DF9AA

I brought this up a couple of weeks ago ... ( -99 TCAS ), now I saw Capt.R's. answer...I will tell you real world happening in 2001:On his final check out as captain on the MD11 on a flight from FRA to JFK over the UK his copilot advised him of a target about 75 miles ahead SAME level opposite direction!! With the TCAS system NOW modelled in the 747 he would never had a chance to advise ATC, who corrected the situation...Karl-Heinz - EDDI/THF " Tempelhof "" The mother of all airports " - Sir Norman Fosterhttp://www.precisionmanuals.com/images/forum/747400.jpg

Why?IT WILL BE BEFORE CHRISTMAS....He did not mention which year....Karl-Heinz - EDDI/THF " Tempelhof "" The mother of all airports " - Sir Norman Fosterhttp://www.precisionmanuals.com/images/forum/747400.jpg

Autoland is used in RW in real bad wx - really low visibility.In my company the crews had to practise Autoland every 90 days to keep their proficiency...re A/T I don't know....Disc. A/P between 1000 and 2000 ft when established on finalKarl-Heinz - EDDI/THF " Tempelhof "" The mother of all airports " - Sir Norman Fosterhttp://www.precisionmanuals.com/images/forum/747400.jpg

> After more than a year waiting.... ??Be patient... I am waiting nearly 3 years now for the MD11... Karl-Heinz - EDDI/THF " Tempelhof "" The mother of all airports " - Sir Norman Fosterhttp://www.precisionmanuals.com/images/forum/747400.jpg

Hi Markus,I am sure you understand : " Verschlimmbessert"... I have no idea how to translate this...Bob,7 miles around an aircraft travelling at 500 miles is MUCH too less!If you sim without "ATC" it was really nice to see other traffic in 50 or so miles distance - especially crossing traffic at same FL...Just too sad!Karl-Heinz - EDDI/THF " Tempelhof "" The mother of all airports " - Sir Norman Fosterhttp://www.precisionmanuals.com/images/forum/747400.jpg

Hallo Markus,it was NOT normal before update ....Karl-Heinz - EDDI/THF " Tempelhof "" The mother of all airports " - Sir Norman Fosterhttp://www.precisionmanuals.com/images/forum/747400.jpg

Since installation of update for 400X I see on TCAS all trafic ON many targets ( sometimes up to 50 )shown as -99 or other targets down to -50 or so.Is this normal, since the older versions showed only targets +/- 26 or less!Karl-Heinz - EDDI/THF " Tempelhof "" The mother of all airports " - Sir Norman Fosterhttp://www.precisionmanuals.com/images/forum/747400.jpg

Hi all,I thought the topic was range of the 7 3 7 - 8 0 0 ??The B737-700 is a rather different airplane. . . much lighter with more or less the same engines ( although derated for the 700 . . . ),but in any case much more powerful in relation to size of aircraft.I have no RW planning charts for the 700, but alone the time to Fl390 of 45 minutes is selfexplanatory - the 800 needs about 20 mins at max tow to FL 320 - another 25 mins for 7000 ft at climb power needs most probably more fuel than a step climb later on?Flight tracker is a nice tool. . .but not always the reality. They use the f i l e d flight plans and you all know that in reality the flight might use other routes accdg. to ATC. . .On a flight from EDDF to KDFW my son ( CP MD11 ) got a routing over Northern Canada DIRECT to BYP for a BONHAM5 arrival. . . direct routings over the North American continent are common - much better for the fuel economy than flying always at MAX altitude. . .and much better than in Europe! Karl-Heinz - EDDI/THF " Tempelhof "" The mother of all airports " - Sir Norman Fosterhttp://www.precisionmanuals.com/images/forum/747400.jpg

Hi,my flt plan was calc. with 175 pax - reduced to 140 pax and NO Xtra fuelI can easy reach FL340 and 360 with 125 pax - all depends to the load. . .Karl-Heinz - EDDI/THF " Tempelhof "" The mother of all airports " - Sir Norman Fosterhttp://www.precisionmanuals.com/images/forum/747400.jpg

Hi Alex,accdg. to RW planning charts - european operator of 738W - such a heavy aircraft can only climb to FL320 for opt. altitude. You cannot compare a 350nm trip with more than 2000nm. . .the 73G is much lighter!The required fuel for the trip is MORE than the payload in weight!One of the reasons for the success of low-cost carriers (in Europe) is that they fly mainly flights below 2 hrs flight time!Karl-Heinz - EDDI/THF " Tempelhof "" The mother of all airports " - Sir Norman Fosterhttp://www.precisionmanuals.com/images/forum/747400.jpg

MIA-LAX is at the edge of max range.Today's flight plan for PMDG 738 winglets with RW fuel figures:Routing:SID WINCO J43 ROGAN J86 SRQ Q100 LEV J86 JCT J15 INK J4 EWM J184BXK J4 MESSI J104 PKE J4 TNP STAR TTL 2061 NM plus 10 NM for SID/STARTTL FLT TIME 05:05 W/C -20ZFW : 130.8 klbs/ 59.3 Kgs ( 175 Pax plus bags )eLDGW : 141.2 / 64.0eFuel : 42.5 / 19.3 ( incl. taxi )eTOW : 172.7 / 78.3eBurn : 31.5 / 14.3eFuel at dest : 10.3 / 4.7 with altn. KSANInitial FL : 320 at JCT step climb to 340

Hi David,I know what it means . . .On each flight since almost 3 years I follow the same procedures and check-lists - NEVER EVER this came up before !In the book for other failures and warnings it says :DO THIS or THAT - but here nothing . . .Will see if it comes up again.Karl-Heinz - EDDI/THF " Tempelhof "" The mother of all airports " - Sir Norman Fosterhttp://www.precisionmanuals.com/images/forum/747400.jpg

After about 1500 hrs on the 744 , I had another first . . .NO failures programmed!After eng start etc and taxiing to rnwy I noticed a yellow warning> NO LAND 3The book says :Determine cause - correct as desiredAny explanation and hints for correction ?Karl-Heinz - EDDI/THF " Tempelhof "" The mother of all airports " - Sir Norman Fosterhttp://www.precisionmanuals.com/images/forum/747400.jpg

differences on winds between AS6.5 and ASX ?Hi,after a flight from EDDT to KPHX several questions came up . . . again!1. To my understanding the winds in both systems are SPOT winds and notFORECAST winds - am I correct? For a 12 hour flight in RW the dispatcher would use FORECAST winds to calculate such a long flight, where some areas will be reached 8 to 10 hours AFTER preparation!Would it be possible to issue some sort of forecast model in future releases of AS ? It would increase the quality extremly. Metars are also issued as spot and fcst . . .2. I noticed some differences between AS6.5 and ASX for the route - sometimes VERY little differences, but there are some HEAVY between both systems. But still, how come that within 5 minutes of loading time ( both server2 at 1450Z Apr 02 ) these differences occur ?3. Difference between both NAVLOGS :AS6.5 looks like : ( only the wind )MIMKU 167,5 (nm) 281 64 PIKILASX :MIMKU 19 283 68PIKIL 168 276 41Both calc with 18 minsAnother one :DLH 111 276 81 14 minsGEP ASX:DLH 117 276 76GEP 111 271 103 15 minsI like the AS6.5 system more since it shows the data more clearly which are used for the sector - would it be possible to change this for ASX ? The only advantage of ASX are MAG VAR values for the waypoints!At the end I arrived at destination within 2 mins of calculation with plus 500 lbs of fuel since I gained back all 12 mins over the US territory since winds have changed favourably after 10 hours since preparation of flightplan . . .Karl-Heinz - EDDI/THF " Tempelhof "" The mother of all airports " - Sir Norman Fosterhttp://www.precisionmanuals.com/images/forum/747400.jpg

??? asking again . . . Karl-Heinz - EDDI/THF " Tempelhof "" The mother of all airports " - Sir Norman Fosterhttp://www.precisionmanuals.com/images/forum/747400.jpg

Two questions . . . no answer!I would be very much interested to use a BBJ version - I use the 800/900 - is it possible to install the 600/700 on top or how can I do it ?BBJ, please come back to these 2 questions . . .Karl-Heinz - EDDI/THF " Tempelhof "" The mother of all airports " - Sir Norman Fosterhttp://www.precisionmanuals.com/images/forum/747400.jpg

Hi,a few days ago it was indicated that it is still NOT in beta - is there anything before alpha ?Karl-Heinz - EDDI/THF " Tempelhof "" The mother of all airports " - Sir Norman Fosterhttp://www.precisionmanuals.com/images/forum/747400.jpg

Hi Damian,Where did you find FSUIPC 4.75 ( seventy-five ?? ) - on the official page of Pete I find 4.25 ( twenty-five !! ) from Feb 14, 2008 !Is 4.25 the latest ?Karl-Heinz - EDDI/THF " Tempelhof "" The mother of all airports " - Sir Norman Fosterhttp://www.precisionmanuals.com/images/forum/747400.jpg

Hi Rudy et al,this is an ever lasting story with the FMC in the PMDG . . .Here a few figures :EGLL-KPHX Jan 25 calc flt time 10:18 - TO 1115Z (ETA 2133Z)Calc burn 115.7 kgs/1000ETA accdg. FMC 2134Z with 17.7 KGS/1000 ( reading after initial level off at FL320 )- this would mean a burn of 119.5 kgs/1000Act Arr at 2147Z ( plus 14 minutes - lost 10 mins over Atlantic - )Fuel remaining at KPHX 21.6 Kgs/1000 !!Ttl burn 115.6 kgs/1000I must admit that my calculation was also a little off . . . but better than the FMC !This was discussed here a long time ago - even the boss himself ( Capt. RR ) wrote a reply, stating that the FMC is one of the most complex systems in the airplane and over 9000 pages of material must be worked into the PMDG program! He also mentionned that his team will look into this problem and hopefully improvements will come - the latest 747X still has the same problem. . .How come that I, with a rather simple spreadsheet program, be closer to the actual burn ? My program calculates the FF along the route by 15 waypoints ( all sectors more or less even ) and taken into account that the FF reduces by decreasing inflight weight and higher altitudes.The FMC does NOT calculates the step climbs, which are programmed by the FMC - after each step climb the est. fuel at destination jumps up - it should be already included in the FMC prediction.The FMC apparently calculates the time to dest with the present speed and not with the standart speed at a given mach number, altitude and temperature ISA - The last sector of the flight - OM to touchdown - the fuel calc is defenitely wrong in the FMC - average indication on all flights I did is 1200 to 1500 kgs, but in actual the aircraft needs only 400 to 500 kgs - checked in over 100 flights !!Several collegues here in the forum will now argue that this is not so important . . . but they want a simulation as close as possible to the RW - and an important part of FS is the FMC - and a relatively easy part to be checked by a normal flightsimmer - most of us cannot check if the 747 behaves like a real one ! ( Capt. RR will soon . . . )EDIT : Forecast winds are of course entered into the FMC - waypoint by waypoint, using ASX !! My calculation is based on those forecasts . . . !Karl-Heinz - EDDI/THF " Tempelhof "" The mother of all airports " - Sir Norman Fosterhttp://www.precisionmanuals.com/images/forum/747400.jpg

Hi,1. NO2. Looks OKKarl-Heinz - EDDI/THF " Tempelhof "" The mother of all airports " - Sir Norman Fosterhttp://www.precisionmanuals.com/images/forum/747400.jpg

Hi Santiago,this will be a lengthly excursion into flight planning - btw the US-Americans have a slightly different approach to this . . . I am not sure about the Canadiens - I am talking about the European - German way.( see PMDG manuals re flight planning in the US ! )I remember a big discussion in my former company about cont. fuel for long haul flights, since in 99 out of 100 flights you DO NOT need this fuel and each kg/lb you carry around you increase your fuel flow ! This was during the period with 7,5 %, apparently it is reduced now to 5 % and if I read the RW flight plan correct it is now reduced to 3 % with a theoretical landing at an earlier airport - it was a flt pln to the Neareast and cont.fuel at 3% was only calculated for a theoretical landing at HECA - Cairo.An example : For todays winds a flight from EDDT to KSFO with a 747 you carry as cont. fuel ( 5 % ) around 13500 lbs or 6150 kgs !! You can save a lot if you plan 3% to Winnipeg - my estimate would be 4500 lbs or 2000 kgs less . . .the burn figures for this flight would be reduced from 270600 to 268500 lbs or from 123000 to 121900 kgs - this is a figure where the bookkeepers of an airline will get big eyes . . .Final reserves is always taken in minutes and then calculated with FF of LRC ( long range cruise - a little less than normal cruise ).As the word FINAL means, it will be used as FINAL RESERVE - in case you arrive at an airport with one runway and this runway is blocked by any reason, you obviuosly cannot land. Unless you have more than the minimum diversion fuel you HAVE to divert to your alternate airport. The min.div.fuel is : Fuel to altn and final res. Lets stick to the KSFO flight : I did it yesterday with a 747-400F - plan figures wereburn : 128.000 kgs plus altn./min.res.fuel 10400 kgs plus cont fuel of 7400 kgs - so I planned to arrive in SFO with 17800 kgs of fuel. So in case I could not land at SFO I had to divert to my altn if I had only 10400 kgs which is very seldom the case since normally you do not use your cont. fuel. Possible holding at DESTINATION will be done with the fuel you have in excess to your min.div.fuel. The FINAL RES is used for any possible problems at arrival at your alternate airport . . .The alternate fuel is also calculated with winds to the altn. airport - in my self-created flight planning tool I disregard this, but its a good idea for improvement. For the SFO flight I used OAK as altn. and this would be no case to calculate winds, it would only be a couple of lbs/kgs, but if you have to use an altn. like LAX ( roughly 200 NM ) it means a difference with 50kts head or tail wind . . .The trip fuel is calculated with the winds aloft - also here time x FF per min or hour !In case you are interested in my flightplanning tool send me a PM with your e-mail adress and I send you a copy - be aware its based on EXCEL 2003 and you must have this office program - I don't know if it works with "WORKS" or any other spreadsheet program ! Allow me a couple of days since I have to rewrite the readme file . . .Karl-Heinz - EDDI/THF " Tempelhof "" The mother of all airports " - Sir Norman Fosterhttp://www.precisionmanuals.com/images/forum/747400.jpg

Hi Santiago,I am not a pilot but worked nearly 45 years with the airlines :here my planning ( btw 737NG are not all alike - 736 73G 738 (w ) and 739 )For 738 - your trip SCIE to SCEL with altn SCIETrip: 3600 lbscont.: 5% 180 - it all began with 10 %, then reduced to 7,5 % now 5 %recently I saw a RW flight plan with 3 % !Altn.: 3400 Final res: 2400 for 30 minsMin.Ldg. Fuel : 2000 lbs ( ONLY to be used in an emergency - supposed to keep the fuel pumps running )Taxi: all depends on the traffic situation at dep airport and distance to runway but with 500 lbs you should be OKExtra : anything up to max ldg wt - will be used in RW for tankering - which means if the fuel at dest is significantly more expensive - fill her up to MAX LDG WTMin. T/O Fuel : 11580 lbs PLUS taxi 500 lbs and possbl EXTRAKarl-Heinz - EDDI/THF " Tempelhof "" The mother of all airports " - Sir Norman Fosterhttp://www.precisionmanuals.com/images/forum/747400.jpg

Hi,I am not flying online, but I use ASX wind and temperature reports (navlog) as basis for my fuel calculation - and in the days of high fuel prices ( thanks god not in FS . . . ) I usually fly with minimum fuel. Therefor I am dependant on most accurate wind forecasts.Yesterday I flew KJFK-EDDM with the 200830Z ASX WX report - till 4940N the winds were more or less accurate, but from 50N030W to LIMRI the forecast called for wind at 230/20 - ACTUAL winds were 265/130 and 270/130 (!!) - I was on the favourable side and the winds gave me a real push of nearly 20 mins - on the other hand, westbound it would put me into a fuel shortage.After the flight I checked the ASX WX again at 1625Z and the navlog still showed between 50N030W and LIMRI a wind at 222/36 . . .Enhanced route coverage was ON - wind smoothening was OFF and other than at descend into MUC there were NO wind shifts of any major significance.Sometimes I have the impression that ASX uses two different sources for the navlog and the feed into FSX during flight - I checked ( on other flights - NOT yesterdays ) ASX and hit the button for REFRESH WX and update the flight plan - the winds there and in FSX were completely different !!Karl-Heinz - EDDI/THF " Tempelhof "" The mother of all airports " - Sir Norman Fosterhttp://www.precisionmanuals.com/images/forum/747400.jpg

Hi,I did a row of "test flights" with the 400F and got confirmed that the fuel consumption is LESS than the pax version . . . I use for my flightplanning about 5 % less during cruise - from TOD to touchdown it is about equal to the pax version,but . . .time and FF to TOC is much less than the pax747normal to FL330 with pax a/c is about 19 to 20 mins and a distance of 120 to 125 NM - the 400F uses only 14 to 15 mins and of course also less fuel for about 90 to 100 NM - both within the same weight range !!Karl-Heinz - EDDI/THF " Tempelhof "" The mother of all airports " - Sir Norman Fosterhttp://www.precisionmanuals.com/images/forum/747400.jpg

Hi,both entries are NOT required for a normal flight, but it is very helpful. . .As Dan mentionned before I also change to 2000 from ICAO - differencebetween both is the area you fly in. In most areas the RVSM or MNPS rule governs, which means that you will fly from 0 to 179 ODD levels ( 310/330/350 ) and from 180 to 359 at EVEN levels ( 300/320/340 etc ) and the entry into the FMC helps you to define the time for step clb.In the other areas the conventional or ICAO rule takes place which means that the steps are 4000 ft ( from 290 to 330 then 370 for ODD ). Whereby the FMC time for step climb is not very accurate - I use the indication of MAX level minus 20 as my point of climb which is earlier than the FMC time and saves even more fuel !The COST INDEX is related to the fuel consumption and fuel price - I use in the 747 a C/I of 135 which gives me a speed of M .855 and a TAS of 495 kts - you can play around with this function of the FMC and find out for yourself . . .EDIT : Even in flight you can change the C/I and will let you see the change of TAS/Mach nbr and fuel flow, but this is very limited in the engines page - you will notice the FF change only over longer period of time.Karl-Heinz - EDDI/THF " Tempelhof "" The mother of all airports " - Sir Norman Fosterhttp://www.precisionmanuals.com/images/forum/747400.jpg