Pfpx is it worth it if I've already got a flight planner?

[Jarkko 59]

The error message box doesn't say. I'm using 1309 AIRAC so it can't be that. Anywhoo, the developer is looking into it.

[JRBarrett 3,121]

Whats subscriptions are you talking about, is it your database its saying its out of date than you need to purchase another airac cycle. Its like the ngx fmc which tells you its out of date etc

The error message that some (but not all) users are getting is that the actual license for the software itself (PFPX) is invalid. Apparently it mainly pops up when the user tries to export flight plans in text format.

 

I suspect it may be a problem with Windows UAC or read/write permissions on the export folders. I'm sure the developers will get the problem sorted out.

[Phillip Gallagher 101]

I see a $35.00 program here NOT $53.00!  Seems like this will add still more time to planning and flight preparation/setup preflight.  It already takes long enough to get a flight underway in FSX, leaving less and less time for actual flying.

[Jarkko 59]

I see a $35.00 program here NOT $53.00!

 

To be honest, I would have paid up to $100 for PFPX. It combines so many of the tools I have purchased in the past.

[Boomer 1,619]

I still think its a little over priced, mind you FSC9.3, which is what I use, is about the same price.

[fullmetal02 23]

A few questions.

 

So does this give you random passenger/cargo loads for the flight? Does it vary fuel based on weather, route, load?

[Azapata87 173]

The only option I have seen is for "max" payload, or you can input in your own custom payload. It's up to you to vary the payload based on the amount of fuel you need to take for the flight to ensure your not over your max take off weight.

 

Edit: I Stand corrected there are additional modes for payload.

[Jarkko 59]

A few questions.

 

So does this give you random passenger/cargo loads for the flight? Does it vary fuel based on weather, route, load?

 

There are three auto modes for payload: None, Maximum and Random (you can press random as many times as you like). Then there is also the possibility to input the payload your self.

 

PFPX calculates the correct fuel based on weather (winds, temperatures), route distance, flight profile (how fast you are climbing, how fast you are descending), cruise speed, cruise altitude, step climbs, taxi time, APU usage, route to your primary alternate and payload, just to name a few.

[Jarkko 59]

I still think its a little over priced, mind you FSC9.3, which is what I use, is about the same price.

 

If you look at my post above, you might find that FSC and PFPX are build for different levels of "accuracy". It all depends on what suits your needs and type of flying.

[zmak 331]

I see a $35.00 program here NOT $53.00!  Seems like this will add still more time to planning and flight preparation/setup preflight.  It already takes long enough to get a flight underway in FSX, leaving less and less time for actual flying.

ah yes but if you buy the T777 with its nifty time accelerator you can spend 3 hrs planning and 10 mins flying . :blink:

[Azapata87 173]

Planning, take off, and landing are the best part for some. (Me)

[daniel_pt 30]

There are three auto modes for payload: None, Maximum and Random (you can press random as many times as you like). Then there is also the possibility to input the payload your self.

 

PFPX calculates the correct fuel based on weather (winds, temperatures), route distance, flight profile (how fast you are climbing, how fast you are descending), cruise speed, cruise altitude, step climbs, taxi time, APU usage, route to your primary alternate and payload, just to name a few.

That fuel calculation is only for the templates it already comes with and also are in topcat?

 

Sent from my HTC Desire using Tapatalk 2

 

 

[Jarkko 59]

That fuel calculation is only for the templates it already comes with and also are in topcat?

 

PFPX has it's own templates and TOPCAT has it's own. They contain totally different data and are not interchangeable.

 

PFPX currently has more templates than TOPCAT. Also users can create their own PFPX aircraft templates (if one has the data and/or patience).

 

If you are interested fuel calculations, then "only" PFPX aircraft template is required. If you want takeoff and landing performance on top PFPX data, then you also need a TOPCAT profile.

[fullmetal02 23]

There are three auto modes for payload: None, Maximum and Random (you can press random as many times as you like). Then there is also the possibility to input the payload your self.

 

PFPX calculates the correct fuel based on weather (winds, temperatures), route distance, flight profile (how fast you are climbing, how fast you are descending), cruise speed, cruise altitude, step climbs, taxi time, APU usage, route to your primary alternate and payload, just to name a few.

Wow. That's a lot! Does it give Cost Index?

A wish would be route by airline, but flightaware gives me that already. This seems like everything all in one place. I already use multiple sources for my route planning, so unsure on this one...

[Lawyer+Pilot 126]

I see a $35.00 program here NOT $53.00! Seems like this will add still more time to planning and flight preparation/setup preflight. It already takes long enough to get a flight underway in FSX, leaving less and less time for actual flying.

If that ends up being even remotely true, you're doing something wrong.

 

Most users do not have these problems.

It sounds to me like you're having issues outside of PFPX. And, as you noted, most users aren't having the problems you describe (heck, I didn't even realize people are still using XP). In fact, I haven't heard of anyone else having the problems you describe.

 

Not trying to jump down your throat, but I don't think it's fair to give people the impression that the program is unstable based on what you've described.