Not sure what you're looking for here.

 

There aren't any true organized tracks or airways to cross the polar region - it's all based off of the coordinate system (much like the Ocean crossings are). Today's KORD to VHHH flight plan (for CPA805) is PMPKN NEATO DLLAN RONIC BAE 4500N08700W 5000N08200W 5500N07700W 5830N07500W 6000N07400W 6500N07100W 7000N06800W INGUM 7500N06400W 8000N06000W 8500N04000W 8730N00000E ABERI B934 SUBEM B934 LUMIG B155 TUNIR A45 USONA G490 LAMIR G490 SERNA A310 POLHO G218 TMR B458 LARAD B458 WXI A461 OBLIK A461 LIG R473 WYN W18 NLG W23 ZUH R473 SIERA. Everything in red is the polar portion (the FAA defines the North Polar area of operations as the area lying north of 78 deg north latitude), and as you can see, most of it is coordinate-based. The darker red is what I'd call a transition area into the polar region. That's not an official definition, but you're crossing off of mainland Canada over the remote parts of Greenland at INGUM, and you are transitioning back over land (Siberia, so..."land," albeit mostly inhospitable) at SUBEM, so, despite it not being polar by definition, you're still in some pretty cold and remote areas.

 

Polar routes aren't intentionally flown. They're incidentally flown. What I mean by that is nobody intentionally seeks to fly up over the poles. They simply do so because that is the shortest route. That being said, there's no button or feature in PFPX that will intentionally put you through that region. It simply routes you that way because it's the shortest route that can be taken. Apart from that, it's flown just like any other ETOPS segment (with higher requirements for the diversion airports and recovery because a potentially powerless aircraft on an extremely cold/remote ramp could be a very bad situation for the crew/passengers). Before even selecting a route, just set the airports KORD and VHHH into PFPX and you'll already have polar route. If you select the "Quick Find Route" option, then it will try to bend that flight path onto available airways as much as it can, and will probably use coordinates throughout the polar region.

 

It's also worth mentioning that, because the map in PFPX is a Mercator Projection, you might not actually get a line that goes up over the pole with a nice picture of the North Pole. It will probably just "top out" (flatten out against the top of the map) at the top of the map, like this FlightAware Map of the above-mentioned flight.

 

For more on Polar Ops and requirements:

http://www.boeing.com/commercial/aeromagazine/aero_16/polar_story.html

Regarding the auto-route feature, it would be a nice enhancement if it generated a route based on the shortest air miles flown factoring in the winds aloft. As I understand, it merely looks for a route that closely resembles the great circle.

what about my question on the terrain alerts on landing?

Why isn't that in a separate thread?  There is already one thread recent on that topic, care to join it?

 

Full names in the PMDG forum please.

Regarding the auto-route feature, it would be a nice enhancement if it generated a route based on the shortest air miles flown factoring in the winds aloft. As I understand, it merely looks for a route that closely resembles the great circle.

 

If you actually go into the route builder, there's an advanced function that offers a "wind optimized route" search. It does actually work pretty well from what I've seen on my own flights so far.

Terrific! I'll give it a try once I get P3D 2.5 up and running. If it works well I can finally cease piggybacking from FAR 121 dispatchers via flightaware

 

Yeah, I used to do that, and then I got curious and tried to see what PFPX would give me versus what FlightAware gave me. I planned a couple different flights side-by-side with PFPX and FlightAware, and the calculated results gave the edge to the wind-aided route each time. I didn't fly each in the sim to verify, but it was definitely finding better routes, wind-wise. That tool can also help you avoid specific FIRs, which I've used a few times, as the cost of Canadian overflights is higher than simply flying down around it (speaking of the DTW/YYZ area here).

I planned a couple different flights side-by-side with PFPX and FlightAware, and the calculated results gave the edge to the wind-aided route each time. I didn't fly each in the sim to verify, but it was definitely finding better routes, wind-wise.

Maybe a wind-aided route would fly you into several thunderstorms. PFPX might pick the best route in terms of wind but I am sure it could not hold a candle in comparison to resources that American, United, Delta, and Southwest can bring to bear on flight planning. If there is a route on FlightAware I will stick with it. If there's nothing on FlightAware, I will use PFPX as a last resort.

Maybe a wind-aided route would fly you into several thunderstorms. PFPX might pick the best route in terms of wind but I am sure it could not hold a candle in comparison to resources that American, United, Delta, and Southwest can bring to bear on flight planning. If there is a route on FlightAware I will stick with it. If there's nothing on FlightAware, I will use PFPX as a last resort.

 

...ehhhh...I wouldn't assume so much.

 

There are many other things at play here.

 

First, and foremost, a wind route doesn't mean you're going to be put into a thunderstorm. Strong wind is associated with thunderstorms at ground level, but upper level wind is not particularly affected (in a lateral sense). If someone is concerned with wind aiding, they're probably also checking for weather along the route. If not, they should be. Either way, it would be a fallacy to assume that wind aiding is somehow associated with convective or frontal activity. The NAT system is entirely driven by wind aiding. That's the whole reason the tracks shift.

 

Second, airlines often use canned routes (depending on the airline) and only deviate when necessary. There are several and varying reasons for this. On one level, airlines often have Letters of Agreement (LOAs) with air traffic control facilities to ensure that they both have an understanding of what to expect. The airline will file a set route, and the ATC facility promises to always grant that route, with exceptions for various scenarios. On a different level, there are ATC Prefroutes that come into play. An example would be DC to NY. The routes they enforce are not very direct, and can't be bent to wind optimization simply because of the intricate traffic flows into and out of N90.

 

Third, if a dispatcher is working for a large carrier, he or she is probably not spending a ton of time planning each individual route (confirmed this with a dispatcher for a US Major). They pull the canned route (unless there is some obvious weather issue), calculate the perf numbers, ensure everything is in compliance, and move on to the next flight. Remember, as well, that a dispatcher is constantly monitoring the flights under his or her dispatch co-authority during the shift, so there's even less mental bandwidth available to spend more time evaluating different routes. Moreover, with certain airlines, there is a standard "approved" route for the city pair, simply on the level of setting a cost expectation. Allowing a potentially different route, daily, would introduce variance in the cost of operating the route. As far as setting budgets goes, that makes things even more difficult.

 

Fourth, and finally, I wouldn't place too much faith in airline programs. While some of the programs are definitely powerful, other airlines are still using various programs that run off of DOS or DOS-like command line terminals. Believe me. I've worked with several of them.

 

 

 

TL;DR:

Airlines are not the end answer to "best route." In fact, they could actually be the worst route for that day simply because the dispatcher chose the canned route when the jetstream was only a little farther north of the route and could've aided the transcon significantly.

Airlines are not the end answer to "best route." In fact, they could actually be the worst route for that day simply because the dispatcher chose the canned route when the jetstream was only a little farther north of the route and could've aided the transcon significantly.

This is a route I flew yesterday http://flightaware.com/live/flight/DAL110/history/20150210/1311Z/KATL/KLAX. Most KATL-KLAX routes are farther north with a gentle bend to the south. It was not a canned route. I think it was wind-hindered as opposed to wind-aided. The first several hundred miles the headwind component was over a 110 knots. Maybe it was worse the farther north you flew.

This is a route I flew yesterday http://flightaware.com/live/flight/DAL110/history/20150210/1311Z/KATL/KLAX. Most KATL-KLAX routes are farther north with a gentle bend to the south. It was not a canned route. I think it was wind-hindered as opposed to wind-aided. The first several hundred miles the headwind component was over a 110 knots. Maybe it was worse the farther north you flew.

 

Right. As I mentioned earlier, there are certain cases in which the canned route is not used. The fact that you said "it normally does [X]" pretty much confirms my earlier post about dispatchers using canned routes much of the time, unless something else is required.

 

As far as wind hindrance, any westbound flight in the Northern Hemisphere is going to probably pick up a headwind of some sort. It's usually a matter of attempting to find the least amount of headwind with a route, if it's possible. I can't tell what they were trying to do here, but that would be my best guess (wind avoidance).

Maybe a wind-aided route would fly you into several thunderstorms. PFPX might pick the best route in terms of wind but I am sure it could not hold a candle in comparison to resources that American, United, Delta, and Southwest can bring to bear on flight planning. If there is a route on FlightAware I will stick with it. If there's nothing on FlightAware, I will use PFPX as a last resort.

 

Wind optimization has more to do with Jetstream Constellation than TSs, at least at the FLs you cruise on ETOPs... Specially if your Eastbound, you can really profit from it, and if you're Westbound, you'd better get away from it :-)

I can send you a real polar flt plan if you like, from Dubai to San Fran or LA..