How do I overcome the problem of not being instructed to lose altituderoughly in concert with the Flight Plan in my PMDG 747-400?On a recent flight I was forced to reduce altitude in order to make a safe landing while the RC controller became increasingly more upset with me for not being at his assigned altitude of 10,000 ft.In fact as we were almost landing he still insisted that I should be at my assigned 10,000 ft.I'd appreciate guidance.Cliff

no guidance needed. air traffic controllers assign you headings and crossing restrictions that they expect you to adhere to. they don't have your fmc, they don't really don't care what your fmc says is the optimal time to start your descent. they have other factors to keep in mind.luckily, in v4, we took care of that. when the rc controller gives you your initial descent clearance from cruise, you can ask for it to be at "pilot's discretion". that way you can stay higher, longer. but a crossing restriction is a crossing restriction. i've read from other users that they enter a checkpoint into their fmc's that is essentially 10000 @ 40 miles. that makes the fmc happy, and rc won't be upset when you miss your crossing restrictionjd

Hi JD:I think that Cliff was referring to the case where it is necessary to reduce altitude to let us say an airport entrenched at low level in close proximity to high terrain on one side such as some in the Canary Islands. In this case I fly under the NOTAMS option following the MSA circle to get down to the correct altitude following the published vertical profile.Since RC samples equally the highest terrain on both sides of the path, I don't think it takes into account non-symmetrical MSA quads. For me using NOTAMS when you have published plates allows these one sided or valley type approaches. Another case is in flying a published approach that requires a steep descent procedure turn or descending race track holding pattern for airports surrounded by high terrain.In the sample I was referring to high terrain is on the west side of the airport but I was approaching from the NE over water. RC wanted me to stay at 10,000 because of the 8,000 foot terrain on the strip's west side. As I was vectored toward the south side I saw the MSA in that area was lower so I descended to 6,000 which as I swung around toward the north allowed me to descend (but still steeply) to the 3,000 foot FAF which RC did request. I just could not have made the that descent in time from 10,000 nor was it necessary in this case to do a PT or holding descent.There is nothing like a plate for guidance on uneven lopsided terrain approaches. RC does a great job on calculating the descent profile for average terrain approaches with the surrounding quad average MSL calculations.Again Cliff, to stop RC from "insisting" use the NOTAMS option on the phase of flight where you know you may have to deviate from the controller's instructions. The other or combo choice is to select NOTAMS and also select to fly a published procedure (from the menu choice) at which point vectoring will stop where it figures you are now lined up with the IAF and you are then on your own.

Thanks for that explanation which refers to Version 4.I've been trying to update from my version 3 to Version 4 but cannot find a suitable download link.Can you tell me where to find that link please?Cliff

v4 hasn't been released yet. target release date is 12/1jd

Thanks for the planned launch date for RCV4 jdGreat program thanks for all the realism and I have followed renzies advice to use NOTAMS - works well for FACT where I was always having a problem although I woould not have believed it from my local knowledge of the terrain!Will RCV4 be downloadable or only by CD again?

cd only