ProATC won't work with (PFPX plan and) Airbus 319...?!

[Guest]

I was looking forward to spending a nice afternoon flying the Aerosoft Airbus for the first time in ages but up to now it's only been hell. I would like to fly with ProATC but I just can't get it working. First problem is that no matter what I do I can't get ProATC to export a plan that I can load into the Airbus. Yes, I know I should be able to enter the plan manually into the MCDU but it somehow just won't work. After spending some 45 minutes on that I decided to plan the flight with PFPX and load it into the Airbus and ProATC. Loading the plan into the Airbus goes okay but things go wrong when I try to add the SID: somehow I end up in a yellow temp plan mode...? But anyway, things go even MORE wrong when I try to load the PFPX plan into ProATC: that SEEMS to work but as soon as I select Fly now and contact ATC I suddenly am getting a different take off runway and SID...

 

It's been almost two ******* hours on this since I installed the Airbus and I am getting pretty ###### here so I was wondering if any of you have been able to get ProATX to work with the Aerosoft Airbus 310 in P3D v3.1? Or if you were able to enter a PFPX plan into ProATC succesfully without ATC suddenly changing things? If so, please tell me how it works because all this is ruining my saturday...

 

Sometimes I hate this hobby and I understand why Dovetail want to make things more simple for newbies because even for someone like me, who has been flying for decades, all those various addons can get totally confusing. And mind you, I did use the various addons before! But somehow it just won't work today. :mad:

[Bobsk8 12,559]

I was looking forward to spending a nice afternoon flying the Aerosoft Airbus for the first time in ages but up to now it's only been hell. I would like to fly with ProATC but I just can't get it working. First problem is that no matter what I do I can't get ProATC to export a plan that I can load into the Airbus. Yes, I know I should be able to enter the plan manually into the MCDU but it somehow just won't work. After spending some 45 minutes on that I decided to plan the flight with PFPX and load it into the Airbus and ProATC. Loading the plan into the Airbus goes okay but things go wrong when I try to add the SID: somehow I end up in a yellow temp plan mode...? But anyway, things go even MORE wrong when I try to load the PFPX plan into ProATC: that SEEMS to work but as soon as I select Fly now and contact ATC I suddenly am getting a different take off runway and SID...

 

It's been almost two ******* hours on this since I installed the Airbus and I am getting pretty ###### here so I was wondering if any of you have been able to get ProATX to work with the Aerosoft Airbus 310 in P3D v3.1? Or if you were able to enter a PFPX plan into ProATC succesfully without ATC suddenly changing things? If so, please tell me how it works because all this is ruining my saturday...

 

Sometimes I hate this hobby and I understand why Dovetail want to make things more simple for newbies because even for someone like me, who has been flying for decades, all those various addons can get totally confusing. And mind you, I did use the various addons before! But somehow it just won't work today. :mad:

 

Did you contact clearance delivery first and get your clearance? Until you do that you won't see the FP in the FMC. 

[qqwertz 772]

Hi Jeroen,

I can't get ProATC to export a plan that I can load into the Airbus.

....

I decided to plan the flight with PFPX and load it into the Airbus and ProATC. Loading the plan into the Airbus goes okay but things go wrong when I try to add the SID

....

things go even MORE wrong when I try to load the PFPX plan into ProATC: that SEEMS to work but as soon as I select Fly now and contact ATC I suddenly am getting a different take off runway and SID

... 

I was wondering if any of you have been able to get ProATX to work with the Aerosoft Airbus 310 in P3D v3.1?

I use the A320 with Pro-ATC and PFPX in P3D 3.1 and it works beautifully. I generally plan the flight using PFPX (it's simply unbeatable for IFR planning). Then I import the .pln flight plan (i.e., the one in FSX standard format)into PFPX and the Aerosoft A320 flight plan into the FMC. You have to make sure that PFPX exports these plans into the proper directory for Aerosoft addons, and that Pro-ATC knows where to look for your .pln flight plans.

 

Did you make sure that you use the same Airac cycle for all three addons? If not, Pro-ATC or the A320 may not recognize SIDs/STARs used by PFPX.

 

Good luck,

Peter

[Guest]

Did you contact clearance delivery first and get your clearance? Until you do that you won't see the FP in the FMC.

The problem seems to be that the PROATCXCLR file isn't being created at all. I just did my first flight anyway by entering the flight plan manually but during the flight the plan was missing a few points that ProATC seems to add to the plan when you actually start a flight... But I will see what happens when I ask clearance first. Although at that time you might not be able to export the flight anymore...?

 

EDIT

Maybe you were trying to say that plan is being created only after getting clearance? I will give it a try later on! Still, as it is now I rather have ProATC working with the PFPX plan... But then I first have to solve this problem:

 

EDIT 2: Yes, that did the trick indeed, thanks Bob! After getting clearance I could suddenly load that PROATCXCR plan! Nice!

 

Hi Jeroen,I use the A320 with Pro-ATC and PFPX in P3D 3.1 and it works beautifully. I generally plan the flight using PFPX (it's simply unbeatable for IFR planning). Then I import the .pln flight plan (i.e., the one in FSX standard format)into PFPX and the Aerosoft A320 flight plan into the FMC. You have to make sure that PFPX exports these plans into the proper directory for Aerosoft addons, and that Pro-ATC knows where to look for your .pln flight plans.Did you make sure that you use the same Airac cycle for all three addons? If not, Pro-ATC or the A320 may not recognize SIDs/STARs used by PFPX.Good luck,Peter

AIRACs are all the same. The main problem is that once I select Fly now in ProATC it for instance suddenly changes the active runway and SID. When I import the PFPX plan into ProATC all seems fine, but when I save it and select Fly now things go wrong. Using ProATC only and manually entering the plan into the MCDU does kind of work (see my post above though) but I would like to use the more accurate PFPX planner, amongst others for validation and being able to export the plan to the Airbus, but specially for the flight plan it creates with pax, cargo and fuel load which I can enter into the right Airbus MCDU.

[qqwertz 772]

When you import the plan you can specify SID and runway. However, it is actually more realistic that ATC tells you which SID/STAR and runway you are to use. If the runway selected by Pro-ATC is not good (happened regularly with older versions of Pro-ATC; do you use the latest version?), you can request a different runway after you obtained clearance. You have to switch back to delivery frequency to do that.

 

Peter

[Guest]

When you import the plan you can specify SID and runway. However, it is actually more realistic that ATC tells you which SID/STAR and runway you are to use. If the runway selected by Pro-ATC is not good (happened regularly with older versions of Pro-ATC; do you use the latest version?), you can request a different runway after you obtained clearance. You have to switch back to delivery frequency to do that.

 

Peter

 

Hm, I just don't get it. The PFPX plan never shows up in ProATC as intended.  Even when I manually select the SID and STAR in ProATC (it always seems to pick the wrong ones compared to PFPX and I can't specify them when I import the plan but only after loading it...?) I get a different route with really totally different waypoints. It seems impossible to use PFPX plans in ProATC one on one. At least I cant get it done not even after spending half of this saturday on this. I checked the AIRACs once more but they really are the same. Again, sometimes I hate this hobby.

 

EDIT

Example, a very short flight from ENBR to ENVA. PFPX gives me this:

 

INTU1D INTUM Z108 NELSU NELS1M

 

After loading it into ProATC and selecting INTU1D and NELS1M (by itself it chooses INTU1C and no STAR at all) I get this:

 

ENBR DCT INTUM Z289 TUMIM DCT GIGIR DCT BAMVA DCT NELSU ENVA

 

Useless.

 

EDIT 2

Hm, seems that if I ONLY change the SID and STAR and do NOT let ProATC recalculate things (which I thought was mandatory) the plan becomes the same as it is in PFPX after getting clearance. I will do some more testing on this tomorrow: I am done for today.

[JLuis 409]

Hm, I just don't get it. The PFPX plan never shows up in ProATC as intended.  Even when I manually select the SID and STAR in ProATC (it always seems to pick the wrong ones compared to PFPX and I can't specify them when I import the plan but only after loading it...?) I get a different route with really totally different waypoints. It seems impossible to use PFPX plans in ProATC one on one. At least I cant get it done not even after spending half of this saturday on this. I checked the AIRACs once more but they really are the same. Again, sometimes I hate this hobby.

 

EDIT

Example, a very short flight from ENBR to ENVA. PFPX gives me this:

 

INTU1D INTUM Z108 NELSU NELS1M

 

After loading it into ProATC and selecting INTU1D and NELS1M (by itself it chooses INTU1C and no STAR at all) I get this:

 

ENBR DCT INTUM Z289 TUMIM DCT GIGIR DCT BAMVA DCT NELSU ENVA

 

Useless.

 

EDIT 2

Hm, seems that if I ONLY change the SID and STAR and do NOT let ProATC recalculate things (which I thought was mandatory) the plan becomes the same as it is in PFPX after getting clearance. I will do some more testing on this tomorrow: I am done for today.

 

The same thing happens to me because this I stopped using ProATC.

[qqwertz 772]

Hm, seems that if I ONLY change the SID and STAR and do NOT let ProATC recalculate things (which I thought was mandatory) the plan becomes the same as it is in PFPX after getting clearance

Yes, that's it. I never let Pro-ATC recalculate the plan (that creates a new flight plan indeed), so I forgot about this

 

Great that you figured this out

 

Peter

[srcooke 52]

The same thing happens to me because this I stopped using ProATC

 

 

ProATC will only modify a route if you tell it too, ie re-calculate which defeats the object of using your own plan.

 

Runways/SID's/STAR's are now dynamically assigned by ATC to accommodate the 'active' runway.

 

Any issues then use the dedicated support forum.

[Pete Dowson 558]

Hm, I just don't get it. The PFPX plan never shows up in ProATC as intended.  

...

Example, a very short flight from ENBR to ENVA. PFPX gives me this:

 

INTU1D INTUM Z108 NELSU NELS1M

 

After loading it into ProATC and selecting INTU1D and NELS1M (by itself it chooses INTU1C and no STAR at all) I get this:

 

ENBR DCT INTUM Z289 TUMIM DCT GIGIR DCT BAMVA DCT NELSU ENVA

 

Useless.

 

EDIT 2

Hm, seems that if I ONLY change the SID and STAR and do NOT let ProATC recalculate things (which I thought was mandatory) the plan becomes the same as it is in PFPX after getting clearance. I will do some more testing on this tomorrow: I am done for today.

 

The flight plan which ProATC needs is the same as the one you file with ATC, and the one exported by PFPX if you use the Squawkbox format -- the file that produced is directly importable into ProATC/X and is far far the easiest thing to do.

 

The plan which ProATC/X is looking for in the above case is just 

 

INTUM Z108 NELSU

 

The SID and STAR data is NOT required at that stage, but I see that ProATC/X actually did a good job discarding it and processing the airway waypoints in any case, resulting in your 

 

ENBR DCT INTUM Z289 TUMIM DCT GIGIR DCT BAMVA DCT NELSU ENVA

 

which looks correct to me.

 

As said earlier in this thread, the SID is assigned by Clearance Delivery, and you can get it changed if you wish, but generally I've found its choices agree with PFPX's predictions (and that's what they are inPFPX, presuctions NOT assignments).

 

Similarly the STAR is assigned by Approach, later, but you can get a predction by ProATC/X or what it is likely to be in the "Flight Info" data window/ menu.

 

As also said previously, the plan for your aircraft's CDU is produced AFTER you obtain clearance.

 

I think it all works well this way, and a lot more realistically than other ATC programs.

 

Pete

[Bobsk8 12,559]

Making a flight plan with Sids and stars before the flight is even begun  is not realistic, because weather can change approaches and runways in use like in real life. Many times I have approached an airport expecting an approach and runway, and I find that the wind has shifted and the runway in use is not what I expected.

[Guest]

The flight plan which ProATC needs is the same as the one you file with ATC, and the one exported by PFPX if you use the Squawkbox format -- the file that produced is directly importable into ProATC/X and is far far the easiest thing to do.

 

The plan which ProATC/X is looking for in the above case is just

 

INTUM Z108 NELSU

 

The SID and STAR data is NOT required at that stage, but I see that ProATC/X actually did a good job discarding it and processing the airway waypoints in any case, resulting in your

 

ENBR DCT INTUM Z289 TUMIM DCT GIGIR DCT BAMVA DCT NELSU ENVA

 

which looks correct to me.

 

As said earlier in this thread, the SID is assigned by Clearance Delivery, and you can get it changed if you wish, but generally I've found its choices agree with PFPX's predictions (and that's what they are inPFPX, presuctions NOT assignments).

 

Similarly the STAR is assigned by Approach, later, but you can get a predction by ProATC/X or what it is likely to be in the "Flight Info" data window/ menu.

 

It may look correct but it IS a quite different route (and a slightly longer one). I wonder why ProATC chooses a different SID and route...? Both PFPX and ProATC are reading the exact same ASN weather. And unlike what you say, in all my cases so far ProATC's choices for a SID do NOT agree with PFPX. I do know SIDs and STARs are assigned by clearance etc. but both PFPX and ProATC give a prediction: I am just curious why they are different. Sometimes even the take off runway is different.

 

As it is now I see no reason at all to keep on using PFPX: it only gives me more work and stuff to do and I don't gain anything from it apart from the fuel load (which isn't enough for me to go through all this trouble). Since I now know how to load ProATC's plan into the Airbus the real reason for using PFPX (getting a plan I can load as company route) is gone. Or does anyone here have a very good reason why I should keep on using PFPX...? If it is more realistic to let ProATC give me a SID and STAR at the appropriate time, I might better go that way and forget about PFPX. If however the routes that PFPX produces are more realistic, shouldn't it be better to NOT let ProATC fool around with it and force it to use the PFPX route (by manually changing SID and STAR and not recalculating the route)?

 

In short: I am confused. :wink: By now I know how everything works (or better said: how to get things done) but I have no clue what would be the most realistic way to go: which choice is the best:

 

1. PFPX plan into ProATC and force it to use PFPX procedures (might be okay with the SID but the STAR might be totally wrong because of weather changes)

2. PFPX plan into ProATC and let it recalculate the route (making the work done with PFPX totally useless)

3. Skip PFPX and let ProATC create the route

[Bobsk8 12,559]

I fly for a VA and do at least 2 flights a day. I looked at PFPX and frankly couldn't see what the advantage of it was. Ballparking the fuel burn can be done with many free sources such as Simbrief, and I just either use ProATC to create the FP or use Simbrief or one of the other free FP sources, and import it into Pro ATC. I let PATC assign the sid and stars, and look at the FMC to see if fuel allocation is OK. I'm not into making things more complicated, frankly. 

[Pete Dowson 558]

It may look correct but it IS a quite different route (and a slightly longer one). I wonder why ProATC chooses a different SID and route...? Both PFPX and ProATC are reading the exact same ASN weather. And unlike what you say, in all my cases so far ProATC's choices for a SID do NOT agree with PFPX. I do know SIDs and STARs are assigned by clearance etc. but both PFPX and ProATC give a prediction: I am just curious why they are different. Sometimes even the take off runway is different

 

Hmm. Sorry, yes. I had assumed the later expansion was part of the airway you selected, but I see now it isn't.

 

I don't really understand why your experience is the opposite of mine. Yes, very occasionally I've found it selecting the opposite runway to PFPX, but I think this is usually when the winds are very light and it is either then selecting them based on order in the list, on what AI are using, or even whether ILS is one end and not the other.

 

I seem to remember that earlier versions of ActiveSky had an option to set a minimum wind speed on the ground at the airports in order to force both AI and other programs to select the same runways, though I suspect even that wouldn't work 100% whether you have two or more runways at close enough angles into the wind.

 

But so far, I've never had ProATC change the main route on me completely, and when the same runways have been selected I've so far always got the same SID.

 

Maybe it would be worth trying to use the PFPX exported flightplan and importing it into ProATC? Maybe that's the difference?

 

Pete

[Guest]

Maybe it would be worth trying to use the PFPX exported flightplan and importing it into ProATC? Maybe that's the difference?

 

Well, actually, I started this topic because I tried to do so but it didn't work LOL

But anyway, I now know that when I import the PFPX plan into ProATC and then ONLY change the SID and STAR to what they were in PFPX and do NOT use the recalculate option in ProATC, the actual PFPX plan is being used in ProATC and P3D. But in the meantime I also found out how to load the ProATC plan into the Airbus (after clearance), which was the main reason for using PFPX, so now all I am left wondering about is: is there a good reason to keep on using PFPX...? Seems it only makes things more complicated, adding extra steps I don't really need. Or is the PFPX plan always far superior to the ProATC plan...?