metalmike 19 Posted February 17, 2019 Share Posted February 17, 2019 Take for example this simple route from Seattle to Juneau with the B732: YYJ J502 SSR PFPX spits out: SEA DCT YYJ/N0430F280 J502 ARRUE/N0431F280 J502 ROYST/N0432F280 J502 YZT/N0433F280 J502 PRYCE/N0433F280 J502 DUGGS/N0433F280 J502 HANRY/N0434F280 J502 ANN/N0437F260 J502 SSR In past versions of PFPX if I had step climbs they were few and made sense performance-wise. I could understand altitudes like this (maybe not this extreme) in Europe where there are a lot more restrictions but I'm at a loss here. I could of course do the entire route without step climbs, but that doesn't make sense economically. Please login to display this image. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
srcooke 422 Posted February 17, 2019 Share Posted February 17, 2019 Using the MAX payload with the supplied B737-200ADV profile and online weather: (FPL-B732ADV-IN -B732/M-SDFHYZ/S -KSEA1750 -N0425F320 DCT SEA DCT YYJ J502 SSR DCT -PAJN0224 PAGS -DOF/190217 REG/B732ADV EET/CZVR0014 PAZA0134 RVR/550 PER/C -E/0328) There are 80kt + winds from the North. Using a max loaded 738 FL360 is returned. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
metalmike 19 Posted February 17, 2019 Author Share Posted February 17, 2019 My 732 is not max payload (and gave me a lower crz than you), and even still, why the constant climbs and descents? Just to chase less headwind? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
srcooke 422 Posted February 17, 2019 Share Posted February 17, 2019 Supplied B732 profile and PFPX weather ? Here is the planning screen returning FL320: Please login to display this image. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
metalmike 19 Posted February 17, 2019 Author Share Posted February 17, 2019 I can't think of what else would cause my issue, other than maybe I'm using US FLAG rules (Alaska is flag ops, even though it's technically in the US, same thing applies to Hawaii for example). Though I get this kind of result on almost any flight I try to dispatch with step climbs. Edit. also to clarify, while I am using PFPX online weather, my fuel profile is slightly modified - cruise bias is about -26% (which I imagine would make me carry less fuel and be lighter - get higher). My optimum altitude is decreased by -2000 ft - I know it seems like some weird modifications but I've found this to match the FlyJSim 732 pretty well. Even with all that though, while I'd understand slightly lower altitudes vs the default profile, what primarily annoys me is the constant climb and descent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
metalmike 19 Posted February 17, 2019 Author Share Posted February 17, 2019 I got rid of my optimum altitude adjustment, and that seems to compute a more straightforward cruise profile. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VHOJT 57 Posted February 17, 2019 Share Posted February 17, 2019 I'm also having problems with the default 744 RB211 (and others) profile getting a normal performance-based step climb with no optimisations. Altitude selection is definitlely weird compared to 1.28.8 which I was using before. I more often than not have to force step climbs by looking at an optimum altitude vs. weight table. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DemonTraitor 3 Posted June 2, 2019 Share Posted June 2, 2019 Same problem here..... Please login to display this image. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
srcooke 422 Posted June 2, 2019 Share Posted June 2, 2019 4 minutes ago, DemonTraitor said: Same problem here..... Please login to display this image. Full OFP ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teddy 0 Posted June 2, 2019 Share Posted June 2, 2019 +1 Full OFP Please login to display this image. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
srcooke 422 Posted June 2, 2019 Share Posted June 2, 2019 Guys how can anyone give an answer with NO useful information. NO route in text format, NO OFP will lead to no answer from me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teddy 0 Posted June 2, 2019 Share Posted June 2, 2019 (FPL-JAI003-IS -B738/M-SDE1FGHIJ1RWXYZ/LB1 -EGBB1005 -N0372F220 LUVUM DCT TNT N57 POL/N0386F260 UN601 RIBEL -EGPF0044 EGNV -PBN/A1B1C1D1L1O1S1 NAV/RNVD1E2A1 DOF/190602 REG/VTJBQ EET/EGTT0017 RVR/200 PER/C -E/0140) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
srcooke 422 Posted June 2, 2019 Share Posted June 2, 2019 14 minutes ago, Teddy said: (FPL-JAI003-IS -B738/M-SDE1FGHIJ1RWXYZ/LB1 -EGBB1005 -N0372F220 LUVUM DCT TNT N57 POL/N0386F260 UN601 RIBEL -EGPF0044 EGNV -PBN/A1B1C1D1L1O1S1 NAV/RNVD1E2A1 DOF/190602 REG/VTJBQ EET/EGTT0017 RVR/200 PER/C -E/0140) The route is level capped to FL285 by RAD, really not much wrong with that, increasing the final cruise to 280 results in greater fuel burn. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teddy 0 Posted June 2, 2019 Share Posted June 2, 2019 Hi Stephan Thanks for trying to help me out. The issue is not so much about the altitude than the problem with suggesting FL220 in the beginning then a descent followed by a descent and then a climb again. That's what I am not able to figure out. Regards Ted Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
srcooke 422 Posted June 2, 2019 Share Posted June 2, 2019 I don't see that here, are you using an addon performance file ? tried a profile other than LRC ? There is an issue with short trip levels, selecting INIT ALT = MAX and no STEP can overcome unnecessary low levels but that shouldn't the problem here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
srcooke 422 Posted June 2, 2019 Share Posted June 2, 2019 Attached OFP using an AirlinerPerformance file and 0.79 cruise, close max ZFW EGBB-EGPF (02-Jun-2019) #2.pdf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teddy 0 Posted June 2, 2019 Share Posted June 2, 2019 1 hour ago, srcooke said: There is an issue with short trip levels, selecting INIT ALT = MAX and no STEP can overcome unnecessary low levels but that shouldn't the problem here. The above suggestion resolves the issue. Let me check a few more OFP's. Regards Ted Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.