. Picture 1 to 4 look the same, i.e. alternate waypoints in primary flight plan, the discontinuity, then the primary flight plan waypoints until the primary destination. What changed is that I now have an alternate flight plan, which looks exactly like expected, starting from the primary destination and going towards the alternate destination.
  8. Dave, what you are saying sounds plausible. But how does a company route for the alternate destination have to look like in order to become recognized as a valid company route? As I said, I removed the departure airport line from the Co Rte file. The result was that it was not accepted on the INIT A page.
  9. Yes, the CoRte for the alternate flight plan contains Departure and Arrival airports: [CoRte] ArptDep=EDDH ArptArr=EKCH Airway1=P605 Airway1FROM=LUB Airway1TO=TOSPA Airway2=P605 Airway2FROM=TOSPA Airway2TO=AMICH Airway3=P605 Airway3FROM=AMICH Airway3TO=PIBUL Airway4=P605 Airway4FROM=PIBUL Airway4TO=MEGAR Airway5=P605 Airway5FROM=MEGAR Airway5TO=GESKA Airway6=Z711 Airway6FROM=GESKA Airway6TO=MONAK But simply removing the ArptDep line leads to the problem that the company route for the alternate is not recognized anymore.
  10. I'm flying version 1.2.3 of the Airbus A320 Family Professional and just training myself for defining and enabling alternate destinations. I'm experiencing an unexpected behaviour on the INIT A page, which is exactly the same as described in a very old topic named "Alternate Flight Plan Issues" from Dec 12, 2015. That topic does not tell about a solution. Is this still an open issue? Is there a solution, which is applicable to the new product, which I am using? I haven't found yet any newer topics in the forum. Can somebody tell me, where I can find more information, if there is any? Attached screenshots show: INIT A page with correctly entered FROM/TO and corresponding company route and alternate destination with corresponding company route The flight plan shows (SID/STAR/APPROACH not yet entered): immediately after the departure airport the waypoints of the alternate route after a F-PLN DISCONTINUITY the waypoints of the primary flight plan the flightplan ends as expected at the primary destination (afte F-PLAN DISCONTINUITY) then it says: there is no ALTN F-PLN but after that come the waypoints of the alternate flight plan And at the end it says: END OF ALTN F-PLN (which according to a former statement does not exist)
  11. You are right, masterhawk. The new A319 Professional does load the company routes from the "new" ...\Aerosoft\General\A3XX FlightPlans folder. I removed the .flp file from the "old" ...\Aerosoft\Airbus\FlightPlans folder and I could verify that the requested route could be loaded (and could only be loaded from the "new" folder). I mixed up two different issues. Originally, my route stored by Corte has had a bad format, and that was why the MCDU could not load it. Then I made two things, I copied the .flp to the "old" folder and corrected the route's format. And then I thought that the copy had fixed my problem. :-) So, thanks to all, who helped me solve my issue. This chat can be closed.
  12. Good question, no, I didn't. But I executed Company Route Editor as admin right now. Unfortunately no change. By the way, I am using version V2.5.1 rev 15. For your information.
  13. Yes, I did. That's what I mean with Changing the "base directory" does not change this behavior. I also tried to overwrite the path in the ini file. No change.
  14. Company routes saved by the Company Route Editor are stored in folder C:\Users\<myuser>\Documents\Aerosoft\General\A3XX Flightplans. The A319 professional MCDU (and others) load company routes from folder C:\Users\<myuser>\Documents\Aerosoft\Airbus\FlightPlans. Manually copying flp files is just a workaround. Changing the "base directory" does not change this behavior, neither does a change in the ini file. How can I bring both, the Company Route Editor and the A319 MCDU together?
  • Create New...