How come there's no trial mode for PFPX?

[Ray Proudfoot 8,976]

Have you ever tried to program a full version trial program that is secure enough NOT to be hacked into a registered version?

 

Not personally, have you? As well as EFB and PM it should also be noted that there is a freeware and payware version of FSUIPC so clearly it is possible to code for such a possibility. And as FSUIPC is top of the sales charts most weeks it clearly doesn't suffer financially. Gary Summons' UK2000 scenery packages have a trial version and those are far less expensive.

 

1. Read the product features and see if they are a fit for you.

 

Yes, that does help to identify if it's suitable or not but you're assuming that all aspects work as intended. Without casting aspersions on PFPX there have been instances of published software that fail to live up to the billing. I can recall one that was considered more of a beta than a finished product and caused quite a few ripples when released. But as I said I'm not suggesting that is the case with PFPX.

 

2. Read user reviews.

 

Indeed. Please point me to some. I can't find any.

 

3. Wait until web site reviews get written.

 

That could take months if at all. But a time-limited version could be immediately assessed by a potential buyer and he could make up his own mind without needing to wait for a review.

 

4. Ever wonder why PMDG doesn't offer trail versions?

 

 

Does any payware aircraft publisher offer a trial version? Not the same as planning software I would argue.

 

The point is it's technically possible to make a demo version of a product available without compromising security. All that is lacking is the willpower to do it. But with prices rising at an alarming rate it's not an unreasonable request to make especially for the more expensive packages.

[pete_auau 1,163]

By the sound of  things  pfpx  is  not  for  you. There are Y tubes out  there  showing  pfpx  on how  things  are done,   and if  you only  flying  ga  aircraft only than pfpx isn't  suited  for  it.  Other  than this pfpx is  a one stop flight planning tool and fuel planner with extras and the good thing  about it  now it  now puts  the wind uplink  data directly  to the folder  so no mucking  about  using  note pad any more  and now  it  works with  most of the payware weather addons  now

[JRBarrett 3,080]

I do wonder about one thing....I love PFPX I use it every flight. But there is something I don't get. I can go to EuroFPL.eu and get a real world flight plan that has no errors etc. it's validated by CFMU or whatever it's called, the same validation that PFPX uses. So my question is, why does PFPX not find a route with no problems? It's not hard to change it when it's a short route, but for the longer ones I go to EuroFPL and copy and paste the route, doesn't that defeat the purpose of autoroute? I don't get that every flight, but most of the time. Only in Europe obviously.

The CFMU-validated real-world European routes you see on EuroFPL, were created by the dispatch offices if the various airlines, using commercial flight planning software very similar in function to PFPX. Those dispatchers may very well have had to go through the very same trial-and-error process to find a route that passes CFMU validation as we PFPX users do.

 

Obviously, the final "as flown" flight plans used by the RW flights will pass validation, but you have to consider the "behind the scenes" work that went into creating those plans in the first place.

 

To be sure, dispatchers who create flight plans day in and day out between specific city pairs will come to know which standard routings will likely pass validation, and which will not, but even then, there are no guarantees. European airspace is very changeable, and a specific FP that passes CFMU validation on Tuesday, might not pass on Wednesday. A route that works in the morning, might not work in the evening.

 

Even the commercial FP software used by the airlines is not guaranteed to automatically generate routes that will pass CFMU validation on the first try. Just like PFPX, those commercial programs often require human intervention to modify generated routes to come up with one acceptable to CFMU. That is the whole reason why the CFMU validation web site exists.

[LeeL 272]

The CFMU-validated real-world European routes you see on EuroFPL, were created by the dispatch offices if the various airlines, using commercial flight planning software very similar in function to PFPX. Those dispatchers may very well have had to go through the very same trial-and-error process to find a route that passes CFMU validation as we PFPX users do.

 

Obviously, the final "as flown" flight plans used by the RW flights will pass validation, but you have to consider the "behind the scenes" work that went into creating those plans in the first place.

 

To be sure, dispatchers who create flight plans day in and day out between specific city pairs will come to know which standard routings will likely pass validation, and which will not, but even then, there are no guarantees. European airspace is very changeable, and a specific FP that passes CFMU validation on Tuesday, might not pass on Wednesday. A route that works in the morning, might not work in the evening.

 

Even the commercial FP software used by the airlines is not guaranteed to automatically generate routes that will pass CFMU validation on the first try. Just like PFPX, those commercial programs often require human intervention to modify generated routes to come up with one acceptable to CFMU. That is the whole reason why the CFMU validation web site exists.

Thanks for the info, I was wondering if that was the case.

 

Thanks again

[MrGsPhace 3]

I read the thread in its entirety; so I have a couple questions not addressed here: 

1. Will PFPX work with freeware (such as POSKY, Skypsirit and TDS and maybe PAD? LOL (I realize that PFPX will probably work better with the payware such as the Airbux X and PMDG). 

2. Granted this isn't for GA aircraft specifically (but I assume that dispatchers for a fleet of corporate aircraft operation use such a software as well as cargo feeder companies utilizing small jets and turboprops as well as the regional airliners). 

 

I also have to point out that it amazes me how many expensive addons don't have trials (aside from aircraft, it would be nice to get trials of aircraft but that isn't really feasible) REX doesn't offer trials on any of their products and its getting to be too common for it to be this way unfortunately IMO will stiffle sales as I will hesitate when spending $30-$50-$100 on something; its questionable whether I'll hesitate at $10-$20 depending on how much I'd be wiling to lose even at $30 but $30 is my breaking point. 

[red259 31]

I read the thread in its entirety; so I have a couple questions not addressed here: 

 

1. Will PFPX work with freeware (such as POSKY, Skypsirit and TDS and maybe PAD? LOL (I realize that PFPX will probably work better with the payware such as the Airbux X and PMDG). 

 

2. Granted this isn't for GA aircraft specifically (but I assume that dispatchers for a fleet of corporate aircraft operation use such a software as well as cargo feeder companies utilizing small jets and turboprops as well as the regional airliners). 

 

 

I also have to point out that it amazes me how many expensive addons don't have trials (aside from aircraft, it would be nice to get trials of aircraft but that isn't really feasible) REX doesn't offer trials on any of their products and its getting to be too common for it to be this way unfortunately IMO will stiffle sales as I will hesitate when spending $30-$50-$100 on something; its questionable whether I'll hesitate at $10-$20 depending on how much I'd be wiling to lose even at $30 but $30 is my breaking point. 

Yes, I thought ASN did themselves a huge favor with the free trial. A lot of people who may have been on the fence purchased it based on their experience with the free trial. I also find the airports where I can get a free trial are good too, because I can check to see what type of frame rate/vas usage issues I may have with an airport prior to purchase. I hate purchasing software and then having issues with it, which causes me to be hesitant to ever buy from that company again. EFB is another example where I used the free trial and ended up making a purchase based solely upon my trial experience. FScaptain was another example. These are purchases that I most likely would not have made, without the free trial. 

By the sound of  things  pfpx  is  not  for  you. There are Y tubes out  there  showing  pfpx  on how  things  are done,   and if  you only  flying  ga  aircraft only than pfpx isn't  suited  for  it.  Other  than this pfpx is  a one stop flight planning tool and fuel planner with extras and the good thing  about it  now it  now puts  the wind uplink  data directly  to the folder  so no mucking  about  using  note pad any more  and now  it  works with  most of the payware weather addons  now

I agree with this 100%. PFPX is more for ifr/ advanced aircraft etc and not really necessary for GA. I have seen profiles for the A2A Cessna for pfpx that people have put into pfpx, but with those smaller planes I prefer VFR anyway. I really like pfpx because its an all in one stop. There are a couple of great tutorials on youtube about pfpx that will clearly show you all the features and help you determine if its a product that would fit your needs. 

[Ray Proudfoot 8,976]

Since I posted a couple of months ago there was a heavily discounted offer for PFPX which I took advantage of.

 

It's a very good program and definitely only for IFR flights. I've had no issues with it at all so clearly the developer and beta testers have done their jobs properly.

 

It works only for those aircraft in its database so Boeing, Airbus are well catered for. Don't bother if you flies a Cessna, Mooney etc.

[MrGsPhace 3]

 

I agree with this 100%. PFPX is more for ifr/ advanced aircraft etc and not really necessary for GA. I have seen profiles for the A2A Cessna for pfpx that people have put into pfpx, but with those smaller planes I prefer VFR anyway. I really like pfpx because its an all in one stop. There are a couple of great tutorials on youtube about pfpx that will clearly show you all the features and help you determine if its a product that would fit your needs. 

 

 

 

 

It works only for those aircraft in its database so Boeing, Airbus are well catered for. Don't bother if you flies a Cessna, Mooney etc.

 

 

not sure but it looks like you can add to the database right?

[MrSpeaker 122]

I just use Simbrief, its free http://www.simbrief.com/system/dispatch.php

[red259 31]

not sure but it looks like you can add to the database right?

Yes you can add to the database, but you do need to know all the numbers to input though to get accurate calculations and finding those numbers to input can be tough sometimes. Its a lot of work but some people enjoy going the extra mile.  I use it for the 737ngx, pmdg 777 and majestic dash 8. They also have several other profiles, airbus, cessna citations, Embraers, md80s etc. 

[MrGsPhace 3]

I just use Simbrief, its free http://www.simbrief.com/system/dispatch.php

 

That's what I've been using, but it seems to me that Simbrief loves put me right into the smack dab the worst of the worst headwinds... really?? c'mon... 

 

I do better at FL380 with 118-120kt headwind than at FL340 with 125-140kt headwind! (but as of right now, it doesn't matter if I'm at FL380 or FL340 cuz the winds are the same /smh) 

[Ray Proudfoot 8,976]

not sure but it looks like you can add to the database right?

 

You would need to know all the correct data and that won't be straight-forward. This product is clearly for those wishing to emulate real-world passenger aircraft flights.

[MrGsPhace 3]

You would need to know all the correct data and that won't be straight-forward. This product is clearly for those wishing to emulate real-world passenger aircraft flights.

 

Alright then, so have you have any experience with simbrief? 

 

I tried EFASS I wasn't impressed with how the map works and and the features/configurations seemed a little clunky (but not all that slow really) 

 

Not sure I like the idea that simbrief puts me at FL340 when there's a known headwind to be 130kts at TOC when its clearly 105kts at FL380 for much of that part of the flight; but as the flight gets on the winds from FL340-380 are comparatably the same IMO it should have done one of the two things: 

 

Told me that winds are not favorable at FL340 and I should climb to FL380 becasue the a/c is capable or B it should have said to stay at FL380 period. So I don't know if PFPX is better at this or not? This is where I'd like to see a trial, its annoying that there isn't one. 

[Lawyer+Pilot 126]

I would like to try this out before I buy, but it's a shame that there's no trial mode. At $50 it's quite expensive.

 

There's no trial mode because it's a no-brainer.  The best planning software this side of realworld commercial ops.  Simple as that.

 

As to price, $50 is a bargain.

Why is it worth it? I currently use EFB and design my flight plans online. How does PFPX add to the experience? 

 

Realism

[red259 31]

There's no trial mode because it's a no-brainer.  The best planning software this side of realworld commercial ops.  Simple as that.

 

As to price, $50 is a bargain.

 

Realism

Heh.That comment of mine you responded to is about 2 1/2 months old. I have used pfpx for quite awhile now.