17 hours ago, J van E said:

I know they are assigned automatically, which is why I asked if you have to create them like you have to do in PF3

Sorry, I misunderstood.

No, you supply AIRAC information, as with ProATC/X -- Navigraph or (I think) the Aerosoft variety. It gets all your installed airport data from MakeRunways generated files.

Pete

 

21 hours ago, Shomron said:

.

Regarding PF3 - is there a way for a simple set up (only putting the route w/o SID/STARs, transitions altitudes etc...) like done in Radar contact and Pro ATC? This is the main draw back I see. I want the flexibility to request SIDs/STARs within the flight...

.

The way PF3 works is when you set the flight, which usually takes me about 5 minutes including looking at charts and getting flight plan from Simbrief, you select whether or not you want a sid or a star in your flight. If you select no to  both, you are vectored after takeoff, and vectored for landing. If you select a sid, after takeoff you fly the sid you want, and at the end of the sid which is usually the first waypoint in the flight plan, you are back under PF3 control. If you say you want to fly a star, you select the start of the star, and when you get there PF3 clears you to fly the star up to the final approach to the runway where you contact the tower for landing. PF3 does not micromanage either your sid or star, other than giving you a sensible altitude profile and having you adjust your speeds on approach. I love the altitude instructions with PF3 because they are always different. Some ATC programs, you know when an altitude change will be given to you and the exact altitude you will get. With PF3 it is always different, which is much more like real life. If you think you might want to fly a star, but not sure, select the star option when setting up the flight, and when you get to that point, you can just ask PF3 for vectors to arrival airport if you don't want to fly a star. 

Incidentally, I always read how difficult some claim in setting up a flight in PF3. My average for setting up a flight including the flight plan from Simbrief, and setting up PF3 with Sids and Stars averages around 5-8 minutes. I spend more time than that making a flightplan in real life VFR  flying  for a C 172. I use Avliasoft EFB2 for the moving map, charts, Sids, Stars, frequencies.  and everything else. EFB even shows you exactly what the sid and star will look like, and your aircraft will track right over the map of the sid and star as you fly including altitude restrictions and speeds if applicable. Been simming since 1986, and PF3 and EFB is like a dream come true. You can even select different stars in EFB while flying towards the approach, and select the one that looks the best in seconds. No more spaghetti approaches into mountains like I use to get with PATC. The most demanding ATC in my opinion is flying into mountainous areas like LOWI, or some of the Airports in Norway, and between PF3 and EFB, every approach I have made into those areas, has been perfect. When I used PATC, I used to avoid those areas completely. 

Edited October 5, 20187 yr by Bobsk8

39 minutes ago, Bobsk8 said:

 

You can even select different stars in EFB while flying towards the approach, and select the one that looks the best in seconds. No more spaghetti approaches into mountains like I use to get with PATC. The most demanding ATC in my opinion is flying into mountainous areas like LOWI, or some of the Airports in Norway, and between PF3 and EFB, every approach I have made into those areas, has been perfect. When I used PATC, I used to avoid those areas completely. 

And since when is PF3 terrain aware? Its hard to believe that PF3 provides a "perfect" approach into challenging, mountainous areas without terrain awareness (which isn't possible without NAVDATA support or any other map data source). 

I have both btw, ProATCX and PF3

Edited October 5, 20187 yr by Woozie

It doesn't have to be internally terrain aware if it uses STARs, since the people making the STARs are terrain aware.

 

1 hour ago, Woozie said:

And since when is PF3 terrain aware? Its hard to believe that PF3 provides a "perfect" approach into challenging, mountainous areas without terrain awareness (which isn't possible without NAVDATA support or any other map data source). 

I have both btw, ProATCX and PF3

If you are flying a sid or star, you don't need terrain awareness. It is built into the sid-star. Terrain clearance is also found from charts, which is why I use EFB. Up to the pilot to figure out where the ground is, not ATC. 

 

Edited October 5, 20187 yr by Bobsk8

15 minutes ago, eslader said:

It doesn't have to be internally terrain aware if it uses STARs, since the people making the STARs are terrain aware.

 

I'm perfectly aware of this, but PF3 doesnt have any NAVDATA support, which means it doesnt know anything about the SID or STAR you fly. You cant even add any ALT restrictions if you follow the officially suggested "best practice" of only including the first way point of a STAR in your FPL. 

12 minutes ago, Bobsk8 said:

If you are flying a sid or star, you don't need terrain awareness. It is built into the sid-star. Terrain clearance is also found from charts, which is why I use EFB. Up to the pilot to figure out where the ground is, not ATC. 

 

Yeah but at some point PF3 will tell me to descent down to FAF altitude, without bothering about any ALT restrictions before that waypoint. I dont get how this should be realistic at all. I know that i'm the armchair captain and its up to me to bring that bird safely down to the ground, but real world ATC wouldnt guide you into a mountain

1 hour ago, Woozie said:

I'm perfectly aware of this, but PF3 doesnt have any NAVDATA support, which means it doesnt know anything about the SID or STAR you fly. You cant even add any ALT restrictions if you follow the officially suggested "best practice" of only including the first way point of a STAR in your FPL. 

Yeah but at some point PF3 will tell me to descent down to FAF altitude, without bothering about any ALT restrictions before that waypoint. I dont get how this should be realistic at all. I know that i'm the armchair captain and its up to me to bring that bird safely down to the ground, but real world ATC wouldnt guide you into a mountain

Obviously you don't know much about PF3 and how it works. First of all Navadata doesn't include terrain clearance. Sids and Stars derived from Navdata do. So if you fly an approach   using a Star for instance, maintaining terrain clearance is up to you, not ATC, The terrain clearance is programmed into the Star,  If you are flying a Star, which is derived from Navdata, you are the PIC and it is up to you to follow the star, headings, altitudes, and speeds. If you don't, and fly into a mountain, that is your fault period. Now if you are doing an approach not using a Star  it is your responsibility to look at a chart, figure out where you are, figure out where the mountains and clouds full of rocks are , and safely fly the approach avoiding problems, The only way to do this is to look at charts, period,Other than a crystal ball, that is the only way to safely conduct a flight and it is what pilots do every day. 

 

As far as real world ATC, they expect the pilot to be looking at the charts and have some idea where they are, and avoid terrain. The ATC person is not responsible for the safe conduction of the flight, the PIC is. 

Edited October 5, 20187 yr by Bobsk8

6 minutes ago, Bobsk8 said:

Obviously you don't know much about PF3 and how it works. First of all Navadata doesn't include terrain clearance. Sids and Stars derived from Navdata do. So if you fly an approach   using a Star for instance, maintaining terrain clearance is up to you, not ATC, The terrain clearance is programmed into the Star,  If you are flying a Star, which is derived from Navdata, you are the PIC and it is up to you to follow the star, headings, altitudes, and speeds. If you don't, and fly into a mountain, that is your fault period. Now if you are doing an approach not using a Star  it is your responsibility to look at a chart, figure out where you are, figure out where the mountains and clouds full of rocks are , and safely fly the approach avoiding problems, The only way to do this is to look at charts, period,Other than a crystal ball, that is the only way to safely conduct a flight and it is what pilots do every day. 

I'm using PF3 since more than a year, i guess gained enough knowledge to understand how PF3 works.

But I believe you are completely missing my point. A couple of posts above you claim that PF3 provides you a perfect approach in mountainous, challenging areas, while ProATC-X fails in this regard:

3 hours ago, Bobsk8 said:

The most demanding ATC in my opinion is flying into mountainous areas like LOWI, or some of the Airports in Norway, and between PF3 and EFB, every approach I have made into those areas, has been perfect. When I used PATC, I used to avoid those areas completely. 

My point is that PF3 doesnt even remotely care how you fly the STAR, it gives you clearance for the STAR you defined in PF3 (which is simply the STAR name and the FAF altitude), provides a few descend instructions (while ignoring any terrain) and once you get close to the FAF (based on the FAF distance you set manually in PF3) it gives final approach clearance and thats it.

So yeah, its not surprising it provides a "perfect" approach as PF3 gives a flying F what you are doing between STAR entry and FAF. Its basically the same as default P3D ATC in this regard

Now compare this to real world ATC ops....they would never clear you for an altitude thats below the current ALT restriction of a STAR

 

 

1 minute ago, Woozie said:

I'm using PF3 since more than a year, i guess gained enough knowledge to understand how PF3 works.

But I believe you are completely missing my point. A couple of posts above you claim that PF3 provides you a perfect approach in mountainous, challenging areas, while ProATC-X fails in this regard:

My point is that PF3 doesnt even remotely care how you fly the STAR, it gives you clearance for the STAR you defined in PF3 (which is simply the STAR name and the FAF altitude), provides a few descend instructions (while ignoring any terrain) and once you get close to the FAF (based on the FAF distance you set manually in PF3) it gives final approach clearance and thats it.

So yeah, its not surprising it provides a "perfect" approach as PF3 gives a flying F what you are doing between STAR entry and FAF. Its basically the same as default P3D ATC in this regard

Now compare this to real world ATC ops....they would never clear you for an altitude thats below the current ALT restriction of a STAR

 

 

And if you are a real pilot, and bust the star approach that ATC gives you by not follwing it because you are too lazy to study the approach charts, , that is on you. As long as you fly the approach properly according to the chart you are supposed to be looking at and following closely. ATC is not going to baby sit everything you do. Once ATC clears you for the approach,  instead of properly following the star they gave you, and you fly yourself and your passengers into the side of a mountain because of your poor skills as a pilot, you are most likely going to have a really bad day. 

4 minutes ago, Bobsk8 said:

And if you are a real pilot, and bust the star approach that ATC gives you by not follwing it because you are too lazy to study the approach charts, , that is on you. As long as you fly the approach properly according to the chart you are supposed to be looking at and following closely. ATC is not going to baby sit everything you do. Once ATC clears you for the approach,  instead of properly following the star they gave you, and you fly yourself and your passengers into the side of a mountain because of your poor skills as a pilot, you are most likely going to have a really bad day. 

I fully agree, and if ATC clears me to an altitude of 5000 even though there is a 7000 feet mountain between me and the FAF, the controller on duty is going to have a bad day too, and thats exactly what PF3 does 😉

1 minute ago, Woozie said:

I fully agree, and if ATC clears me to an altitude of 5000 even though there is a 7000 feet mountain between me and the FAF, the controller on duty is going to have a bad day too, and thats exactly what PF3 does 😉

If you are on a Star, they will clear you to fly the star, and the altitudes will be in the Star star you are flying. If the controller clears you to 5,000 feet and there is a 7,000 foot mountain directly in front of you and you don't know where you are because you didn't follow the charts, , the bad is going to be yours. 

Went and purchased me PF3.

Question - I understand I must define a STAR when initiating the flight plan.

How can I change a STAR dynamically when in flight (in case the weather requires the reciprocal runway for example)? I am set with a plan which I've defined which is taking me to the wrong direction. Will PF3 in this case take me to the end of the incorrect STAR and then when reaching the final STAR way-point vector me all around to the opposite direction?

In case the answer is Yes is the only workaround for this is to request vectors in advance before the STAR takes me to the wrong direction?

 

does pf3 have a performance hit

jim

15 minutes ago, jimimac said:

does pf3 have a performance hit

jim

I am on an IFR flight in Alaska right now. Task manager shows CPU % at 0.4%

20 minutes ago, Shomron said:

Went and purchased me PF3.

Question - I understand I must define a STAR when initiating the flight plan.

How can I change a STAR dynamically when in flight (in case the weather requires the reciprocal runway for example)? I am set with a plan which I've defined which is taking me to the wrong direction. Will PF3 in this case take me to the end of the incorrect STAR and then when reaching the final STAR way-point vector me all around to the opposite direction?

In case the answer is Yes is the only workaround for this is to request vectors in advance before the STAR takes me to the wrong direction?

 

You cant change SID/STAR dynamically once you started your flight. 

It largely depends on how you set your flight plan in PF3. Best practice for PF3 is to exclude any SID/STAR waypoints apart from the SID exit and the STAR entry. If the same STAR applies to all landing RWYs you simply change it in your FMC and follow the respective STAR waypoints as PF3 doesnt "know" the STAR routing anyways. If the aiport has different STARs for every runway you would have to request vectors to FAF or improvise by changing the STAR in FMC after you passed the "wrong" entry waypoint (if you change your course before passing this waypoint, PF3 will nag you with course corrections to guide you back to the, now wrong, STAR entry)

If you included all STAR waypoints in your flightplan, PF3 will vector you to the FAF (set by the FAF distance value in PF3 options) of the active runway once you passed the last waypoint of the STAR if you didn't request vectors manually during approach. 

Edited October 5, 20187 yr by Woozie