Keeping an eye on this to be sure but, with the 777 purchase immanent I need to keep my powder dry and, as a FSC owner, there is no desperate need as yet.  Maybe pencil this in as a Christmas purchase.

You can't compare the two for many reasons. But no, you are not the only one that thinks its a bad price.

 

Clearly you haven't used airline route planning software.

 

...and I think it's a rather good price, particularly compared to the ridiculous price airlines pay for the same tools.

 

 

 

I usally seek a route on the vataware site (top routes) and copy this to simroutes.com and make a flightplan that way. You can export the plan is many formats. So I wonder if it is netter with this one.

 

The problem with poaching from VATAware is that if the person you grabbed it from flew the improper route, you're now flying the improper route.  This is cut down by the "Top Routes" feature, because those are correct most of the time.

 

The issue is that, for longer range aircraft, routes flex a good bit more depending on the wind for that day.  Case in point: NATs.  The flight that flew NAT X yesterday may be on NAT Y today, or NAT W.  Why?  Wind.  If you're using a weather program, you might be using a sub-optimal route for the current weather situation.

 

 

 

"It's not really that much" is very subjective statement, but at the other side, it's not a "must have addon" anyway, nor it's "must have it NOW" . It maybe saves a little bit of time, but all that can be done manually. 

 

So, where in any of my posts did I say everyone has to agree with me?  At no point, whatsoever, did I even hint at the idea that my opinion that it isn't that bad should be taken as fact.

 

 

 

One more thing, how much airlines pay for similar software is not relevant. Airlines pay for aircraft hundreds of million euros, and we get it simulated for "just" few tens.

 

That's a really poor comparison, and by really poor, I mean absolutely terrible.  They're getting a physical aircraft, which requires a lot more in terms of input costs.

 

My comparison was at least software to software, and more specifically, software that does the same thing...

 

Nice shot at discrediting my comparison, but nobody's going to actually discredit that, I'm sorry.  The two programs do essentially the same exact thing.  One is doing it for a lot less.

whta do you think about this product compared with FSBUILD and AS2012, would this replace these 2 programs, one for routing and other for weather? better to have one instead of two?

forgot also TOPCAT

 

whta do you think about this product compared with FSBUILD and AS2012, would this replace these 2 programs, one for routing and other for weather? better to have one instead of two?

Keeping an eye on this to be sure but, with the 777 purchase immanent I need to keep my powder dry and, as a FSC owner, there is no desperate need as yet. Maybe pencil this in as a Christmas purchase.

If you already have FSC, you're pretty well covered for route planning, if it came down to a choice between PFPX and the T7.

 

My only big concern with PFPX has nothing to do with its functionality, but I do wonder if the developers have implemented a server robust enough to handle hundreds of users connecting at one time to download weather, notams etc.

 

Time will tell!

AS2012 is a weather program, PFPX uses data weather either his one or the one of your addon to find the best route. AS 2012 "just" handle the weather within your sim, it does not give you routes, or anything like performance computation, to know fuel burns and flight times.

 

FSBuild is used to make route and only that, I believe it "only" find a best route from its AIRAC, but does not account for wind, and doesn't go far in fuel consumption and things like that.

 

 

TOPCAT is used only to compute takeoff and landing speeds and actually PFPX can call TOPCAT to get you this part on your complete flight briefing. But it does only compute speeds dependning on aircraft weight and weather.

 

That is a completely different piece of program. I'd say in all you listed you can remove FSBuild, and use PFPX with the two others.

So, where in any of my posts did I say everyone has to agree with me?  At no point, whatsoever, did I even hint at the idea that my opinion that it isn't that bad should be taken as fact.

 

 

That's a really poor comparison, and by really poor, I mean absolutely terrible.  They're getting a physical aircraft, which requires a lot more in terms of input costs.

 

My comparison was at least software to software, and more specifically, software that does the same thing...

 

Nice shot at discrediting my comparison, but nobody's going to actually discredit that, I'm sorry.  The two programs do essentially the same exact thing.  One is doing it for a lot less.

 

You shouldn't go defensive as no one attacked you. Just discussing here.

 

And no, its not the software that does the same thing. It's simulator of dispatcher software, shall not be used for real flight planning, even if it's more accurate than RL software. Just because it doesn't simulate the physical thing doesn't mean that it's not a simulator. Precisely, this is a software simulating a software.

Here we go.....Grabbing bowl of popcorn...

You shouldn't go defensive as no one attacked you. Just discussing here.

 

And no, its not the software that does the same thing. It's simulator of dispatcher software, shall not be used for real flight planning, even if it's more accurate than RL software. Just because it doesn't simulate the physical thing doesn't mean that it's not a simulator. Precisely, this is a software simulating a software.

 

I don't even know...just...wow.

 

I'm done.

Nice argument :smile: I'm sorry, even if I gave "a like" at many of your posts I do not hesitate to write when I disagree. 

 

But, let's just agree we disagree. :smile:

LOL...does it *really* matter guys.

 

Let's all just chill out.  (virtual) beer is on me.

 

 

Nice argument I'm sorry, even if I gave "a like" at many of your posts I do not hesitate to write when I disagree. 

 

Fair enough.  It's good to have a good debate from time to time, but that last post just...my mind had a BSOD...literally.

 

Simulating airline software?  That's like saying my version of Photoshop simulates the version of Photoshop on some designer who gets paid a ton of money to do what he/she does...

 

 

 

But, let's just agree we disagree.

 

Yeah, I've got better things to do than argue about this, honestly.

 

I'm so worn out from everything right now that I really don't feel like expending the energy...

You find $53 (U.S.) "pricey"? When I saw the beta previews of what this software does, I would have assumed it would retail for much more than that. I was shocked that the price is as low as it is.

 

I paid 3 times that for FOC back when it was fully supported. It was the best professional quality flight planning and dispatch software available in its time, but it certainly looks like PFPX will far exceed what FOC had to offer.

Well the thing is, something can be both 'pricey' and good value for money at the same time. I mean if you consider all the development effort that goes into a real T7, and how much money it can earn you as an airline it might be a good investment, but I'd still say several hundred million dollars is quite 'pricey'.

 

Same thing for many FS add-ons, sure they are great value for money when you consider what you're getting, but that doesn't necessarily mean they are cheap in absolute terms, especially if you are on a tight budget.

 

 

Yeah, I've got better things to do than argue about this, honestly.

 

Exactly! Back to beta testing, you! Get this beast ready!

Exactly! Back to beta testing, you! Get this beast ready!

 

At work...plus...this close to release, I'll let you read between the lines  :wink:

 

 

Clearly you haven't used airline route planning software.

...and I think it's a rather good price, particularly compared to the ridiculous price airlines pay for the same tools.

 

I knew beforehand I would get such a reply from you B) . Anyhow, two reasons why the prices can't be compared (in my oppinion :ph34r: ) are:

 

For the developer for PFPX it doesn't matter if the outcome of a route is wrong or it cost a lot more then needed to name a few points. I can think that in the real world mistakes of the application will count in several calls from the airliner or even fines. I don't know because I don't work in that world but I could just inmagine it works the same way as in the world I work in.

 

What I do know though is that the price for software for private use is completely different then software used by companies even it is the same software.

 

And again. I to think it is a valid price. I agree with you there.