PF3 with P3dv3.4 HF2 ?

[charlie130 196]

Happy New Year to fellow MCE Captains!

 

As the topic title states, is anyone using PF3, with P3dv3.4 HF2?

 

Over the holidays, I thought I would have a go at PF3 (Demo). Since, as we know, MCE also supports PF3.

 

Unfortunately my (latest and greatest) install of P3d appears to have not made friends with PF3?

 

Is anyone using PF3 successfully with HF2?

 

My latest HF2 works with everything, except REX WX Advantage weather radar(....they are working on a HF), and PF3?

 

Cheers

 

David.

[starter 8]

Hi David,

 

according to this thread: http://www.avsim.com/topic/500412-mce-crashing-p3d/, you should contact support :wink: .

 

Thank you for your nice vids :smile: .

 

Best wishes.

 

Best regards John

[RALF9636 1,955]

Running MCE with PF3 (full version) and the newest P3D hotfix without any issues here. Works like a charm as usual.

[charlie130 196]

Hi David,

 

according to this thread: http://www.avsim.com/topic/500412-mce-crashing-p3d/, you should contact support :wink: .

 

Thank you for your nice vids :smile: .

 

Best wishes.

 

Best regards John

 

Thanks John.

 

Its not MCE that's at fault. The latest 9.1 fixes the HF2 issue. MCE runs 100% with HF2 now.

 

The problem appears to be elsewhere! PF3 has an error trap logarithm that pops up if the program encounters a crash. You can then send a copy of the error log to the PF3 guys.

 

 

Running MCE with PF3 (full version) and the newest P3D hotfix without any issues here. Works like a charm as usual.

Thanks Ralph. Hmmm...that gets me wondering? Perhaps its just the demo version of PF3 that doesn't play well with HF2?

 

For now I have returned to RC4, which works as usual:-)

 

Cheers

 

David.

[ARCO 245]

I stand to be corrected David but I believe it is the PF3 demo that won't work with MCE, I tried it myself and could not use it, so I dropped PF3 unfortunately.

[RALF9636 1,955]

Whatever problem you have with PF3, well possible it is just a problem with the demo. From what I've read on the PF3 forum the demo is not really always kept up to date.

 

I can only recommend PF3 and it would be a shame if potential buyers were held back by problems with the demo that don't exist with the full version.

 

Did you guys contact their support with your problems? They are usually very quick and helpful on the PF3 support forum.

 

Don't give up on PF3 too early. The immersion of PF3 with MCE is awesome.

[charlie130 196]

I stand to be corrected David but I believe it is the PF3 demo that won't work with MCE, I tried it myself and could not use it, so I dropped PF3 unfortunately.

This is a serious issue for the PF3 Devs.

 

I support the programs that permit you to try before you buy. I believe its an excellent way to market your product. I can see no reason why the PF3 Demo can not be an up to date and working example of the full product? a "showcase" for a prospective buyer. Obviously with restrictions on the demo, such as the 15 minute limit that exists at the moment.

 

If you test drive a car that breaks down on the test run, your not going to be impressed?

 

Cheers guys.

 

David.

[RALF9636 1,955]

What exactly does not work?

 

Did you report it on the PF3 support forum?

[vololiberista 205]

What exactly does not work?

 

Did you report it on the PF3 support forum?

I second that. The forum supports queries for the demo as much as for the full version. One thing to remember though is whilst the full version receives "automatic" updates the demo doesn't. The demo version itself is updated at the same time but it is for the demo user to "manualy" download an up to date copy. i.e it's not an "automatic" update for the demo. If things don't like right either with the demo or with MCE in conjunction then report it on the PF3 forum and/or the MCE forum.

This is a serious issue for the PF3 Devs.

 

 

David.

Not really. The demo is updated when the full programme is updated. The difference being that the demo has to be manually downloaded each time there is an update. The demo is a free trial remember. It's not the full programme. Even so the only differences are restricted number of voices and restricted distance on your flight plan. Everything else is the same and so if there are any issues they can and should be reported on the forum.

[ARCO 245]

Before rejecting PF3 following the non-functionality of MCE with the (PF3) demo version, I checked both on MCE and PF3 fora to see if there were any threads relating to that problem, and indeed there were, but as often unfortunately, inconclusive, in other words with no solution offered and the request was abandoned after a while sinking in the dark hole of fora unsolved issues...

 

So after trying the PF3 demo without MCE within its limits which are well understood, it was only legitimate to also try it with MCE before making the decision, One additional aspect that remained unclear and was also a deterrent was the absence of SID and STAR since there is no update possible with Navigraph. I am aware that one can design them within PF3 but this is a lengthy process, leading to literally build the flight for ATC.

[vololiberista 205]

Before rejecting PF3 following the non-functionality of MCE with the (PF3) demo version, I checked both on MCE and PF3 fora to see if there were any threads relating to that problem, and indeed there were, but as often unfortunately, inconclusive, in other words with no solution offered and the request was abandoned after a while sinking in the dark hole of fora unsolved issues...

 

So after trying the PF3 demo without MCE within its limits which are well understood, it was only legitimate to also try it with MCE before making the decision, One additional aspect that remained unclear and was also a deterrent was the absence of SID and STAR since there is no update possible with Navigraph. I am aware that one can design them within PF3 but this is a lengthy process, leading to literally build the flight for ATC.

Yet another simmer who wants everything handed to them on a plate. It takes no time at all to a.  generate a flightplan and b. to set up SIDs and STARs. Once it is all set up click/go! Next time you want to fly that same route click/go!

PF3 is proably the easiest to use in that you have full control over what you want. Some are put off by PF3's flexibility. Meaning that they can ensure that the fpl has the correct SIDs STARs instead of wrongly generated ones which is "not" uncommon among other ATC programmes.

If you were a real pilot "you" would have to prepare your own fpl. Otherwise a dispatcher would have to do it. If he/she made a mistake which you as PIC blindly followed. You are to blame!!!!!! So the onus is always on the PIC. In PF3 you make sure that the correct SIDs and STARs are flown. As PIC you are legally required to know all SIDs and STARs and to know which ones are for your specific routing. And in fact you can even include as part of the fpl if they are required for your route, fuel loading etc.

 

As PIC you are legally required to know the weather and by implication the departure and arrival runways and the associated SID that takes you to your fpl first wypt. If ATC chage the runway then you know that and you also know the associated SID. There's no getting away from it I'm afraid. As a simmer you can do what you will. But if you want any kind of realism in relation to interaction between the aircraft and ATC you are singularly responsible for the fpl. So it pays to check what a fpl generator actually gives you. Rather than accepting it as a given. I've seen queries for example where ATC apparently didn't work only to see that the fpl generator that person used sent him on airways in completely the wrong direction. Also bear in mind that these fpl generators hate being given off-airway routings. They either throw up their hands and say no way Albert or send you completely round the houses.

 

When all that is required is DCT in the fpl.When I create a fpl I always check it against current airac/notams etc. But having done that for over 40 years It's a bit of a habit I suppose. But then as PIC I recognise my responsibility.

 

Why do some simmers find it so difficult to enter 7 characters into a box? Beats me!

 

Btw MCE and PF3 do work together. So if you are having difficulty buy the full version. You won't be disappointed.

[ARCO 245]

Vololiberista, lets agree to disagree, your reply denies facts and this is embarrassing. Having flown (RW IFR) eighteen years and a few thousand hours in five geographical parts of the world including the US and Canada, I know a couple of things about flight planning, ATC operations and actual flying, So please dont tell me that I "want everything on a plate" and "if I were a pilot I would have to prepare my own FPL". I believe that my experience in flight planning and piloting never led me to input the details of SIDs and STARs other than selecting them in my FPL, and yes I was responsible to follow my Jeppesen procedure charts during the flight...

 

Regarding simulation, I happen to NEVER fly twice the same routes, so what benefit do I get to inflate my database if I have no intention to reuse it?

 

Initially that topic was about finding a solution to use PF3 demo with MCE, we are all aware the two software work well together, but the PF3 demo does not work with a full version of MCE (until further notice).

 

We are all passionate about our hobby, in particular when it comes to products we like and eventually contributed to, I understand your reaction and excuse you for it. Case closed and Happy New Year!

[charlie130 196]

Initially that topic was about finding a solution to use PF3 demo with MCE, we are all aware the two software work well together, but the PF3 demo does not work with a full version of MCE (until further notice).

 

I applaud your clarity and considered response, thank you sir. You wouldn't have the surname "Sullenberger" would you by any chance?

 

 

Btw MCE and PF3 do work together. So if you are having difficulty buy the full version. You won't be disappointed.

 

Since by your signature you are a "beta" tester for PF3, you will be aware that the program has an error trap alogarithm, which produces a Zip folder containing all the logs. This is then forwarded to the devs with the customers email (voluntary) and a free narrative of the events leading to the error. I felt this should be a sufficient and accurate step towards a positive solution.

 

I must add that my "demo" version had a facility to upgrade regularly, to the latest version. Therefore I consider that my "test drive" was in the latest model!

 

Because no two computer systems will run these complex software programs identically, I must rely upon my own empirical experience, in order to make a decision as to what to spend my money on. That's why I consider that a demo version must demonstrate its functionality to me, the consumer. If it fails to do that, its not my problem, I simply don't buy the full version.

 

Happy simming.

 

David.