Yes. Waypoint to waypoint.  It wont show you airways like charts do.  You have to add in the Sids and Stars as well.

Just now, ooxteme said:

I like the "moving maps" ...   If Navi would work the same as EFB then the answer would be simple for me. Id go with Navigraph hands down. 

I think that is what the new Navigraph  "Charts"  app/feature  does. Maybe someone can compare the two.

True but also the way it moves from ground, departure, enroute, to approach. Plus how you can work the comms. If Navigraph added those features I would choose Navigraph.

7 hours ago, 787WannabePilot said:

Unless I choose a runway in PFPX it won't transfer to TOPCAT for calculations

Yes it will. Just do the Topcat calculations, then de select the runways, and then compute. Easy.

Navigraph has a cleaner and modern UI. I wish some of these apps would focus on the UI/UX more. But a lot of these 3rd party apps look terribly ugly. The only 3rd party app that has a decent UI is ChasePlane.

11 hours ago, Boomer said:

Hmm, opinions are divided...I'm pondering this too.

Very divided it seems. I'm still in 2 minds.

 

Thanks everyone for all the info. It seems that it's a really nice piece of software, but at the same time I think it might be a bit overkill for my current setup. PFPX assigns my runways and dep/arr procedures. ProATC X has a moving map, and airport layouts (although sometimes the airport layouts are inaccurate). I forgot to mention that I have a yearly subscription to NavDataPro (without charts) so I have regular AIRAC updates. I'm thinking along the same lines as Aaron. It seems like a lot of applications running at the same time. It would be nice if they could all be integrated.

 

So I still need to be convinced lol.

What does PFPX do that the free Simbrief doesn't do? 

Simbrief is outstanding. You can also send the route to Aivlasoft EFB meaning you only have one program running in conjunction with the sim. 

3 hours ago, nealmac said:

Very divided it seems. I'm still in 2 minds.

So I still need to be convinced lol.

 

Hi Neal,

Understandable. Based on the capabilities you already have, adding EFB would not give you the greatest gain I would say.

 

As for complexity, I am one of those that does not have PFPX surprisingly.

My workflow is relatively simple for commercial flights and involves Simbrief (as mentioned by Glenn above) which gives me flight planning capability (although EFB allows manual flight planning task as well but I do not use it). This gives me the ability to import the flightplan directly into EFB and ASN. I usually have the enroute and the SID programmed as part of initial flight planning but then I determine the STAR/approach to be used while I am enroute using EFB based on real weather status shown in both EFB and ASN and the ability to view all current aerodrome charts.

 

Comments on EFB functionality:

Nice UI. I have very few issues with the airport charts being shown although there is a limitation of it not showing closed runways from a scenery design perspective.

It was also very straightforward to getting the networked mode working for the moving map.

The moving map on EFB is very nice and can be remotely displayed (I have mine showing on a separate Tablet PC without the need to have any additional remote CDU sw being run as EFB includes this functionality).

I also like EFB because it comes with a flightlog. This means for example you can track fuel consumption by waypoint and then I can compare this to the predicted values Simbrief gives you as part of the OFP that I annotate as the flight progresses. (Essentially  it simulates what happens in the real cockpit)

The Support forum gives great support!

I am also looking forward to v2 when that arrives.

What I miss: EFB does not currently display enroute tracks/airways. This would be nice to have on the moving map. Time is displayed synched to actual UTC time (not able to synch to flightsim time).

 

At the end of the day, this involves starting 3 programs and running simultaneously: ASN then FSX then EFB. Topcat I only use for planning purposes for take off and landing calcs initially but its closed the majority of the time.

Re ongoing maintenance/cost: As mentioned already, up-to-date AIRAC cycles can be purchased from the two providers mentioned which is the ongoing expense if you wish to keep your charts current with these tools.

 

Cheers

Mark

 

28 minutes ago, GHarrall said:

What does PFPX do that the free Simbrief doesn't do? 

Simbrief is outstanding. You can also send the route to Aivlasoft EFB meaning you only have one program running in conjunction with the sim. 

What about ProATC X? ASP4? They also need to be running alongside the sim.

 

As for the PFPX v Simbrief argument, I admit that I don't use PFPX to it's full potential, but off the top of my head, SimBrief doesn't interact with TOPCAT or Active Sky. Also, for long haul flights, PFPX seems to know more about NAT tracks and all that advanced type of stuff. I can't be 100 sure on this one, but as far as I know SimBrief doesn't work with NavDataPro, it only works with NaviGraph.

2 minutes ago, aldridgem said:

 

Hi Neal,

Understandable. Based on the capabilities you already have, adding EFB would not give you the greatest gain I would say.

 

As for complexity, I am one of those that does not have PFPX surprisingly.

My workflow is relatively simple for commercial flights and involves Simbrief (as mentioned by Glenn above) which gives me flight planning capability (although EFB allows manual flight planning task as well but I do not use it). This gives me the ability to import the flightplan directly into EFB and ASN. I usually have the enroute and the SID programmed as part of initial flight planning but then I determine the STAR/approach to be used while I am enroute using EFB based on real weather status shown in both EFB and ASN and the ability to view all current aerodrome charts.

 

Comments on EFB functionality:

Nice UI. I have very few issues with the airport charts being shown although there is a limitation of it not showing closed runways from a scenery design perspective.

It was also very straightforward to getting the networked mode working for the moving map.

The moving map on EFB is very nice and can be remotely displayed (I have mine showing on a separate Tablet PC without the need to have any additional remote CDU sw being run as EFB includes this functionality).

I also like EFB because it comes with a flightlog. This means for example you can track fuel consumption by waypoint and then I can compare this to the predicted values Simbrief gives you as part of the OFP that I annotate as the flight progresses. (Essentially  it simulates what happens in the real cockpit)

The Support forum gives great support!

I am also looking forward to v2 when that arrives.

What I miss: EFB does not currently display enroute tracks/airways. This would be nice to have on the moving map. Time is displayed synched to actual UTC time (not able to synch to flightsim time).

 

At the end of the day, this involves starting 3 programs and running simultaneously: ASN then FSX then EFB. Topcat I only use for planning purposes for take off and landing calcs initially but its closed the majority of the time.

Re ongoing maintenance/cost: As mentioned already, up-to-date AIRAC cycles can be purchased from the two providers mentioned which is the ongoing expense if you wish to keep your charts current with these tools.

 

Cheers

Mark

 

Very informative post, thanks Mark.

 

I've been watching a few videos on EFB since I made this thread. I see how the charts work. It seems like they are kind "generated" based on whatever input you give them? This would be more than good enough for me, and the fact that they aren't "real" charts doesn't matter to me. I'm feeling a bit more inclined to splash out on this.

3 hours ago, nealmac said:

It seems like a lot of applications running at the same time. It would be nice if they could all be integrated.

SIMstarter NG! A superb utility that makes things soooooooo much easier.

Remember with plans made from real navdata sets you have to be sure you have the scenery to match - you could be going to a runway or even an airport that does not exist in the sim since it came after the scenery was implemented. You have to fly a plane with a navigation system FMS or GPS that has the same navdata set - plans from un-matching datasets uploaded to FMS and GPS can crash them or the sim with mysterious CTDs. Since the sim does not have that same data to run from, the ATC and AI Traffic will not work properly giving in-sim ATC and AI traffic a bad name - in effect you need a third party ATC system.

 

I bought EFB a long time ago but dropped it because of stutter in the sim (FSX i think)

 

How are your performance ?

 

Thanks

Michael Moe

What amazes is me is that no one talks about realism. Everyone wants planes that are as real as possible but when it comes to this kind of software I wonder how realistic it is. Do real airline pilots have the kind of software we are talking about? Do they have charts with a moving plane on it and things like that? I often get the idea simmers want full realism on one side but don't mind throwing realism out of the window on the other side. 

17 minutes ago, J van E said:

What amazes is me is that no one talks about realism. Everyone wants planes that are as real as possible but when it comes to this kind of software I wonder how realistic it is. Do real airline pilots have the kind of software we are talking about? Do they have charts with a moving plane on it and things like that? I often get the idea simmers want full realism on one side but don't mind throwing realism out of the window on the other side. 

Take this little helper (i personally love too) as your copilot that you don't have at home.