Jump to content

How to get PFPX output to agree with AEX fuel planner


Recommended Posts

I have generated a flight in PFPX to try using it with AEX. I load the AEX aircraft and then load AEX fuel planner module, Iand input the pertinent data. I cannot get the planner to agree with PFPX and vice-versa. What am I doing wrong and can someone offer insight as to how to properly use PFPX to load the aircraft correctly.

Thanks

Dom

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Dom,

I think I know what you mean. You setup PFPX to plan a flight using an A320, payload, etc: then try the Airbus Extended Fuel Planner with the same distance, passenger numbers etc and find that ZFW and predicted fuel requirements differ greatly! How to reconcile the two is the big question!!

One of the differences that I've accepted is that for a given ZFW and distance the fuel predictions might be quite different. For PFPX I might have forgotten to set the correct fuel policy to match where I'm flying.

But I have noticed that if I can match PFPX and Airbus Extended Fuel Planner on ZFW and use the PFPX fuel prediction that it does work correctly. ie. on the Details tab, under the Fuel Planning heading if you load fuel as per the "Release" item you will end up at the destination with fuel remaining as per the "Remaining" item.

Regards,

Philip M. Wafer

EIWT

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From a good deal of usage I can say that PFPX gives very accurate real world flight plans (in my case with the B772).

The problem then becomes one of how accurately your simulator implements the real world aircraft. If not very well then, sorry to say, you are stuck with a poor implementation of the aircraft, and.this cannot be the fault of PFPX.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

I too am having difficulty getting all the weights to match up, could someone upload a screenshot or a list of their setup? as there is no profile for the AXE and probably wont be one for a good long time yet. I dont have much of a problem with fuel burn and I can get TOPCAT and PFPX to match up pretty good its when it comes to the loadsheet and getting the correct takeoff data for the AXE it seems to be a bit off from what the AXE fuel planner is giving me.

my settings are(in Kgs):

TOPCAT

Configuration: iFDG Single Class

Pax: 150

Cargo: 5420

Fuel: 19087

DOW: 41243

MZWF: 62500

MTOW: 77000

MLW: 63000

PFPX

takeoff and landing performance: A320-214 CFM56-5B4

I have matched the numbers from TOPCAT to the DOW etc for PFPX but when I get the loadsheet printed from TOPCAT its not much use as is usually way off what the AXE fuel planner is giving me.

I have also changed the passenger weights to what they are in the AXE to match up within PFPX and TOPCAT

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Stuart,

PFPX DOES have an aircraft template listed as " Airbus ExtendedX 320-214". Slight editing required.

Topcat (2.73 09SEP13) DOES have an aircraft configuration for "Aerosoft Airbus Extended". Slight editing required. I note you use "iFDG Single Class".

So, like yourself, I've matched weights between the various bits.

We're talking about 3 pieces of software here - PFPX, Topcat and Airbus X Extended Fuel Planner. The primary function of each is different. If you're looking at the fuel calculation of each of these you're going to get different results from each. They do not match. Which is right, which to use??

I take the fuel value predicted by PFPX, go to the Airbus X Extended Fuelplanner and edit the Total Fuel value to match, then press " Load fuel & payload" button. This works for me as I also land at destination with fuel remaining as per PFPX (approx.), so I'm happy with the results. One reason I do this is that Airbus X Extended Fuelplanner has higher fuel calculation results by 1.0t to 1.5t, which means by comparison the PFPX calculation sounds more efficient (lighter aircraft).Topcat fuel "estimation" is much closer (EIDW-LEBL, I got a difference of 200kg more), but still higher than PXPX.

What differences are you getting (assuming it's the fuel calculation differences that's bothering you)??

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you can determine the differences, you can experiment with PFPX Fuel Bias numbers to see if that brings the burn more in line with AXE. Since you are loading the same OEW and payload, the ZFW should be what is being entered in AXE, then it would be a matter of the performance characteristics model that PFPX uses versus AXE.

Do you have the numbers that AXE is producing ? ( you listed the PFPX numbers) If it is weight related ( eg the ZFW numbers don't match, it could be the weights being assumed for passengers -- again settable via PFPX)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
  • Aerosoft

Keep in mind that in real aviation this data can easily be 5% off. It varies per aircraft, weather predictions are not perfect, pilots all fly different etc. It's like the VATSIM controller that told me to fly a heading of 233 degrees in bad weather. Any pilot will tell you that getting it roughly between 230 and 240 is pretty good.

For some reason simpilots expect things to be more perfect then they are in real life.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

ok guys, planned a flight from ESSA to EGPH this is the results I got:

AXE -
ZFW - 52824
TOW - 60220
Taxi - 60513
LW - 55355
RELEASE - 7689
TOPCAT -
ZFW - 51843
TOW - 59488
LW - 54918
PFPX -
ZFW - 52932
TOW - 60577
LW - 56007
RELEASE - 7755
i dont know if i am just digging a deeper hole here but it would be nice if the numbers matched. its not causing a serious problem as the fuel predictions are pretty good, but i cant use the topcat loadsheets and takeoff performance sheets plus my flightplan weights dont agree with whats in the actual aircraft.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

that makes no sense, you can't compare PFPX with AXE and TOPCAT.

PFPX calculates the Fuel with Wind, Temp, Route

AXE Fuel Planner use great circle distance and Fuel Calculation is very basic and not 100% accurate

TOPCAT use great circle distance, no Wind, no Temp. and so on.

I made the PFPX Airbus X Extendend File, I've spend many hours to make it as accurate as possible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

ok maybe i muddied the waters a bit: i will go into a bit more detail about my flight planning, I will plan the flight within PFPX, this is where I get my flightplan and fuel load. i will export the completed load and balance to TOPCAT, where I will get the loadsheet and takeoff performance, i will then load the AXE with the AXE load manager with the PAX and Baggage and Fuel load from PFPX.

the problem i am having is that none of the numbers from the 3 different programs used for flight planning match up in the actual aircraft.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Stuart,

I think you're digging yourself a big muddy hole here :).....

I looked at ESSA - EGPH. PFPX gave me G/C distance of 713nm, F/P distance of 764nm and Air distance of 831nm. 150pax, 2250kg baggage and I added 1500kg cargo to give me a total payload of 16350kg - ZFW 57593kg. Fuel policy EU-OPS, extra 330kg. Release 7527kg. When Flight "calculated" I clicked "takeoff" (4th button from left) from which I can calculate takeoff performance. Takeoff weight of 65010kg already inserted, press calculate - FLEX 65° available for Rwy19r ESSA. press append and apply - It's now a paragraph in the OFP. You can do the same with the next button ("landing") but the append doesn't include autobrake settings calculations. Maybe in the next version! Average winds in the OFP shows as 33knots HW. FL=360. Alternate EGPF 56nm.

So! On to the AXE Fuelplanner. A320 - 150pax, 3750kg baggage, ZFW 57593kg. Input from ESSA to EGPH = 713nm. Planned FL = 360, Alternate distance 56, Windspeed 33, wind direction 260. This gives me a total fuel load of 8717kg, roughly 1200kg more than PFPX. So I'll change it to 7527. With FSX running and an airbus x extended A320 sitting at the gate I'll press the "load fuel and payload" button on the Airbus X extended flightplanner and I'm good to go. I've checked the aircraft/fuel and payload menu option in FSX and the figures now match (ok - they show in pounds, but the conversion to kg show the right numbers.)

That's what I do.........

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Stuart,

I think you're digging yourself a big muddy hole here :).....

I looked at ESSA - EGPH. PFPX gave me G/C distance of 713nm, F/P distance of 764nm and Air distance of 831nm. 150pax, 2250kg baggage and I added 1500kg cargo to give me a total payload of 16350kg - ZFW 57593kg. Fuel policy EU-OPS, extra 330kg. Release 7527kg. When Flight "calculated" I clicked "takeoff" (4th button from left) from which I can calculate takeoff performance. Takeoff weight of 65010kg already inserted, press calculate - FLEX 65° available for Rwy19r ESSA. press append and apply - It's now a paragraph in the OFP. You can do the same with the next button ("landing") but the append doesn't include autobrake settings calculations. Maybe in the next version! Average winds in the OFP shows as 33knots HW. FL=360. Alternate EGPF 56nm.

So! On to the AXE Fuelplanner. A320 - 150pax, 3750kg baggage, ZFW 57593kg. Input from ESSA to EGPH = 713nm. Planned FL = 360, Alternate distance 56, Windspeed 33, wind direction 260. This gives me a total fuel load of 8717kg, roughly 1200kg more than PFPX. So I'll change it to 7527. With FSX running and an airbus x extended A320 sitting at the gate I'll press the "load fuel and payload" button on the Airbus X extended flightplanner and I'm good to go. I've checked the aircraft/fuel and payload menu option in FSX and the figures now match (ok - they show in pounds, but the conversion to kg show the right numbers.)

That's what I do.........

Interesting. I can almost match up your values with mine. Some questions if you don't mind on the OFP:

What factor are you using for burn adjustment? I have 96.7%

Where do you find the average winds value on the OFP?

Thanks

Dom

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Dom,

Is that under "Performance Adjustments" in the Aircraft Editor?? If so, I've left them at the default 100%.

Average winds I took from the first block of the OFP. It's below "TTL AIR DIST: xxx NM". = "AVG WIND CMP: HD033 KT". So since we're heading a little South of West I selected 260° 33knots in the AXE Fuelplanner.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can anyone put the correct procedure detailed and setups needed for three programs to match numbers and plan a flight?

Enviado desde mi Nexus 5 mediante Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

it would be nice if they did, thanks phillip for the help, I think I will be following your instructions to the letter from now on!

its starting to get annoying with PFPX and TOPCAT, regards to TOPCAT it used to be my go to application for getting loading and takeoff data along with some nice paperwork, that was back in the good old FS9 days with ifly etc.

ever since there are more and more high quality addons for FSX coming out AXE, PMDG 737/777, MJC Dash 8, these are basically my entire hangar at the moment. none of the above will work (without ridiculous tweaking and hours and hours spent).

Ive always been a fan flightsimsoft but they have really dropped the ball. by the time we get all the profiles we are waiting patiently for microsoft will have stopped supporting FSX :(:boohoo_s:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can anyone put the correct procedure detailed and setups needed for three programs to match numbers and plan a flight?

Enviado desde mi Nexus 5 mediante Tapatalk

My advise - don't try to make the numbers from all 3 programs match. It's more or less futile. And why would you use numbers from both AXE and PFPX? Stick with the program, which gives the best result, when doing the flight. If PFPX is best, use that - if not, use AXE. Or use PFPX for the route planning and AXE for the fuel planning - if that works best. As already mentioned in posts above, making all 3 sets of numbers the same is probably not doable, as the factors used by the different programs aren't the same.

I've lots of grey hair - I think you'll have, too, before you make it work.

all the best

Torben

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My advise - don't try to make the numbers from all 3 programs match. It's more or less futile. And why would you use numbers from both AXE and PFPX? Stick with the program, which gives the best result, when doing the flight. If PFPX is best, use that - if not, use AXE. Or use PFPX for the route planning and AXE for the fuel planning - if that works best. As already mentioned in posts above, making all 3 sets of numbers the same is probably not doable, as the factors used by the different programs aren't the same.

I've lots of grey hair - I think you'll have, too, before you make it work.

all the best

Torben

I prefer to use PFPX. But how you use it? Is a good way to put the load in AXE setup, then put ZFW obtained in PFPX and calculate release fuel and put it in to AXE to load payload to FSX?

Enviado desde mi Nexus 5 mediante Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

I prefer to use PFPX. But how you use it? Is a good way to put the load in AXE setup, then put ZFW obtained in PFPX and calculate release fuel and put it in to AXE to load payload to FSX?

Enviado desde mi Nexus 5 mediante Tapatalk

I think its the good I dea, !!!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Privacy Policy & Terms of Use