hi-end flight planners

[Guest william273]

i posted something along these lines recently but can't find the post so here it is again.not sure i understand how these planners work exactly but here's my concern. you have the default fs9 database ok? then when you use fs build or fs commander and they update the data base on a regular basis so you're going to have new fixes, intersections and such that i assume will not match the fs9 data base.so what happens when you plan a flight in one of the mentioned above planners and use fixes/waypoints that aren't in the default database.there's no way to know unless you crosscheck each fix to see if it's there.i must be overlooking something because both are popular flightplanners. i don't want to be wondering if the flightplan is going to take me where i want to go or not during the flight.hope this makes sense.william

[KevinAu 441]

If you use fsbuild, it will save the flightplan into fs for you to load from within fs. You completely bypass the fs default flightplanner. You don't touch it except to load the externally built flightplan. It doesn't matter that the default database is years older than the one you used in fsbuild.

[WarpD 824]

Exceptions:1) If a VOR is moved in the new database, it will remain in the old location in FS... thus your course information will be inaccurate with regards to needle alignment.2) Any airport changes (new runways, new ILS) will not be reflected within FS unless you get an updated AFCAD.

[scott967 62]

that is a good point. The general rule is that the planners create a .pln file, and when you load that plan ATC will follow the lat/long of the fixes in the pln, even if an FS9 waypoint is not defined at that location.scott s..

[Guest william273]

well that's what i'm wondering about. sort of defeats the purpose if you can't fly accurately not knowing if a VOR or whatever is or is not going to be where you "HOPE" it will be. you'll find out when you get there?so why would i want something like that? sure it looks very nice with all the fluff, pretty colors and a neat looking layout but behind the pretty face.........a mountain in the dark at 250 knots?don't mean to offend or get anyones feathers up.i'll keep looking into it though.thanks ed,william

[Guest william273]

thanks scott.william

[Guest william273]

thanks kevin.william

[KevinAu 441]

>well that's what i'm wondering about. sort of defeats the>purpose if you can't fly accurately not knowing if a VOR or>whatever is or is not going to be where you "HOPE" it will be.>you'll find out when you get there?>>so why would i want something like that? sure it looks very>nice with all the fluff, pretty colors and a neat looking>layout but behind the pretty face.........a mountain in the>dark at 250 knots?>>don't mean to offend or get anyones feathers up.>>i'll keep looking into it though.>>thanks ed,>>william VORs aren't moved that often. However, intersections come and go pretty often. If you use IFR and if you use real charts in your flying, then a program like fsbuild makes the flightplanning a lot easier, since its database is updated regularly. You will more likely be able to load in the departures, airways, and arrivals that you're looking at in the charts. With the fs default planner, you will often be hard pressed to find the intersections being called for in your more recent charts and you will not be able to define your chosen route for the computer.As for airport runway changes, that really has nothing to do with the flight planning portion. With a few exceptions, flight planning need not include any specific runways. And if you use add-on scenery, chances are, your airport is going to be of a newer and different configuration than the older, pre-new-runway default version. What you need to blend a new runway into your sim flying would be an updated AFCAD and an updated ATC file to use the new runway in IFR conditions. If you use fsbuild, the updated database will include more current SIDS and STARS that take the new runway into account. Much better than if just used the default planner that may not have any of the intersections needed to define the new routings.If you fly airliners like LDS or PMDG, then a planner like fsbuild is a must since the FMS's of those addons are constantly updated and do not match the default database anymore. Using fsbuild will make planning a flight with one of those planes much easier since the plan you build in there will be using a database that more closely matches the one in the FMS.If you just fly VFR in GA planes, then a program like fsbuild is not necessary, since you will not be making use of IFR charts and FMS's.

[Guest william273]

hi kevin. if i'm using the autopilot/GPS to follow a fs build flightplan it is going to take me to all the waypoints in the flighplan and assuming the airports haven't changed/moved then to the airport also regardless of what's in the default fs9 database?if the aircraft will follow the plan then it shouldn't matter what's in or not in the default database. it may not go in the same direction as the default map/GPS if those intersections aren't in the default database but that should not matter if it's still following the plan to the airport. maybe not looking at the default map/GPS would help and only observe the fs build map.wow, did that come out right? hope i didn't confuse you, i'm getting a bit tangled myself. for a split second it made sense.thanks man,william

[David Vega 348]

William,I have also seen a download that updates and augments the FS9 fixes. Suggest searching for it. Regards,Dave Vega

[Guest william273]

thanks dave. just now thought again about that. this is beginning to get alittle more involved than i wanted it to.i'm ok with the default planner it's just REALLY small and has a clunky look compared to what's out now. i'd like to find something with a large map and simple to use without having to do all this stuff. yea, asking alot here but that's about what i'm looking for.i do thank you and everyone else for helping.william