Flight planning with no tool

[Guest]

I think your main problem is the Carenado plane. They often are quite basic and simplistic and lack a lot of options. That FMS system probably is useless for serious simming. I think you picked a very wrong plane to learn planning and flying IFR... 

[Gaz 14]

13 minutes ago, J van E said:

. I think you picked a very wrong plane to learn planning and flying IFR...

What would you recommend? I'm perfectly happy to sign up to Navigraph, BTW. Other than flying using IFR, I've been training myself on that aircraft for a while and I quite like it. 

[FalconAF 178]

Gary,

You're getting way confused, and it's easy to do until you understand the overall issues.

There are 3 "problem areas" you can run into when flying with FSX/P3D when it comes to "navigation".

1.  The flight sim itself has a database of navigation "stuff" in it.  It is circa 2006 and will be WAY, WAY out of date for a lot of real-world flight simming.  You can update that database (if you want to) using the free download links in one of the posts above.

2.  There are payware products that you can use like Navigraph to get monthly updated navigation data for flight PLANNING, but Navigraph does NOT update the core flight sim navigation data.  All it does is provide you with fresh monthly "real world" updated navigation data that you can use with flight planning software AND SOME addons that will ALSO use that monthly updated navigation data.  Examples are things like the PMDG aircraft, weather programs like Active Sky, flight planners like Little Nav Map (freeware) or Flight Sim Commander (payware).  Note that the freeware online flight planner SimBrief will ALSO use the most current Navigraph monthly navigation data updates IF you have a paid subscription to Navigraph (you can update YOUR free SimBrief account every month using YOUR Navigraph navigation update). But ALSO note that the default flight sim's flight planner is basically useless for planning up-to-date flight plans...especially IFR ones.  It just won't use things like SIDs and STARs unless you MANUALLY enter each and every one of the waypoints into the flight plan.  And that is a royal pain in the *ss, and is NOT necessary with today's flight sims and addons available to create and use flight plans.

3.  Now here is the part that I think is really got you confused.  How well all of the above works for any particular AIRPLANE during IFR flying strictly depends on how well the AIRPLANE was designed to UTILIZE all the navigation data.  The default GPS's in most of the default FSX/P3D aircraft won't even use SID/STAR data.  And even if they did, the default ATC in P3D doesn't recognize SIDs and STARs anyhow, so they will ignore any SIDs and STARs in your flight plan and instead vector you all over the darn place that have nothing to do with you departures or arrivals to the airports in the flight plan.  You need a QUALITY GPS or FMC "installed" in the airplane to use most "real world" navigation data.  Sad to say, most Carenado aircraft don't have that high a quality GPS or FMS in the airplane.  You could add a third-party one like from Flight1 software if you wanted to (maybe), but the default Carenado one you are using is probably going to hinder your IFR learning in the long run.

If you want to use real world navigation data, you need to have access to it.  That requires something like the payware Navigraph subscription to keep the data updated monthly.  It MIGHT require that you do the freeware core simulator updates from the 3 links given in a previous post.  That will update the sim's CORE navigation data from the default-ish 2006 data. Whether or not you NEED to do that really depends on where you fly and the type of flying you do.  But it's a freebie to do it, so the real answer is "Why not just do it?"  So go ahead and do it if you want to.  And if you want the ATC you use to work "right" when flying with all this updated data, you will also need to quit using the default ATC...they just don't care about SIDs and STARs and some other stuff, and the way the default ATC vectors you would make a real world pilot wanna beat their heads against a wall (trust me...I've been a real world pilot since 1972 and would assassinate the default P3D ATC if I could).  😁

And sad to say, even if you DO all of the above, there will STILL be times when you will encounter "navigation issues" in the sim.  For instance, if a developer made an airport a few years ago and sold it, then the real world navigation data for that airport changed and you updated it with like Navigraph, the runway numbers shown in the scenery may not be the same anymore with the runway numbers in the new navigation data you use.  Or the ILS frequencies could change the same way.  That won't prevent you from creating a flight plan using the new updated data and using it, but it could cause your flight plan to say you are using runway 26R while your airport scenery still displays 25R on the runways in the scenery.  And if the scenery airport's ILS frequencies changed, you would have to know which ones to use now for your autopilot to correctly fly the approach and landing for you.  The only way to "fix" something like that is the airport developer needs to update the airport, or "you yourself" need to use something like Airport Design Editor to update the AIRPORT file itself.

Note:  Everything above is described at the "newbie" level, so please don't anybody start nit-picking it to death.  Expand on it, or clarify it if you feel it is needed, but don't beat it to death from a PhD level.  😂  I'm using the "Common Core of Experience" teaching requirement in trying to teach it to him.  And for all practical purposes, he is at the "newbie" level right now concerning the subject.  Thanks. (Gary, that's not a "slam" against you in any way). 

Edited July 23, 2018 by FalconAF

[Gaz 14]

1 hour ago, FalconAF said:

Note:  Everything above is described at the "newbie" level, so please don't anybody start nit-picking it to death.  Expand on it, or clarify it if you feel it is needed, but don't beat it to death from a PhD level.  😂  I'm using the "Common Core of Experience" teaching requirement in trying to teach it to him.  And for all practical purposes, he is at the "newbie" level right now concerning the subject.  Thanks. (Gary, that's not a "slam" against you in any way). 

Thanks for that. I have a lot of time to look into this stuff nowadays, and decades ago, I was seriously into this stuff, so while I do class myself as a newbie, the first thing I'm trying to do at the moment is simply get back on track. Given what people have said in this post, I have :

1. Loaded those 3 sets of data into my system, as you said I should
2. Began a membership of Navigraph since it can update my aircraft, and I have done so
3. Learned a lot about the fact that atc is not too good in P3D - you mentioned SIDs and STARs a couple of times, and I know that the ATC doesn't cover that in P3D, but I would rather have ATC than SIDs & STARs, since it will guide you to the final approach (I get your point, I wish there was an ATC add-on that supported AI aircraft and SIDs & STARs), but I'm not aware of one. 

Given all this good advice on this post, it has taken me a long way to get this going, and I hope I don't look as though its something I'm not going to get a bit more than a newbie. I guess what I'm trying to say is that what you have said is what others have taught me in this thread already, although I appreciate you adding to it. 

 

FalconAF ; does that change /help with all I was asking for in this post? BTW, if there are places where newbies should go, and not here, please direct me. 

 

Gaz

[FalconAF 178]

On ‎7‎/‎23‎/‎2018 at 6:39 PM, Gary McCluskey said:

Learned a lot about the fact that atc is not too good in P3D - you mentioned SIDs and STARs a couple of times, and I know that the ATC doesn't cover that in P3D, but I would rather have ATC than SIDs & STARs, since it will guide you to the final approach (I get your point, I wish there was an ATC add-on that supported AI aircraft and SIDs & STARs), but I'm not aware of one. 

The way the default ATC guides you to the final approach is absurd, EVEN WHEN you AREN'T using SIDs and STARS, like when you are using the Carenado general aviation airplane between smaller airports without SIDs and STARs.  They will take you 30+ miles out of the way in most cases.  It has little resemblance to the way the real world ATC vectors pilots to runways.  Plus, they don't take into account terrain, etc, which means they will vector you into a mountain if you let them.  SOME third-party ATC programs make provisions for this, but the way they do (due to limitations in the core flight simulator) might mean YOU...the Pilot In Command...will HAVE to know how to fly the flight plan yourself using things like "the airways" or SIDs and STARs if included in the flight plan.  Example:  Radar Contact allows you to file a NOTAM with your flight plan, which will "force" the ATC to allow you to navigate using the FLIGHT PLAN's data during departures (SIDs) and approaches (STARS) so the ATC won't "accidentally" give you too low an altitude requirement and/or fly you into hilly terrain near the airports.

As for your "is this a good place for newbies to go...", of course it is.  But just like any other place, when someone asks a question about something, they become a "student".  And when someone else answers the question, they become the "teacher" or "instructor".  Good teachers and instructors have been taught about "Barriers to Communication" and other teaching concepts.  You always teach "from the Known to the Unknown" (starting at the level of the student's CURRENT knowledge), using a "Common Core of Experience" approach.  A PhD level "teacher" has to talk to a "newbie" level student at the NEWBIE's level of knowledge to begin with, or the student just gets lost and confused.  A flight instructor would never try to teach a new student pilot how to fly an IFR approach UNTIL that student pilot had mastered everything about flying VFR first, understanding the navigation systems used (airways, VOR's NDB's, ILS's, etc).  The same way a PhD professor would never try to teach a first year Physics student the mathematics of a PhD level Physics degree until the student had mastered basic Algebra, Calculus, etc.  You start from what the student already knows ("teach from the Known") then teach...in an order that can make sense to the student...what the student doesn't know ("...to the Unknown").

So by all means ask any questions you may have here.  But any answers that try to take you directly to the Unknown while just ASSUMING you already know something won't help you much.  THAT is why...based on your original statement saying (something like), "I wouldn't even recognize an airway..." I even replied to this thread.  Many of the answers seemed "too advanced" for you to begin with. Again, that's not a "slam" against you.  It's just the difference in already known information vs what would make sense to try to "teach" you in answering the question(s) you asked.

Edited July 25, 2018 by FalconAF

[Gaz 14]

13 hours ago, FalconAF said:

when someone asks a question about something, they become a "student".  And when someone else answers the question, they become the "teacher" or "instructor"

I understand that, and I want to say that I appreciate you getting back to me and helping - i.e. teaching me.  I do need that, and I'm pleased that people like yourself are around to look into these forums and reply to the likes of me asking for help - honest! 🙂

13 hours ago, FalconAF said:

Radar Contact 

I have to admit that I have never heard of this software. I know of ProATC (and it has a shortcoming that really gets to me).  In a way, because of this entire subject of ATC, I think I'm not like others who are seriously into Flight Sim. I guess for me, I want to receive instructions, and I'm not that good at flying (though I try), whereas others have the planning and flights as the primary importance (and they're no doubt better at flying than me!) - wouldn't you agree?

Gaz

[FalconAF 178]

Even the most qualified real world pilots will still be faced...and have to deal with...the limitations of our "home computer" flight sims.  I still use Radar Contact as my ATC program because there is not a replacement (yet) that will be "perfect" or even necessarily "better".  EVERY ATC program has it's own shortcomings.  It's the same for AI addons.  AI aircraft act incredibly stupid in our flight sims, regardless of who makes them or installs them.  It's just a limitation of the flight sims.  Regardless of how "real" you may want them to act, AI and ATC just aren't there yet, and you will have to make "simming compromises" while using them. 

And whatever flight planning software you choose to use will have it's own limitations too.  None of THEM are error-free either.  Different people will sing the praises of the ones they like to use.  That's cool, but it may not be what works for you.

Find the one(s) that work for you and how you want to fly in the sim.  Don't expect perfection...or in many cases...anything even CLOSE to it.  It just isn't gonna happen. 

[skelsey 763]

Hi Gary,

I've been watching this thread with interest but haven't had a chance to properly jump in yet (and still typing this on my phone rather than my desktop so please excuse any typos!).

Regarding the question of whether pilots get involved in flight planning in real life - the answer is that it depends very much upon the context. 

An airline pilot will generally pick up a pre-prepared briefing package including a flight plan that is effectively ready to go (though the Captain is still responsible for ensuring the route planned by the Ops department is suitable and so a certain amount of pre-flight time will be dedicated to reviewing the plan and checking for any glaring errors!). For an airline it makes sense to have the people being paid to fly aeroplanes spending most of their time flying aeroplanes rather than spending hours sat in an office wrestling with the finer details of flight planning! 

However, in much of the rest of the aviation world pilots are very much hands on with flight planning as in most of the general aviation sector, from pleasure flying up to air taxi and corporate aviation it is unlikely there will be a full operations department on hand to deal with that stuff. I know a chap who flies corporate jets -- they do pretty much all their own planning and admin as the flight department is essentially just them! The difference between a company who's business is flying aeroplanes (ie an airline) and a company who's main business is elsewhere that just happens to own some aeroplanes for the purpose of getting from A to B...

As Rick says, there is a distinction between the process of planning a flight and the process of executing that plan. The latter may be made easier by some form of FMS or other on-board integrated navigation equipment, and increasingly in today's airspace structure such devices are fast becoming almost, if not in fact, mandatory for flight in many segments of airspace and route segments, but in principle in many cases just basic instruments and radio navigation equipment would be sufficient to navigate the planned route.

The planning process can be achieved by hand without any sophisticated software quite easily with a little practice but an underlying understanding of the way airspace is structured and what "IFR" actually is and entails is necessary. There are also various websites and pieces of software, many of which have been mentioned in this thread, which can automate large chunks of the route-finding and 'plog' creation process but in order to get the most out of these tools an understanding of the underlying principles is necessary (as they often, as any computer, chuck out garbage results left to their own devices!).

Flying and navigating the route which has been planned then becomes a question of understanding how the aircraft equipment is operated (refer to the aircraft flying manuals) and of basic pilot navigation principles and techniques applicable to all aircraft. 

I will endeavour to provide some more advice and useful links soon once I am back in front of a proper keyboard again! 

[Gaz 14]

On 7/25/2018 at 10:32 PM, FalconAF said:

 

 

On 7/25/2018 at 11:42 PM, skelsey said:

 

Thanks to both of you - in fact, I wish I was nearby for some person - to - person training from people like you!

I'll continue with my training and see what I can do. Currently, I'm working with the new Airbus a320 Professional series from Aerosoft, and I think I'm doing well on it. 

Thanks again, Gaz