There is some confusion about the differences between a simple flight plan, ETOPS and redispatch; when one would be preferred over another; and indeed whether anything beyond a simple flight plan is even a requirement for flight simulating.

 

This package may help. It contains 4 files - 3 flight plans and an explanatory document. Save the documents if you wish to use them.

 

I hope that you get some fun from it.

 

Cheers, Richard

 

 

This package may help. It contains 4 files - 3 flight plans and an explanatory document. Save the documents if you wish to use them.

 

I'd suggest uploading it to AVSIM.  Dropbox is best for a handful of users.  Eventually, they'll cut you off if they see too many people downloading things.  Plus, lots of companies/organizations block Dropbox from their workstations to avoid people dumping company proprietary information in there and taking it home (as is the case where I am currently).

 

Additionally, I'm really, really confused as to what you mean by "LNAV Skills."  Skills in letting the plane follow its own path?  I'm guessing you meant "Flight Plan Knowledge?"

 

Sorry, I'd answer my own questions if I could read it.

Hi Kyle,

 

I meant LNAV in the sense of lateral navigation. Intentionally, none of the package addresses vertical navigation.

 

HTH

 

Cheers, Richard

Very nice stuff.

 

I would like to ask for permission to translate it into spanish, so more people can access to it.

Thank you for your work in putting this together.  I had no problems accessing the documents through Dropbox.

 

 

I meant LNAV in the sense of lateral navigation. Intentionally, none of the package addresses vertical navigation.

 

Right, but my point was more that LNAV is an autopilot mode and that, though I'm being pretty semantic about the point here, the topic at hand is flight planning and different types of flight planning.  LNAV itself isn't even discussed at all in the document apart from being the title.  That's the only reason I said what I did.  I wasn't trying to be rude.  I was simply saying that a better title exists to match the document content.

 

Otherwise, it's very well written.

Hi Paco!

 

Please feel free to translate into Spanish. If you wish, I will upload the result into my Dropbox so that everyone is able to download both the English and Spanish versions.

 

Regards, Richard

Hi Kyle,

 

Let's hope that the title is not too dissuading.

 

Cheers, Richard

Thank you Sir!, workin' on it!

Thanks for your work Richard!

I can download the five files (not four) directly to my hard drive or I can open them first in Firefox and then save them to my hard drive but, in both cases, the files cannot subsequently be opened in Acrobat Reader XI. Is the problem with me or with the files?

 

Edit:  Problem solved by downloading the zip file instead of individually.

Many Thanks Richard.

I understand that there may be many pilots who find a lengthy document hard in English.

 

I am happy for anyone wishing to translate to do so. I can then add the documents to Dropbox.

 

Cheers, Richard

I understand that there may be many pilots who find a lengthy document hard in English.

 

I am happy for anyone wishing to translate to do so. I can then add the documents to Dropbox.

 

Cheers, Richard

To make things a little more reader friendly perhaps you should include the raw flight plan inputs rather than the output files which are hard to read at the best of times.

 

Also a bit of preamble explaining the principle of redispatch would help. Mathematically 5% of A plus 5% of B is the same as 5% of A+B. From studying your example I gather redispatch enables you to carry less reserve overall assuming you don't use all the reserve in the first segment. But I can't apply that on another route without understanding how to select the intermediate diversion point, ONL in your example. Unfortunately your guide doesn't explain this though it does explain everything else extremely well.

 

Very professional piece of work.

Hi Kevin,

 

I don't understand the problem you have with the flight plans.

 

As you are probably aware, writing a document is not just a challenge in finding what to write, but also what not to write.

 

I decided early on not to say anything that could be better said by a document to which I could produce a hyperlink. So having found the sources to which I wished to hyperlink, I could then delete those parts of my document that duplicated (often less well) those hyperlinked documents. So I am VERY dependent on the reader using all of the hyperlinks that I took so long in inserting.

 

I hope, therefore, that you will agree with me that Boeing are far better than I at explaining redispatch.

 

Re the redispatch point, this is decided for you by pressing the Auto button in PFPX redispatch section. ONL then just magically appears, and it seems to be the best choice in my extensive use of the facility.

 

I hope that this explains how you maximise your flight plans.

 

Cheers, Richard

I don't understand the problem you have with the flight plans.

I don't have a problem with reading flight plans but they are rather dense on detail when you are trying to put across some higher level planning concepts. I would have kept with the raw flight plan routings as examples to show the differences. In other words the user's inputs to the flight planning tool. For people whose first language isn't English that might be a little more understandable to help grasp the principles you are trying to put over.

 

Regarding redispatch, I missed the hyperlink you put in. My bad, though the link only comes at the third or fourth instance in the text. But you did define the other planning concepts in your text, which is why I felt a description of redispatch (something totally new to me) was missing. Anyway, I was intrigued but found myself wondering how could I use this new information without knowing how to choose the redispatch point. I didn't realise I would need the PFPX auto redispatch button to try the idea out until your reply to me here.

 

In my post I said

 

Very professional piece of work.

 

which still sums up my overall opinion. I'm sorry my post came over as being crtical when the comments were intended to be constructive.