Winds aloft data, any importing tool?

[riccardo74 36]

As you know to better fit realism during long haul flight planning you have to insert winds aloft data into FMC to achieve better fuel consuption accuracy prediction.

 

I always do it manually. But it's an annoing operation. 777X has a special function to import this kind of data. So, in your opinion is there a workaround to achieve the same result with MD11?

 

It would be a useful feature, what do you think?

[MPL 30]

I think it would be very useful feature but in order to make it work feature needs PMDG to continue develop MD11 and that is something they aren't going to do, don't know about workarounds :(

[pcubine 143]

It would be a useful feature, what do you think?

Ricardo

 

It would be a very useful feature to have in the MD-11. For me on any flights where there are 40+ waypoints the 777 has put the MD-11 out of business. However, I agree with Mikael PMDG ain't going to do it and I know of no workarounds.

 

Michael Cubine

[Ralgh 43]

I use Active Sky 2012 for my weather and when I enter my flight plan into that it gives me the average wind component for the flight. I then put that wind component into one of the early fixes and the MD-11 appears to assume that's the wind for all the following waypoints if I don't enter anything else. Whatever it's doing my fuel prediction seems to be pretty accurate after that. It's kind of a sloppy way to do it and of course you have to know what the average wind component is but it's the best I've come up with without having to manually enter a ton of winds.

[pcubine 143]

Tom

 

Look at post #5 in this thread http://forum.avsim.net/topic/423074-trip-wind/. Average wind component is a shortcut to disaster on long flights.

 

Michael Cubine

[Big_Duke 11]

Tom

 

Average wind component is a shortcut to disaster on long flights.

 

Michael Cubine

Not really. I've used average winds on over 500 flight hours (all long haul) and have yet to experience a "disaster." I was using mainly FSBuild (before PFPX) which does include the actual waypoint winds to calculate step climbs and fuel usage, which turned out in most cases to be almost within 1K lbs at the end of the flight. The only thing that may be off are the forecasted waypoint arrival times shown in the FMC which is, at most, a minor annoyance.

[pcubine 143]

 

 

I've used average winds on over 500 flight hours (all long haul)

 

Jerry

 

Did you look at post #5 in the link to the thread on Trip Winds?

 

Michael Cubine

[Big_Duke 11]

Yes, I looked at that thread. The question boils down to the approach of using the FMS as a flight "planning" tool versus a flight "management" tool. "I" prefer to use a separate flight planning tool such as FSBuild, and now PFPX, which are designed to calculate accurate flight parameters such as step climbs, intermediate flight times, fuel burn, etc rather than the FMS which is designed to manage an already planned flight. Others may prefer the opposite approach; either may satisfy an individual's preferred method of flying within FSX.

[3-2-1-Now 126]

The benefit of wind entry is over-stated. Except during the flight planning stage when fuel required is affected, in-flight it has no material impact on what is actually burned/time taken.

 

The FMS will always take current conditions for the prediction to the next waypoint; it is subsequent waypoints that are affected, and I have noticed little difference in predicted fuel burn over the flight. Most of my flight is done with zero wind entered into the FMS, but because of my flight planning, the FOB at any moment is rarely different to what I predicted, as it is the flight plan I check against, and not the FMS computed values.

 

To me, it is a pure convenience to have more accurate FMS predictions (hence the reason for my question the other day). Only when there is a serious difference on the ground at the start of the flight do I ask questions about the FMS prediction vs. flight plan.

 

Right now I am 7 hours into a 9 hour flight, and fuel at dest has reduced by only 0.7 since departure. Flight plan states 29.9; it is predictcing 35.0. Overhead GALBO (western France) I should have 51.1 according to the flight plan. I'll report back with the actual figure. EDIT: Actual 51.8.

 

The average wind entry affects the fuel overhead destination by +1.3. -57/000: 33.5, -50/T040: 34.8

 

Best regards,

Robin.

[mburkhard 23]

Most airlines didn't have any data link option for en-route wind import when they operated the MD-11. It was a manual thing and yes it was always done on long haul flights. You don't have to do this during cockpit preparation, it is fully sufficient to do it during climb.

 

Now you might say why do this, the average wind component gets me to the destination too. Yes it does, and fuel might be pretty accurate too.

 

BUT

 

- What about the other component: TIME. If you want accurate time predictions (remember: airlines usually have to keep a flight plan and have connecting passengers) you will want to have the specific en-route wind entered.

- Something goes wrong: In case of a malfunction or more serious emergency en-route it might become extremely handy to have accurate fuel and time predictions too.

 

So yes entering the average wind component might be fine for your simulation. But the real operations want to have more. And on the real MD-11 this was done manually for a very long time.

 

Regards,

Markus

[riccardo74 36]

Thank you very much guys, your opinion is very appreciated.