PFPX Disapointment - The Aircraft Database

[fluffyflops 1,865]

if anyone needs any aircraft weights and figures I can get them from the Jeppesen Jetplanner database for most aircraft, and paste them in here

Heres the data for a 737-700W_CFM56-7B22

-- WEIGHTS
TO   	MAX T/OFF WT  	69989 	KGS   	LA	MAX LNDNG WT   	58059  	KGS
ZF	MAX ZF WT	54657	KGS	OP	OP WT	38000	KGS
MP	MAX PAYLOAD	9072	KGS	RW	MAX RAMP WT	70216	KGS
NW	NAV CHGS WT	0	KGS	MW	MIN FLIGHT WT	0	KGS
 
-- FUELS
ZT	
ZERO FUEL TBL

N		HC	HOLD CALC ZF	N
FC	MAX FUEL CAP	22137	KGS	HF	HOLDING FF	0	KGS
MF	MIN FUEL	0	KGS	MH	MIN HOLD FUEL	0	KGS
MD	MIN DEP FUEL	0	KGS	MA	MIN ALT FUEL	0	KGS
SF	STEP CLMB FUEL	0	KGS	RF	RESERVE FUEL	0	KGS
AF	APPROACH FUEL	0	KGS	MC	MIN CONT/RES	0	KGS
FW	FOD WARNING	0	KGS	MT	MIN C/R TIME	0	MIN
TX	TAXI FF	0	KGS	MX	MAX CONT/RES	0	KGS
FE	MN EMRGNC FUEL	0	KGS	RH	RES+HLD/CTG	0	KGS
DT	TAXI OUT	0	KGS	ST	SITUATION CODE	
AT	TAXI IN	0	KGS	IR	INT RES POLICY	 
BR	APU BURN RATE	0	KGS	FU	FUEL TYPE	JET A1	
 
-- MISC
PI	PERF INDX	F	EP	PRI ETOPS	N
FL	MAX FLT LVL	410	BK	PRI BRACKETS	N
AD	MIN ALT DIST	0	NM	CW	PRI ALT CAP TB	N
SI	SITA ADDRESS		DD	PRI DRIFTDOWN	N
OI	PROFILE OPT INTERVAL   	0	NM	HA	HOLD ALT	 	 
FD	FUEL DISTR TBL		LC	COST INDEX METHOD	(N) Traditional JetPlan
NZ	NOISE CATEGORY	III	MS	MACH STEP COST INDEX	00
IX	INDEX		WU	WEIGHT UNIT	K
CM	CLIMB METHOD		DM	DESCENT METHOD	
CL	CLIMB/DESCENT COST INDEX	-1	PP	ILS CATEGORY	
 
-- MODES
CB	DEFAULT CLIMB		CI1	MIN RAT CI	
CR	DEFAULT CRZ		CI2	MAX RAT CI	
DE	DEFAULT DSCNT		CI3	DEFAULT CI	
LM	LOWEST CI MACH		HM	HIGHEST CI MACH	
RC	DEFAULT RCLR		AX	AUX CRZ ACFT	
OC	FIXD OPER COST	0	
 
-- TANKER
TI	TNKR FUEL INDX	 	TC	TNKR CURRENCY	
TT	TNKR THRESHOLD	 	TL	TNKR LNDNG WT	58059	 
TM	TNKR FUEL MAX	 	 	TK	TNKR FUEL CAP	 	 
 
-- EQUIPMENT
HR	HF RADIOS	2	GP	GPS	Y
VR	VHF RADIOS	3	OM	OMEGA	N
DA	DUAL ADF	N	RE	RNAV	N
DI	DUAL INS	Y	TE	TCAS EQUIPPED	Y
FM	FMS	N	83	833 KHz COMM	Y
AS	ACARS	N	FY	FMS TYPE	
AG	AGCS		NR	NRS Capable	N
RM	RAIM GPS Algorithm			GM	RAIM Mask Angle	2.0
DR	Departure Req Nav Performance			RR	Enroute Req Nav Performance	
AR	Arrival Req Nav Performance			GR	RAIM GPS Equipment	
 
-- CERTIFIED
AA	AUSEP APPRV	N	OW	OVERWATER EQUIPPED	Y
ME	MNPS EQUIPPED	Y	RV	RVSM CRTIFIED	Y
RP	RNP CERTIFIED	Y	C3	CAT III APPRV	Y
OA	OVERWATER CAPABILITY

[megs8888 20]

Hi guys why don't you post issues and bugs/suggestions to where it will get the coverage.

 

http://forum.aerosoft.com/index.php?/forum/592-pfpx-professional-flight-planner-x/

 

Just a thought.

[NGXfanatic 85]

Another hickup I found was when exporting to Topcat.  You need to set up the Topcat aircraft again with weights, etc. (I know I am complaining a lot here but really, these two programs can't talk to each other and share information??).

 

That was a big big concern on my part when I started using the program.  It turns out you can send the data from PFPX to Topcat, it just isn't explained AT ALL in the manual.   You just need to finish setting up the flightplan, release the OFP, and then go to the "Flight Plan (OFP)" icon in the toolbar, hit Send and select TOPCAT.  

 

Strange that such a vital piece of information on the integration between the two programs is absent from the manual.   The developers really need to improve the documentation, the whole point of getting TOPCAT as a supplement to PFPX is to reduce the workload on the user.

Anyone know if there's any way for PFPX or Topcat to send the weights to the NGX in FSX, or if that system is only for default aircraft?

 

Regards,

Ró.

 

Topcat can send the weights, but not the fuel, into the NGX.  When you first create an aircraft profile in TOPCAT, you have to select the aircraft's .cfg file.  That opens up the communication between the program and the addon aircraft.   Just note, that the passenger load distribution you select in TOPCAT will not match what you see in the FMC completely, but you will see the same zero fuel weight.

[mosteen 111]

I am not so sure about this. It may require editing a text file as opposed to creating the profile directly from PFPX. There is a thread about user created aircraft profiles on the PFPX forum but I have not looked into it in detail.

Mark, you have to change the txt-file wich is the "base" for the TopCat models before you edit your aircraft setting.

 

To find the numbers for my aircraft I did what was suggested, zeroed/fulled out the 800 NGX, noted the numbers and edited the aircraft in both TopCat and PFPX, and now it is spot on.

 

I also had a mixup in the class and baggage weights in TopCat but as soon as I corrected that PFPX / TopCat and FMC all display the correct ZFW.

[Dirk98 354]

 Also I can export fuel and payload from my laptop to the FSX machine.

 

and is this with AirHauler? Very interesting.

 

Dirk.

[Jarkko 59]

and is this with AirHauler? Very interesting.

For fuel and payload exporting from my laptop, I can use TOPCAT, AeroSoft Airbus load manager and REX Latitude. So it is not just AirHauler

[MarkW 1,502]

That was a big big concern on my part when I started using the program.  It turns out you can send the data from PFPX to Topcat, it just isn't explained AT ALL in the manual.   You just need to finish setting up the flightplan, release the OFP, and then go to the "Flight Plan (OFP)" icon in the toolbar, hit Send and select TOPCAT.  

 

Strange that such a vital piece of information on the integration between the two programs is absent from the manual.   The developers really need to improve the documentation, the whole point of getting TOPCAT as a supplement to PFPX is to reduce the workload on the user.

 

Topcat can send the weights, but not the fuel, into the NGX.  When you first create an aircraft profile in TOPCAT, you have to select the aircraft's .cfg file.  That opens up the communication between the program and the addon aircraft.   Just note, that the passenger load distribution you select in TOPCAT will not match what you see in the FMC completely, but you will see the same zero fuel weight.

 

Actually I did get this to work (make sure you select a Topcat profile in the aircraft setup).  You just need to be careful that Topcat and PFPX are both setup for each aircraft with the same Dry Operating Weights and also pax setup (single class, dual, etc.). 

[Dirk98 354]

For fuel and payload exporting from my laptop, I can use TOPCAT, AeroSoft Airbus load manager and REX Latitude. So it is not just AirHauler

 

Yes, I'm aware of TOPCAT (limited number of planes though) and AXE.

 

REX Latitude looks interesting, even if for this feature only. Do you like REX Latitude for anything else, Jarkko?

 

Will it work on a networked client?

 

And I'll buy PFPX, of course.

 

Thanks,

Dirk.

[Piper9t3 25]

I printed it to the free Primo PDF printer.

Hi Mark

When I print my PFPX OFP to pdf creator it seems to cutoff portions of the OFP. Do you use any special settings in PFPX to capture the entire OFP when printing to pdf file?

John

[Jarkko 59]

REX Latitude looks interesting, even if for this feature only. Do you like REX Latitude for anything else, Jarkko?

 

Will it work on a networked client?

 

I have REX latitude running on every flight I do. Still I would say, that Latitude isn't for everyone.

 

In order to get a good score, you have to fly according to Latitudes "rules". The complaint I see quite often is:

 

"I flew the whole flight with autopilot on and I got a terrible score, what gives?"

 

This doesn't mean that you will have to fly manually with Latitude, it means that you will be using autopilot modes that keep the IAS as stable as possible.

 

Latitude also made me completely change the way I do landings. Before I would come in on a flat profile and floated for a long time to get a soft landing. This meant I was using more runway than needed. This approach didn't work well with Latitude.

 

I now maintain the 3 degree slope longer and have learned a better way to flare (without floating). I'm now able to land on shorter runways than before.

 

And to answer to the last questions, yes you can run it networked. It uses SimConnect for sending and receiving data from FSX.

[ideoplastic 86]

After reading 3 full pages of comments.

 

The software doesn't have config files for the main payware aircraft currently in use. Promise that more will be available, heard that before with TOPCAT but they never materialised.

 

Since I already create and validate my own flight plans, the only reason I would spend $56 on this would be if it provided

me with accurate config files and thereafter work out take off data. The latter is already provided by the original TOPCAT

release.

 

Weather. Very much doubt it will beat Opus FSX.

 

As regards comments about the 56$ cost. Well many people in our community/hobby don't have that kind of money available everytime a new product comes out.

 

Pass!

[Osirith 14]

After reading 3 full pages of comments.

 

The software doesn't have config files for the main payware aircraft currently in use. Promise that more will be available, heard that before with TOPCAT but they never materialised.

 

Since I already create and validate my own flight plans, the only reason I would spend $56 on this would be if it provided

me with accurate config files and thereafter work out take off data. The latter is already provided by the original TOPCAT

release.

 

Weather. Very much doubt it will beat Opus FSX.

 

As regards comments about the 56$ cost. Well many people in our community/hobby don't have that kind of money available everytime a new product comes out.

 

Pass!

Entering correct parameters is not difficult to do, at least for PMDG aircrafts (I did it for all 737 NGX variants in a matter of a few minutes, both for TopCat and PFPX, and will not need to redo it again for all future uses).

See http://forum.avsim.net/topic/417842-topcat-pfpx-737ngx-weights-how-to/

So for me it's not a major problem (except if you cannot afford to spend less than one hour one time to enter those numbers).

 

After those few minutes spent, my estimated fuel and flight duration calculated by PFPX is now exact when I compare numbers after landing. Less than 1 minute shift and very minor difference in fuel consumption. Was with 2 different flights with 737 NGX, flight duration was roughly 2 hours each time across Europe.

 

But I totally agree that it could have and should have been done by the programmers, not by the users. I am still puzzled about why they did not do it...

 

Of course PFPX will not replace any weather engine. It is not such a product. It's a weather server to be used only by PFPX to grab weather data for planning... I am an ActiveSky 2012 user and just set PFPX parameters to use ActiveSky data.

 

PFPX do far more things than other FSX flight planners. Etops, alternate runways, fuel policies, etc... If you don't know, don't want and don't need to use these you can pass using it.  If you have an interest on those, you will not find another planner providing such functionnalities today.

 

Chris

[pete_auau 1,167]

Weather. Very much doubt it will beat Opus FSX.

 

 

this is news to me didn't think pfpx  was a weather  program

[aceridgey 330]

Sorry to bump..

 

Does anybody know if the 767-300ER LEVELD is going to be updated (RR engines)

 

Also, is the entry in the software with or without the winglets?

 

Alex

[some1 65]

It has already been said in this topic, that Level-D does not simulate RR engines, it's just visual model difference. Power/fuel consumption is still GE specific.

 

Not sure if winglets models have different FM.