Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  

A320 SID Test

Recommended Posts


I reviewed the posts related to the flight management system failing to comply with published SID's.

I too have been struggling with this using the new pro bus 318 & 320.

A little info on my test setup:

1) i7-2600k 16GB RAM, OC 4.0 GHz, nVidia GTX970, Windows 10 Pro all the latest updates

2) P3Dv4.3 clean install with only a few ORBX addons; Global and LC.

3) Aerosoft A318/319 & A320/321 with all of the latest updates via the updater (A320/321 ver:


I set up a simple flight from EGKK to EGUN simply to test the MCDU and the flight. The departure was 26L using CLN4X like another user had with a single waypoint at cruise (FL070) and a transition to Rwy29 via TUSMU.

I started the sim in turn-around mode and loaded the pax and cargo then closed the doors except the main.

The main MCDU was used to enter the flight plan manually.


The departure was reviewed using a commercial chart system and compared to the 1809 Navigraph proc for EGKK.






TF,KKE11,51.202697,-0.154894,0, ,0.0,0.0,0.0,0.0,3,4000,0,1,250,0,0,0, 
TF,KKE15,51.213975,-0.073089,0, ,0.0,0.0,0.0,0.0,0,0,0,1,250,0,0,0, 
TF,SUNAV,51.260250,0.194389,0, ,0.0,0.0,0.0,0.0,1,5000,0,1,250,0,0,0, 
TF,KKE42,51.227028,0.568528,0, ,0.0,0.0,0.0,0.0,1,5000,0,1,250,0,0,0, 
TF,DET,51.304003,0.597275,0, ,0.0,0.0,0.0,0.0,1,5000,0,1,250,0,0,0, 
TF,KKN52,51.385000,0.627611,0, ,0.0,0.0,0.0,0.0,1,6000,0,1,250,0,0,0, 
TF,DAGGA,51.821944,0.794167,0, ,0.0,0.0,0.0,0.0,1,6000,0,1,250,0,0,0, 
TF,CLN,51.848472,1.147589,0, ,0.0,0.0,0.0,0.0,1,6000,0,1,250,0,0,0, 


COURSE TO FIX KKE09 +3200  @ 220 FLYBY
TRACK  TO FIX KKE11 -4000  @ 250 FLYBY
TRACK  TO FIX SUNAV  5000  @ 250 FLYBY                               My interpretation of the SID
TRACK  TO FIX KKE42  5000  @ 250 FLYBY
TRACK  TO FIX DET    5000  @ 250 FLYBY
TRACK  TO FIX KKN52  6000  @ 250 FLYBY
TRACK  TO FIX CLN    6000  @ 250 FLYBY


SID (SimPlatesX Ultra)



The details confirm that the first two waypoints can/should be above 1500 & 3200 while the third is limited (constrained) to 4000 feet

It was interesting that there is no altitude for KKE15.


Loading the MCDU flight plan:

The plan was loaded using the dep/arr runways and stated STAR and Transition.

The next image shows what the screens looked like right after loading (A), after modifying some waypoints to add constraints (B) and finally after the fuel prediction was activated.



It can be seen that KKW02 shows an altitude that is clearly less than the required +1500 while KKE09 shows an altitude that conforms to the +3200 value.

KKE11 displays the correct altitude and speed constraints.

KKN52 is supposed to be 6000 but shows nothing so I entered it manually (B)

CLN is supposed to be 6000 but it displays as 6100.

The rest of the items appear to be correct.



Now we turn to the A320 plan display to see what it shows:



Viewing these all the constraints appear to be correct.


Now looking at the DET plan versus display:



Clearly it shows that one display is somehow wrong.


After having set up the flight the full Checklist with copilot was started.

The aircraft took off as expected and after reaching a suitable altitude the autopilot was turned on.

The plan then proceed to climb immediately @220kn to the 4000 restriction.

Once it passed KKE11 it decided to climb to cruise altitude blowing away all of the speed/altitude constraints; furthermore the flight plan changed all of the SID constraints to FL070.


My past experience suggests that this aircraft now has a HAL9000 running in the background as it wants to do things that I or Navigraph do not want it to.





Share this post

Link to post

Here is the updater screen that was checked before I started the test.:




Are there any specific files that I might need to send to you to confirm if the update is as expected ?

Share this post

Link to post

Just dropped in to see if anything had changed. When something does I will re-run the test using the same procedures.

Share this post

Link to post

Yesterday I noticed that a new version of both the busses was available.

I removed both from my test and regular systems and followed the prescribed methodology for re-install.

Once I had updated Navigraph I decided to re-test the previous flight again.

Using the provided A320 Lufthansa CFM I set up at a gate at EGKK.


Once again the flight plan for cruise at FL070 was entered manually with one intermediate waypoint (WTZ) between the CLNX4X SID for 26L and TUSMU Transition for ILS29.

After everything was set up and the systems were active  I checked both the MCDU values and those shown on the ND which generally seem to display the constraint values.

I placed these values in a table to make it easier to review:




Those values in red show where the MCDU displayed things differently than the ND and the underlying constraint values.

Perhaps these apparently contrary display values are simply part of the weird and wonderful Aerosoft Airbus logic?


Now on to the actual flight............

Following the fully managed with copilot procedures the takeoff went without a hitch.

At a suitable altitude and before the first waypoint AP was turned on.

The MCDU and ND were watched closely to see if any strangeness happened.

The aircraft passed KKW02 above 1500, KKE09 above 3200 and held at 4000 before KKE11.

After KKE11 it climbed and maintained 5000 @ 250kias.

After DET it climbed to 6000. At CLN it climbed to 7000 and held until TOD

Descent and landing were normal.


The SID profile was flown as expected and nothing strange (for me anyway) happened.

It appears that the changes to the coding have corrected the previously encountered behaviour.


Thanks for the fixes !




  • Upvote 1

Share this post

Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Create New...