Ray Proudfoot 231 Posted September 6, 2014 Share Posted September 6, 2014 I used PFPX v1.15 to plan a flight from EGLL to LEPA (Palma, Mallorca). This is the plan created... MID4F MID UL151 SITET UN859 ETRAT UQ203 PUMAL UN859 TOLSO TO1DCP The problem is there are only two waypoints in French airspace - ETRAT on the Channel coast and PUMAL on the Spanish border. That's a distance of over 440nm with no waypoints. Surely that cannot be correct. There are many upper jet routes in France. Why has PFPX selected such a odd routing? I've never had such a routing over mainland Europe with so few waypoints. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PatrickM 49 Posted September 6, 2014 Share Posted September 6, 2014 UQ* airways are mostly night time fuel saving airways. They are active from 2100z until 0500z if I'm not mistaken.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yakyak 19 Posted September 6, 2014 Share Posted September 6, 2014 Hi Ray, Seems to be the most sensible route to take.....quite direct. I wouldn't be concerned with so few way points. Nick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiago91 7 Posted September 6, 2014 Share Posted September 6, 2014 This is a very common route for such flights. for flight without many turns and intersections it's a really straight route. I can understand that we all get used to busy EU Airspace with many curves. ETRAT UQ203 PUMAL is a populair route for airliners that crosses from south to north france and in reverse. This route provides more capacity for traffic that's only fly over the France airspace. It's a benefit during peak hours for short, medium and long range flights. I Think PFPX is calculating the shortest way via the great circle distance and not the best route for capacity slots like in real life (CFMU). for that you've to do it manually. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
srcooke 422 Posted September 7, 2014 Share Posted September 7, 2014 Hello Ray, As pointed out by the others 'Q' & 'UQ' are mainly nigh-time use, from the AIP UQ203 has availability: CDR1, SUM: 2300-0400 - WIN: 2200-0500 If your planning outside of those availability periods use the advanced find and Q* and UQ* to the Avoid section. As for long segments try the Free Route Airspace over Scandinavia with DCT's across the countries, this type of airspace is expanding. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Torben Andersen 15 Posted September 7, 2014 Share Posted September 7, 2014 I don't know if you tried to validate the route? If you do the restriction Stephen mentions pops up, rendering the route a no-go during daytime. Torben PS: Long direct can also be found on the NAR route system over Canada/US - so as such not an problem in itself Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpgmultimodal 61 Posted September 7, 2014 Share Posted September 7, 2014 Hello Ray, Jeppesen charts mention ETRAT UQ203 PIMAL = 446 nm. Stephen made reference to Scandinavia with DCT. Do not forget Irish airspace (EISN); see enclosed chart where in upper space there are only DCTs. Regards, JP Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ray Proudfoot 231 Posted September 7, 2014 Author Share Posted September 7, 2014 Hi everyone, Very impressed with the support here and thank you all for your replies. I planned and flew the route yesterday afternoon. If it's a night-time only route should PFPX have taken that into account? How would I know when to use the Avoid option for a route? I didn't validate it but I'll be flying back to Heathrow today or tomorrow so will validate the return. The shortest path between two points is a straight line so the PFPX routing is logical. I would expect few waypoints over sparsely populated areas like Scandinavia or Canada but this route did surprise me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
srcooke 422 Posted September 7, 2014 Share Posted September 7, 2014 Validating the route is really the only option Ray. Even if PFPX could take in to account the available time periods ( data would need to come from the AIRAC IF available ) the actual airway availability is subject of CDR also and therefore may/may not be available. The easiest way to find out is validate Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ray Proudfoot 231 Posted September 7, 2014 Author Share Posted September 7, 2014 Hi Stephen, I've tried planning the route again and validated it this time. The results are depressing. I really don't know how to resolve the issues raised. This is the main reason I don't validate my routes as they rarely seem to pass muster. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alpha117 51 Posted September 7, 2014 Share Posted September 7, 2014 Hi Ray, I know how you feel!! try this route: MID L151 SITET A34 KOVAK H20 DOMOD A3 NEV R31 MTL A6 MTG G7 BGR A27 KENAS Good place to find European routes is: https://www.eurofpl.eu/ This one also: WOD N615 MID L151 SITET A34 KOVAK H20 DOMOD A3 NEV R31 MTL A6 MTG G7 BGR A27 KENAS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
srcooke 422 Posted September 7, 2014 Share Posted September 7, 2014 Use the ADVANCED find route option Ray and add Q & UQ to the avoid list: then select 'find', now validate. This will throw just one error LE2149 that refers to TOLSO, checking the RAD indicates: Not available for traffic ARR LEIB, Palma Group Except 1. DEP LEBL/LL/RS 2. With RFL Below FL195 Go back to the advanced find and add TOLSO to the ignore list, once again select find and validate, your good to go. Most of your original errors occurred due to UQ203 been closed during the day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ray Proudfoot 231 Posted September 7, 2014 Author Share Posted September 7, 2014 Clive, Thanks for the alternative but it doesn't help for the following reasons:- 1) It's a longer route. 16% longer than GCR. 2) When validated it's worse than the PFPX route. I want to continue using PFPX but need to know how to correct a route that isn't validated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ray Proudfoot 231 Posted September 7, 2014 Author Share Posted September 7, 2014 Hi Stephen, Thank you very much for your guidance. That's given me a perfect route and just 4% longer than GCR. MID4F MID UL151 SITET UN859 LOMRA UN727 ROCAN UN859 BCN UZ167 LORES LO1DCP Onwards and upwards! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Emi 5161 Posted September 7, 2014 Share Posted September 7, 2014 By the way, try VATROUTE or edi-gla to get your routes, those are valid most of the time and it will save you much time planning Expecially edi-gla is very good since it got real world flightplans (which most often even looks much better than those on vatroute, routefinder, etc.). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiago91 7 Posted September 7, 2014 Share Posted September 7, 2014 Clive, Thanks for the alternative but it doesn't help for the following reasons:- 1) It's a longer route. 16% longer than GCR. 2) When validated it's worse than the PFPX route. I want to continue using PFPX but need to know how to correct a route that isn't validated. 16% longer GCR isn't that bad for such a short route! Sometimes in bad wheather you would plan to avoid. Even if airspaces or airways are closed. Planning in EU is hard thing but nice! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ray Proudfoot 231 Posted September 7, 2014 Author Share Posted September 7, 2014 By the way, try VATROUTE or edi-gla to get your routes, those are valid most of the time and it will save you much time planning Expecially edi-gla is very good since it got real world flightplans (which most often even looks much better than those on vatroute, routefinder, etc.). Emi, I fail to understand why you and others are recommending I try different planning software. Especially on the PFPX forum. It does seem disrespectful of this product. Having paid good money for PFPX I want to use it. Others may be happy with alternatives but surely this isn't the place to recommend rival planners. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Torben Andersen 15 Posted September 7, 2014 Share Posted September 7, 2014 Hi Ray I know how you feel - PFPX should be all that is needed. However, route building is an art not an exact science (if I interpret the posts from people in the trade correctly). This makes it a challenge now and then - but as your skill developes, some of the problems will be more easily solved. One of my "hate" airports is Frankfurt-Hahn (EDFH), which sometimes seems almost impossible to make a route into/out of due to route restrictions in Germany/France/Benelux. But I usually find a route - by help from the good people on the forum :-) PFPX has so many advantages that I can live with the quirks. Torben Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alpha117 51 Posted September 7, 2014 Share Posted September 7, 2014 Ray Its not about using other software. I use PFPX only, but I get routes from 'other places' as mentioned here then I 'plumb' them into PFPX, sometimes the routes will pass Validation, sometimes not, then you can get your 'dispatcher' head on and work out why they do not, like Steve has shown above. Sometime I will spend more time as a dispatcher than a pilot, sometimes its the other way around. With PFPX you make the choice that's the beauty of the software. just my thoughts Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ray Proudfoot 231 Posted September 7, 2014 Author Share Posted September 7, 2014 Torben / Clive, Points taken but it already takes me too long to get airborne after starting planning. If I add another process into the loop I might never get airborne. I can understand why you do this but for me it's all about a trade-off between planning accuracy and available time. And I'm retired. Lord knows how you working chaps find the time! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alpha117 51 Posted September 7, 2014 Share Posted September 7, 2014 Tell me about it!! That's the beauty of PFPX, you can be as 'real' as you want, or just click and go. BTW here's a RW route flown by BMI and this will fail validation, go figure!!! MID DCT SITET UN859 BCN DCT LORES Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ray Proudfoot 231 Posted September 7, 2014 Author Share Posted September 7, 2014 Sounds like real world planners don't take too much notice of EU regulations. Can't say I blame them! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.