PMDG 747-8 EFB Intersection Takeoff calculation

[guenseli 1,580]

The NavData would contain this information in general as TOPCAT also has information about intersections and could calculate them. 

But it is a good workaround to use the NOTAMs, thanks for the hint.

 

So, has the question been answered now, if PMDG plans to implement the intersection calculation?

[chapstick 2,757]

30 minutes ago, guenseli said:

The NavData would contain this information in general as TOPCAT also has information about intersections and could calculate them. 

But it is a good workaround to use the NOTAMs, thanks for the hint.

 

So, has the question been answered now, if PMDG plans to implement the intersection calculation?

Yes, here's your answer. Sounds like a no. 

On 1/17/2019 at 12:40 PM, Olympic260 said:

As far as I know there are no such information available on the navdata files.

As an alternative, you can use LittleNavMap (free) to measure the runway length from your desired intersection and put that in the NOTAM page mentioned.

Alex Pugh

 

[icaruss 18]

On 1/17/2019 at 12:44 PM, downscc said:

I cannot imagine a scenario where I'd want to decrease my runway length in a heavy (747/777).  If you are that light then you are not making money.  Pilot's three favorite things: Fuel in the tank, altitude below and runway ahead.  In reality, any such operation would most certainly be backed up with heaps of that expensive data operators keep on each airport.  It's not something that we can expect to see.

Intersection departures is very common for 121 operators on a variety of airports.

[berts 97]

On 1/17/2019 at 5:57 PM, MattS said:

Does anyone know where intersection distances can be viewed?  I can't seem to find anything on the charts. With that information, the shortening distances could then be manually entered. Then we could do the common KJFK "31L Shortened" takeoffs. 

Here are two absolutely useless things in aviation that are definitely worth remembering.  The first is excess fuel left behind in the bowser when you are airborne and wishing you'd taken it after all.  The second is the length of runway behind the aircraft at the start of the takeoff roll - and wishing you still had it during the subsequent max weight rejected takeoff close to V1. 

Aircraft like the B744 will normally always use the full length of a runway if it is available.  In the case of JFK it is therefore more common to use Taxyways J and/or Z and join 31L at the runway threshold.  Where there is WIP which reduces a runway's takeoff length, or there is a suitable intersection to use for a departure, then either a temporary or permanent performance table or chart will be provided in the aircraft's onboard documentation for that individual runway, so that the crew can use this alternative information to calculate the correct performance figures on the day.  It is not normal to rely solely on the lengths shown on airfield charts such as Jeppesen's for this sort of safety critical information, because using a shortened runway can have other safety implications for the aircraft's takeoff performance apart from the reduced length (whether it be to the TORA, TODU, reduced obstacle clearance heights during the initial climbout, etc).    

[Boeing or not going 578]

The intersection data is in Navigraph. The takeoff calculator Toper uses the PSS Navigraph installer for the takeoff database. - David Lee

[Copper. 78]

Hello Bertie, you’re right.

In the present day however, that is where the performance tool comes in. All of this safety critical data you mention now resides (or, should) within it, I fully understand what you’re saying though as some operators still use the paper charts, which like the performance tool, are usually well protected.

The data available in performance tool includes airport data (including intersections and lengths etc) and of course, the performance tool has enough functionality to account for any detractions or credit not already programmed into the performance tool relating to performance on the elected runway for the takeoff run and also into the segments - so that would include some things like contaminated runways, obstacles, field shortening or lengthening etc.

and like you advise, changes are made very clear to pilots. Either by new, custom charts (if they don’t already exist) or, specific instructions to pilots on how to make the adjustments in performance tool (for temporary/intermittent but recurring changes).

The existing 748 performance tool is missing a few key features but, simmers REALLY MUST appreciate the cost to acquire the relevant data! It is a tremendous amount of money normally and A LOT of intellectual property. That we can get derate and assumed temps is a significant step forward.

Edited January 20, 2019 by Copper.

[30K 72]

On 1/17/2019 at 7:18 PM, Olympic260 said:

I do not believe this are available on the "generic" charts at least Jeppesen. There might be "special" extra charts for each airliner which contain these info on specific airports as per airliner request.

LIDO provides this info on the AGC everywhere in the world, except some airports. That this Information is missing is very rare and only not present, when space does not allow it, and one does not want to clog it. Although most airports in the States don't have this Information given

Edited January 20, 2019 by 30K

[berts 97]

On 1/20/2019 at 10:07 AM, Copper. said:

The existing 748 performance tool is missing a few key features but, simmers REALLY MUST appreciate the cost to acquire the relevant data! It is a tremendous amount of money normally and A LOT of intellectual property. That we can get derate and assumed temps is a significant step forward.

You are quite right, Brian. 

Gone are the days (thank goodness) when pilots had to work out their own 'Performance A' calculations using tables and graphs and decode their own weather forecasts and actuals with the aid of Tephigrams and weather station symbols!  The EFB is a pleasure to use within the QOTSII -8 and P3Dv4.4 and it was probably as complicated to program as any other single addon aircraft available to the Flight Simming community.  Yes, I know it has its performance limitations at the moment and I can live with them, but I can't wait to see what else PMDG and others have waiting in the wings for us to try with our 64 Bit software in the future. 

[CargoluxPilot748 0]

Thanks for your answers guys! Is there a Topcat file for the PMDG 747-8f and i? I already got Topcat and would like to use it for intersection Takeoffs, if theres a file for it.

Cheers Dennis

[downscc 1,327]

15 minutes ago, Dennis Etienne Ratzel said:

Thanks for your answers guys! Is there a Topcat file for the PMDG 747-8f and i? I already got Topcat and would like to use it for intersection Takeoffs, if theres a file for it.

Cheers Dennis

Nope... cannot use TOPCAT for B748.  You can use the EFB as mentioned above.

[CargoluxPilot748 0]

I know, but Intersection Takeoff is not possible yet. Hm bad. Is it possible to create a 748 profile by my own?

[CargoluxPilot748 0]

I think I finally found a way to calculate the Intersection takeoffs in the 748 on every airport! 🙂

[downscc 1,327]

31 minutes ago, Dennis Etienne Ratzel said:

I think I finally found a way to calculate the Intersection takeoffs in the 748 on every airport! 🙂

Using NOTAMS to shorten head end of runway, or did you find something not already discussed here??

[Copper. 78]

On 1/23/2019 at 6:36 AM, Dennis Etienne Ratzel said:

I think I finally found a way to calculate the Intersection takeoffs in the 748 on every airport! 🙂

I haven’t used the EFB very much, but unless you can edit obstacle data and meet gradient requirements etc I wonder if your results are accurate (enough) to use?

[downscc 1,327]

7 hours ago, Copper. said:

I haven’t used the EFB very much, but unless you can edit obstacle data and meet gradient requirements etc I wonder if your results are accurate (enough) to use?

That is exactly what the NOTAM sheet for each runway allows you to do.

For example, I found that the Aerosoft PANC airport scenery has an incorrect value in their AF file for 33 TORA and this was making departures just a little too exciting for my taste.  I went to the FAA NFDC web page and pulled up the data and made the adjustment to the PANC 33 NOTAM.  Turns out the scenery is okay, just the underlying AF file with the scenery was wrong.

You can also add obstacles and the EFB will use those in the takeoff calculations.

Edited January 25, 2019 by downscc