VHOJT

Yep same here

I can confirm this program works well - have had it for a while now.

To further muddy the waters, operators sometimes have to adapt their policy to the country they are flying to in order to appease their regulator as well as their own.

It's the type of projection chosen, and it works fine. All I've seen is you come in here recently, make rude posts to people who try to help you and bad-mouth the program and its developers, whilst downvoting everything in sight (unless that's a coincidence). Your attitude stinks. If you want help, I suggest you modify it. By the way, real-world flight-planning software is not necessarily pretty and perfect like Google Maps or something, even in 2021!

Thank-you Judith and Christian for a wonderful program. A lot of the enjoyment in this hobby comes from planning realistically for the airline I choose to fly - PFPX with its huge range of options makes this possible. I would honestly enjoy this hobby far less without a program such as PFPX which you created. I am glad to read you will still have the program available, along with the server subsription, so hopefully PFPX will not "die" as did Danur's FOC. I was going to make a post for others to put ideas of what PFPX enthusiasts should do into the future, but having read your post my mind is somewhat more at rest. Thanks again, your program has and will continue to give me much enjoyment. Kind regards, Rudy PS - indeed many thanks to Stephen Cooke who has been an absolutely essential member of the community. Cheers, Stephen

Having said all of that, it would be nice to hear from the developers from time to time at least. I'd hate for this amazing piece of software to get a reputation and go the way of Danur FOC 2003 if anyone remembers that. Flight sim would be nowhere near as enjoyable for me (possibly not at all anymore) without this bit of software.

It is still the best tool if you want highly customisable/realistic flight planning tools. Simbrief is fine, but does not have the power or flexibility of PFPX.

All default profiles: 77F: 0.8% fuel bias, drag 0.6%, approach burn 800kg 77W: -0.7% fuel bias, drag 0.5%, approach burn 800kg 738: -2.6% fuel bias, drag 0.3%, approach burn 300kg 744RR: -2.9%, drag 0.3%, approach burn 1000kg Again, all of these were derived before PMDG fixed (they've now fixed all their aircraft) the fact their aircraft fuel burn didn't change per ISA deviation. So I edited the PFPX profiles removing any change for ISA deviation. Further testing on the aicraft have shown that PMDGs do now burn ~ +/- 3% per +/- 10 degrees ISA deviation, as they should. So in theory, these bias figures should still be sound.

I think I am going to go bald if I read this thread again. Please read Stephen's post. There is no issue with PFPX. I just realised before I say that in bold - can you still release your flight plans?

I will have a look tomorrow for the 77F figures I use. Note that these were before PMDG updated the 777, which now correctly burns differently depending on ISA deviation. The figures I have for it are for the default 77F profile where I took all ISA deviation burn changes out of the profile. So in theory, it should be a reasonable number.

Thanks Stephen!!

Have you guys all read what Stephen said above ^^^^. It's not an issue, it's telling you that there is no wind forecast when using Activesky weather, which is true. So how is this an issue?

Awesome, cheers mate. I use that site all the time but never noticed that "view source" button. That helps a lot - thanks very much! You learn something new every day...

Hi all, I have doing a bit of cargo flying of late and was wondering if anyone would know if LH/GEC file SIDs/STARs or account for them in the OFP? Most airlines I'm used to in Oz don't but am less sure about European practice! Any ideas would be much appreciated. I am also slowly building a statistical contingency database for airports I fly into - I was trying to think of some way we can all contribute to something similar, but it would depend a lot on whether or not the user's PFPX profile/bias are accurate. Cheers, Rudy

Would the <&MinReserveFuel> be what you're looking for? It is defined as Alternate Fuel + Final Reserve fuel + ballast fuel. So will generally be alternate fuel + 30 minutes in your case?