Honest opinion on flight planners.

[Brian_A_Neuman 198]

Bit the bullet and got the PFPX/Topcat Bundle. Should be fun.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Flexman 30]

Since you're on a shopping spree , you should also consider a Navigraph Charts annual subscription. It's absolutely a must for anyone wanting to closely simulate airline operations. It has about all the charts in the world, including airdrome information sheets and enroute charts and it's always up to date with the current AIRAC cycle as is the navdata in the CDU.

Works on all mobile devices as well.

[vc10man 732]

PFPX has an export option that will export the route in the correct format to many addon aircraft (including PMDG).  Very simple to use.

Thanks, Mark. Worked a treat. Is there a way to follow the aircraft on that map?

[Brian_A_Neuman 198]

Since you're on a shopping spree , you should also consider a Navigraph Charts annual subscription. It's absolutely a must for anyone wanting to closely simulate airline operations. It has about all the charts in the world, including airdrome information sheets and enroute charts and it's always up to date with the current AIRAC cycle as is the navdata in the CDU.

 

Works on all mobile devices as well.

Meh on the shopping spree. I already feel I wasted money on the TOPCAT as I didnt realize it didnt have full NGX or 777 support, so that was my bad.

[bmcl26 15]

I have been using vRoute for years and was fairly happy with it, but after using PFPX for only a few days I will be uninstalling vRoute.

 

PFPX looks daunting when you start but it is very intuitive and works really well, I have been very impressed with it's accuracy on fuel burn and timings.

Re Navigraph Charts they have just introduced "Charts Cloud" which subscribers get access, it effectively makes, an iPad, Tablet or Smartphone into an EFB for all charts.

[vc10man 732]

 

 

PFPX looks daunting when you start but it is very intuitive and works really well

Spot-on there, Bill. Felt the same here. Now have got the hang of it. Learning curve I suppose like everything.

[bmcl26 15]

Spot-on there, Bill. Felt the same here. Now have got the hang of it. Learning curve I suppose like everything.

 

Rick

 

Yes, it certainly was a learning curve, but after getting some advice on the support forum I really started to get to grips with it quite quickly.

 

I did a flight from EGLL - WSSS and landed with 0.4kg of fuel more than predicted and within 6 minutes of time prediction, cant get better than that over the distance (probably lost the 6 minutes making a turn to avoid a towering column of CB dead ahead) :lol:  

[vc10man 732]

 

 

I did a flight from EGLL - WSSS and landed with 0.4kg of fuel more than predicted and within 6 minutes of time prediction, cant get better than that over the distance (probably lost the 6 minutes making a turn to avoid a towering column of CB dead ahead

Now, oddly enough, I decided after creating a flightplan for a flight from GCTS(Tenerife South) to EGCC that I'd take on board what PFPX recommended, which was about 65k kgs. Instead, along the route, I kept getting messages in FMC of 'Insufficient Fuel'. Now let me pre-face that by stating that I was in the Cold ' Dark panel start-up which has been reported and acknowledged as being buggy. But nevertheless, I'm intrigued how you managed to get such a long flight using PFPX to give you such an accurate fuel load, when 72.1 for the Tutorial was sufficient for a longer flight from VRMM-OMDB than mine was from GCTS-EGCC.

[Brian_A_Neuman 198]

It was daunting to begin with yes. I had to get creative with ETOPS by adding an airport somewhere between KLAX and NTAA by using a Hawaiian airport that just hit the edge of the flight plan. Took creative planning to make that work.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[bmcl26 15]

Now, oddly enough, I decided after creating a flightplan for a flight from GCTS(Tenerife South) to EGCC that I'd take on board what PFPX recommended, which was about 65k kgs. Instead, along the route, I kept getting messages in FMC of 'Insufficient Fuel'. Now let me pre-face that by stating that I was in the Cold ' Dark panel start-up which has been reported and acknowledged as being buggy. But nevertheless, I'm intrigued how you managed to get such a long flight using PFPX to give you such an accurate fuel load, when 72.1 for the Tutorial was sufficient for a longer flight from VRMM-OMDB than mine was from GCTS-EGCC.

[bmcl26 15]

Now, oddly enough, I decided after creating a flightplan for a flight from GCTS(Tenerife South) to EGCC that I'd take on board what PFPX recommended, which was about 65k kgs. Instead, along the route, I kept getting messages in FMC of 'Insufficient Fuel'. Now let me pre-face that by stating that I was in the Cold ' Dark panel start-up which has been reported and acknowledged as being buggy. But nevertheless, I'm intrigued how you managed to get such a long flight using PFPX to give you such an accurate fuel load, when 72.1 for the Tutorial was sufficient for a longer flight from VRMM-OMDB than mine was from GCTS-EGCC.

 

Rick,

 

Sorry about the double post, bit of a issue with a brief power cut but back on now.  65k sounds an inordinate amount of fuel for a journey of around 1600 - 1700 nm

 

I suspect you have got imperial settings confused with metric either in PFPX or  the 777.

 

I have carried out a few trans Atlantic trips using PFPX here are some of the bare bone numbers.

 

KPAE - EGLL (Delivery flight empty)  Release Fuel 66.6k kg Air Distance 4183nm

EGLL - KBOS  Release Fuel 103.1k kg Air Distance 5852nm

EGKK - TXKS (Bermuda) Release Fuel 66.4k kg Air Distance 3202nm (higher release as nearest div is over 550nm away)

 

This is in addition to the Tutorial as you say.

[cx822 4]

At the moment im using Simbrief... it's a free alternative which is VERY accurate on winds and fuel figures for pmdg aircrafts. The cruise wind is around the values on the NAV display, which is fed by OpusFSX. Note that in real life, winds will not exactly match the flight plan but the general speed and direction will be good for fuel planning.

 What it lacks is it doesn't have weather packages found on real flight plans such as proc charts... but since this is free I'm not complaining

[vc10man 732]

 

 

I suspect you have got imperial settings confused with metric either in PFPX or the 777.

Hi Bill

 

It seems that you were spot-on again. I was under the assumption that the default was kgs, when I've just checked and seen it was set to lbs. Will try that same flight again and see if I get that 'Insuff.........' error flag.

[bmcl26 15]

Hi Bill

 

It seems that you were spot-on again. I was under the assumption that the default was kgs, when I've just checked and seen it was set to lbs. Will try that same flight again and see if I get that 'Insuff.........' error flag.

 

Rick

 

Easily done, in PFPX you can set individual aircraft for your preference, for realism I have set the US liveried aircraft to imperial to match the default settings in the 777, saves you having to change them.

 

Make sure the setting for the aircraft you are using are the same in both PFPX and the 777 and you should be ok.

 

Bill

At the moment im using Simbrief... it's a free alternative which is VERY accurate on winds and fuel figures for pmdg aircrafts. The cruise wind is around the values on the NAV display, which is fed by OpusFSX. Note that in real life, winds will not exactly match the flight plan but the general speed and direction will be good for fuel planning.

 What it lacks is it doesn't have weather packages found on real flight plans such as proc charts... but since this is free I'm not complaining

 

Joe

 

Yes, used Simbrief while waiting for the release of PFPX and it was ok as you say lacks the realism provided by PFPX.

 

Bill

[MMartinov 48]

Is anybody using the PFPX bundled with Air Display to show on IPad?

Does the Air Display affect running FSX in full screen mode? Any significant performance penalties or issues?