Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
ryanbatc

How is ProFlight 2000?

Recommended Posts

>>Already configurable within the ProFlight CFG file... but>change it at you own risk ;-)>Can anyone pls name the configurable CFG correctly? Could not find anything relevant in PF2000.cfg.Thanks. :)(Here ?)DescentBias=2.0WaypointBuffer=10DeptBuffer=10DestBuffer=15

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No problem Dave, and as I said, the support has been excellent. :)I just wanted to post my findings so far, which of course can be found by reading the forums and reading the manual. The program is of course very good and I don't mind using the 2 interfaces to load the plan. I didn't know you only had the program and not the source code to build on. As I said, not a big deal to me, but some would possibly make an issue of it.As far as the other issues, I'm glad you guys are looking into expanding the callsign database and AI interaction. These are really the only two things I can find most users having a problem with.I really like the program and don't want to appear otherwise. I obviously haven't flown near as many flights to explore all options, but RC4 has given me awful vectors to final as well, so these things happen I guess. Heck, even MS ATC will give bad vectors, and sometimes it's reproduced into the same airport each time. KFLG is one such airfield that MS always messes up the final for, at least in my case.I haven't looked into editing the .CFG (didn't know I could) to adjust my plan, but maybe I should give it a try to see what happens. I'll ask more on the PFE forum about this.Thanks again for the wonderful support.


- Chris

Gigabyte Z790 Aorus Elite AX | Intel Core i9 13900KF | Gigabyte GeForce RTX 4090 24 GB | 64GB DDR5 SDRAM | Corsair H100i Elite 240mm Liquid Cooling | 1TB & 2TB Samsung Gen 4 SSD  | 1000 Watt Gold PSU |  Windows 11 Pro | Thrustmaster Boeing Yoke | Thrustmaster TCA Captain X Airbus | Asus ROG 38" 4k IPS Monitor (PG38UQ)

Asus Maximus VII Hero motherboard | Intel i7 4790k CPU | MSI GTX 970 4 GB video card | Corsair DDR3 2133 32GB SDRAM | Corsair H50 water cooler | Samsung 850 EVO 250GB SSD (2) | EVGA 1000 watt PSU - Retired

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>Thanks for this great review. Now I know what to do. ;)>>OT:>>>I like this because it requires>>absolutely no interaction from you at all, from cruise to>>touchdown, you only listen. Obviously, if you want to>>interact and pick new runways or whatever, you can do this>by>>choosing from the keyboard numbers. Otherwise, the co-pilot>>does all the talking and comms for you.>>Makes me wonder why you fly at all...! What's the fun of just>looking at the screen and doing nothing at all? I know this is>an option and you can do EVERYTHING yourself, but I just>wondered what the fun of FS is when you let the computer do>all the work...I'd like to address this. If you're flying with a co-pilot and you're the PF, then the co-pilot is probably going to handle all the comms for you in the real world, so why not here? This is something RC4 even does and is prefered by lots of people. If you're flying a 737 or similar aircraft, take-off and climb can be demanding enough to have to hit keys on the keyboard for every instruction you receive. With PFE and RC4 you are obviously gonna hear what your instructions are, so I'm not sure why simulating a co-pilot is bad.Also, you can handle the comms any way you like. If you don't what any co-pilot control, you can turn that off and handle all of it yourself, including having to tune the frequency on the radio before being able to talk. You don't have any text to read either. Similar to how RC4 works, only without the number options showing, you don't read anything on the screen. PFE will display your frequency you might need to pick for clearance or whatever, but that's it. You run the whole flight without any window in the way.


- Chris

Gigabyte Z790 Aorus Elite AX | Intel Core i9 13900KF | Gigabyte GeForce RTX 4090 24 GB | 64GB DDR5 SDRAM | Corsair H100i Elite 240mm Liquid Cooling | 1TB & 2TB Samsung Gen 4 SSD  | 1000 Watt Gold PSU |  Windows 11 Pro | Thrustmaster Boeing Yoke | Thrustmaster TCA Captain X Airbus | Asus ROG 38" 4k IPS Monitor (PG38UQ)

Asus Maximus VII Hero motherboard | Intel i7 4790k CPU | MSI GTX 970 4 GB video card | Corsair DDR3 2133 32GB SDRAM | Corsair H50 water cooler | Samsung 850 EVO 250GB SSD (2) | EVGA 1000 watt PSU - Retired

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Airtime

>as of today, you can now download 680mb of radar contact.>>this may look reactive to PFE being released, but has been in>the works for months. people who have purchased the cd have>had private emails giving them the link to download it, and>they have.>>jdI was ready to purchase RC4 when it first came out, and would have been first in line, but you did not offer a download. I was disappointed, but now I have a choice... hooray! Bottom line is you may have lost a sale by waiting so long.AT

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Made a flight from KLWB to KBTR. I was brought into KBTR at 5,000' well less than 10 miles out for a final ILS approach, much too high and close and had to execute a missed approach. As someone else said, this type of situation is not uncommon for MSFS ATC as well.No biggy and certainly can be worked around.Happy flying:RTHSORRY! This was in PFE, so ignore this reply. Need to learn to read I guess.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>Made a flight from KLWB to KBTR. I was brought into KBTR at>5,000' well less than 10 miles out for a final ILS approach,>much too high and close and had to execute a missed approach.>As someone else said, this type of situation is not uncommon>for MSFS ATC as well.>>No biggy and certainly can be worked around.>>Happy flying:>RTH>>SORRY! This was in PFE, so ignore this reply. Need to learn to>read I guess.I used to think that high approaches were a fault of ATC as well,but i am having second thoughts.Recently i have been experimenting with faster descent speeds 2500ft per min sometimes even a little higher and also making much more use of the air brakes as well to reduce speed as i approach the various altitude transitions ie 240 180 120 below 10 etc(obviously below 250kts at crossing ten thousand)and i am having a much better success rate at approaching the runway at the right altitude and also(not every time yet but i will keep on experimenting with different descent speeds)avoiding AI jumping me on approach.So maybe ATC isn't always to blame,maybe its how we are descending.cheers Andy


photo-141290.gif?_r=1341161573?t=54318216?t=43542077

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

100% Correct Dave!I didn't mean to imply that there was anything wrong with PFE.Again, thanks to you and Garard for the GC2 tutorial. RTH

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest mikealpha

After half a dozen flights with PFE and around a year RC4 also some remarks :1. Voice quality : Yes, the accents are quite nice in PFE. But the overall voice quality is not SOOO much better than RC4. There are some quite weird sounding voices in PFE and if one deactivates strange sounding voices (matter if taste !!) in RC4 , I find the difference not so big.2. Ground handling : MUCH better in RC4, from extended clearance ('ready to copy clearance') via pushback/startup request to AI interaction (e.g. "follow COMPANY_X Airplane") and to correct European phraseology ("taxi to the holding point RWY XX, line up and wait, etc.). In PFE one justs gets a 'taxi to the runway' and a generic lineup instruction and that's it.ATIS is integrated in RC4, while in PFE you just hear some guys on the ground asking for the altimeter setting.Very good AI interaction/seperation regarding runway overruns : Haven't seen it in both programs.3. Phraseology : Again much better in RC, down to almost correct European phrases. Not quite there, some more in this direction was promised for RC5. But PFE has just some free interpretation of phraseology build in for the entire world. And instructions to enter the runway or headings are not readback, which is pretty depressing.4. Climb/Cruise/Descend : Nice step Climb/Descend for both. Less useless frequency changes in PFE, very good, even if the sectors are not quite correct. RC4 is a bit more flexible regarding deviations, one can e.g. request a DIRECT to one of the following flight plan waypoints.Has been mentioned already, very nice SID/STAR feature of PFE, although it requires editing of the Airport vs SID/STAR relation before each flight. RC4 also has SID/STAR handling, but does not name them. But it is easier to start, just select flight plan and callsign and off you go.5. Approach/Vectors. Next to bullet proof in RC4, I never got any weird or wrong vectors. In PFE, I got correct vectors two times, weird vectors two times and completely useless stuff also two times (almost at the LOC intercept, then being send by 100 degrees in wrong direction). The developers say it is flight plan dependent, but maybe should better specify details for what exactly I have to look for.And if I use e.g. VATSIM conform flight plans, why shall I take care of that at all ?? Except terrain avoidance, I perfectly understand flight plans should be checked regarding this, but that stands for both programs.6. AI Interaction in the air : Yes, RC4 has it, but I do never use that. An example during cruise : With the limited voices one gets a guy in an Air France plane flying southbound, and 20 mins later the same guy in an Iberia plane also flying southbound. Not really that amusing.However, for me RC4 remains the most professional ATC for me. MS ATC is completely useless. And PFE for me stands somewhere between this two with certainly much more entertainment value than MS ATC. With more usage from my side and support from the Dev. side maybe it gets closer, remains to be seen. But I understand, the PF core can't be changed anyway ? I think, there really should be a detailed 'flight plan setup guideline' to get correct vectors more reliably.And finally one RC remark. The developer might have their reason for that, but the ultralong development cycle (2.5-3 years ??) for the next version is a pity for users. Would be great to get an intermediate 4.5 version with some new 'features from the wishlist'. Or another example : Since there are no callsigns of Russian Airlines in RC4 except Aeroflot, I have send them a list 1 year ago. If RC5 maybe gets released next year, it will be outdated by 2 years already.Anyway, it's good to have both programs, just for a change here and there :)Mike

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest mikealpha

Dave,Flightplan was LSGG BALSI UN852 GENIO UN855 ALR DAAG You can get a chart for DAAG Runway 23 here : http://www.sia-enna.dz/PDF/AIP/AD/AD2/DAAG/IAC4.pdfI tried three ways. First exactly as above. Then I removed ALR (which is directly at the airport) and replaced it by ZEM (see chart). Finally I also removed ZEM. Now from the previous Waypoint BUYAH it's around 80 NM to the Airport, plenty of room for approach for my vectors. As mentioned above, I was almost there, at 200 deg not too far from the intercept, when approach gave me turn right to heading 100. From there it completely went bananas, approx. 20 NM later I got heading 55 and then didn't hear anything more.Altitude handling was Ok, according to my Waypoint presets.Mike

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Tom Allensworth,
    Founder of AVSIM Online


  • Flight Simulation's Premier Resource!

    AVSIM is a free service to the flight simulation community. AVSIM is staffed completely by volunteers and all funds donated to AVSIM go directly back to supporting the community. Your donation here helps to pay our bandwidth costs, emergency funding, and other general costs that crop up from time to time. Thank you for your support!

    Click here for more information and to see all donations year to date.
×
×
  • Create New...