PMDG UFT Performance Calculator

[Fiorentoni 4,273]

2 hours ago, Bobsk8 said:

I just did it 2 minutes ago. 

What he's saying is that while you can edit the weight, it will not use it for the calculation, but instead use the current weight. But @threegreen from what I've gathered on the PMDG forum, this only happens when you use the virtual keyboard on the EFB. It shouldn't happen when you just use your physical keyboard.

[brucewtb 250]

I did I here that right in the above vid that for a normal flaps 5 take off you get 50 cm tail clearance in the 737?  if this is typical of jet airliners no wonder fellow simmers trying out the Horizon 787-9 are getting tail strikes.

Bruce

[BrammyH 447]

Flightdeck2sim also has a nice overview where he compares the values against his company's calculators.

 

[Vitold69 47]

Looks like our Emi "Now" ThePilot doesn't have Boeing's official software. And never had  😀

[Vel 295]

32 minutes ago, Vitold69 said:

Looks like our Emi "Now" ThePilot doesn't have Boeing's official software. And never had  😀

He was a 737 pilot for Ryanair for 5 years so Im sure he had whatever software was required.

[BrammyH 447]

1 hour ago, Vitold69 said:

Looks like our Emi "Now" ThePilot doesn't have Boeing's official software. And never had  😀

He rolled off the 737 to the A330 at any rate. so likely doesn't have access to it. I think flightdec2sim used the app his company uses.

Also, Emi's old employer wasn't thrilled with socials so I doubt he would have mentioned it.

I haven't watched Emi's yet to compare. This just seemed like a good thread to post it.

[Fiorentoni 4,273]

13 hours ago, brucewtb said:

I did I here that right in the above vid that for a normal flaps 5 take off you get 50 cm tail clearance in the 737?  if this is typical of jet airliners no wonder fellow simmers trying out the Horizon 787-9 are getting tail strikes.

Bruce

In theory the longer the fuselage the higher the tailstrike risk (unless other things are changed, too; e.g. the A320 has a longer landing gear and could therefore be less prone to tailstrikes), therefore the -800 is more at risk than the -700 and the -900 more at risk than the -800 etc. That said you really have to screw things up in any of those to get a tailstrike as a professional pilot. So tailstrikes are not a problem unless you rotate like you were flying a spaceshuttle or your trim is all wrong.

As for the Horizon 787-9, the rotation is bugged and you indeed have to rotate like a spaceshuttle to get it to lift of the ground. This leads to tailstrikes, unless you are very careful. But that's a bug and not a thing of the actual aircraft.

[Stearmandriver 2,313]

3 hours ago, Vitold69 said:

Looks like our Emi "Now" ThePilot doesn't have Boeing's official software. And never had  😀

What you have to understand about performance calculation software is that there isn't one "official" version of it.  It's true that Boeing has their own, but theirs is actually sloppier and less fine-grained than many third party solutions, so many airlines are willing to pay for better data.

What better data means (for takeoff) is: more opportunities to reduce power.  You'll sometimes hear pilots talk about how a "double reduction" (derate + assumed temp) isn't allowed, or how you can't reduce at all off a wet runway or with a tailwind... These pilots are stuck with the Boeing perf calcs.  The Dynamic Source data I use at work allows all of these things and more.

There seems a bit too much of an effort to "get" PMDG lately, often by simmers who aren't pilots at all, or at least have never stepped foot in an airline flight deck.  It often ends up not working out, because folks just don't understand all the variations in the airline world.  Just because the PMDG version doesn't do something exactly the same as a single airline, doesn't mean they're wrong.

[El Diablito 328]

2 hours ago, Fiorentoni said:

As for the Horizon 787-9, the rotation is bugged and you indeed have to rotate like a spaceshuttle to get it to lift of the ground

I don't want this to sound like a whine but why does mine take off normally then? I don't have any issues with rotation in this aircraft. With my Reaction setting at 80% for the feeling of weight, I pull back on the stick and she begins to rotate, hold her at about 5 degrees and she comes up perfectly, once we're clear and I retract the gear I pitch her up to 12 degrees or thereabouts and we're away.

I know others have been having a rotten time with it so it's all a bit confusing for me. I went with a flaps 10 takeoff today and it was as smooth a take off as you could ask for.

[JRBarrett 3,108]

On 11/1/2023 at 12:45 PM, grandfred29 said:

Licc,  i posted on their forum their à différence 1200ft between navigraph and the data they are using 

The “data they are using” is the actual runway length in the sim, taken directly from the installed scenery. Navigraph is using the latest data for the real airport.

Many times Navigraph and the sim airport will exactly match regarding runway lengths but not always. Many of the default airports were built using satellite photos or other information that was already out-of-date when the sim was released in August of 2020. In some cases, existing runways have been lengthened in the real world (which Navigraph represents), but that is not the case with the MSFS version.

[Kevin_28 164]

I do wonder how that all works in terms of addon airports. If you install an addon airport that reflects a more up-to-date runway length, does the UFT read that or the original runway in sim?

[Stearmandriver 2,313]

It's a good question.  Most add-ons that read nav data from the sim have an option to force rescan scenery... And you know it's happening because it takes a bit.  Where / when does it happen for an EFB (any dev's EFB)?

[JRBarrett 3,108]

13 minutes ago, Kevin_28 said:

I do wonder how that all works in terms of addon airports. If you install an addon airport that reflects a more up-to-date runway length, does the UFT read that or the original runway in sim?

It should read whatever airport has the highest priority in the sim scenery. I did my own mod of my home airport to reflect (among other things) that the main runway is now 500 longer that MSFS default, and the EFB picks up the correct length. I believe that if a newer version of a default airport is installed in the Community folder, that newer version is the one the EFB will use. 

[Stearmandriver 2,313]

13 minutes ago, JRBarrett said:

It should read whatever airport has the highest priority in the sim scenery. I did my own mod of my home airport to reflect (among other things) that the main runway is now 500 longer that MSFS default, and the EFB picks up the correct length. I believe that if a newer version of a default airport is installed in the Community folder, that newer version is the one the EFB will use. 

I think I remember a slight delay, just a split second, when loading a runway in the tablet.  Do you think it's reading runway data on the fly as an airport is selected?  That would make sense; would actually be a good way to do it.

[Bobsk8 12,806]

2 hours ago, Stearmandriver said:

 

There seems a bit too much of an effort to "get" PMDG lately, often by simmers who aren't pilots at all, or at least have never stepped foot in an airline flight deck.  It often ends up not working out, because folks just don't understand all the variations in the airline world.  Just because the PMDG version doesn't do something exactly the same as a single airline, doesn't mean they're wrong.

Not ain't that the truth...😁