beechcaptain

I upgraded from 5.3 to 5.4 and have zero issues I primarily fly PMDG a/c and occasionally Capt Sim 757 and have not encountered any problems, knock on wood. My recommendation is 5.4.

Ok, I think I understand what is happening. I will try with a current route from flightaware and the latest NAT tracks and see what happens. Unfortunately, I'm midway through a 3.5 hour flight so it will be later today or tomorrow before I can give it a go. Thanks for the input, much appreciated.

I tried to post over on the "official?" PFPX support forum at Aerosoft Forums but could not find a way to select the PFPX support sub forum to make the post. So, without further ado, I shall post here hoping to find a solution. I'm planning a flight from KATL to EGLL and want to use one of the latest NAT tracks, which SIMBRIEF suggested. I prefer final planning with PFPX because it has better fuel burn algorithms that to me are way more accurate. When I try to add an online NAT Track, it will show up in the proper NAT track window in PFPX (bottom right menu line), but disappears after a couple of seconds. Not sure how to manually add NATS as the example I went by failed to show in the NAT track window. Also, if I try to manually enter a route (example: PLMMR3 BURGG Q22 BEARI DCT FAK DCT ENO DCT VCN DCT CYN DCT RIFLE DCT HTO DCT KANNI N139A PORTI/M084F350 NATW XETBO/N0485F350 DCT EVRIN DCT JETZI DCT AMFUL DCT OCTIZ P2 SIRIC SIRI1H ) when attempting to build the route, PFPX does not recognize NATW. What am I doing wrong? Kindest regards, Glenn Edited to add: I was able to select Manual tracks and paste the tracks within the NAT tracks window. However, when I build the above route, I still get the error message "unknown waypoint or airway NATW" Here's a screen shot:

Another highly satisfied 5.4 flyer, here! I agree with all that Ray said above plus the PMDG a/c. I'm a happy simmer!

Update. I found some previous notes I had written about one cause for red X being associated with VDGS issues so I renamed the VKT_KIAD_VDGS.xml to VKT_KIAD_VDGS.off and the red x's are gone. That problem solved. I will simply use a GSX provided marshaller. However, there is still the issue with some parking spots not having gates/jetways. I used GSX to add a jetway at spot B78. All of the original gates are listed as SODE jetways in the GSX app window. The one I placed for B78 is a GSX gate/jetway. I can easily add missing gates using GSX, so with a little work, everything should be ok and look better. I'm still open to any input and/or updated AFCAD bgl/SODE xml files if available.

I am trying to use KIAD in P3Dv5.4 and everything is working except there are the big red X's placed by SODE at certain gates. Example, gate B78 is missing the jetway and has a red X in the spot. I have researched and made sure SODE manager validates P3Dv5 path and everything is in the green. I have not had any success with google searches. I have found the potential issue(s) - the Flightbeam_KIAD.xml is missing a lot of gates that are in the stock afcad bgl file. For example, gate B78 - there is no entry in the xml file and this spot has the red x. There are quite a few red X at KIAD when parked and viewing the terminals. Does anyone have any updated afcad and or xml files for FB KIAD that solves this issue. If not, I guess I will have to spend a lot of time gathering the specific lat/lon data and all that the xml requires for each spot, or remove those spots from the afcad via ade, if I want to use the airport. Too bad Flightbeam took down their forum.

Once this has evolved to the point where nothing more can be done to further reduce the blue hazey tint, and you (@Ray and others) are satisfied with the end result, please post the settings that got you to that point. I also have the blue haze tint like Ray and have ENV Plus, so will be interested to try the changes. Kindest regards and best wishes, Glenn

Thanks for the info, Ray & polosim. I would normally just select DES NOW in my PMDG a/c and let VNAV control the slower descent rate, usually 1000 fpm until the T/D is reached then it will descend at various fpm rates to meet crossing restrictions in the STAR. However, the FMC in the Capt Sim 757 III is a bit antiquated compared to the PMDG 737NGXu a/c and I prefer to let its VNAV initiate descent at its calculated T/D. I don't tend to fly the 757 much, as I prefer the PMDG a/c, so I just wanted to see if there was a better solution.

To Ray or any other RC4 user - RC4.3 Controller (P3Dv5.4) commands initial descent earlier than FMC/CDU calculated T/D. The manual indicates it is possible to advise controller that we are unable to descend at present by selecting option #3 from the menu. However, I never see an option 3, only 2, 4 & maybe 5. I've tried both with NOTAMS box on arrival airport checked and unchecked without the option appearing in the menu. I've just been ignoring controller's commands to descend and once the a/c begins descent as per the FMC VNAV path, controller stops nagging me. Is there any way around this, or am I doing something wrong/missing something? Kindest regards, Glenn

I would also like to know the secret. I'm wondering if he really has a solution, since he's been back but not responded since his post. Time will tell.

I get "The file is currently unavailable" message from the above link. I wonder if it was pulled because of a cease and desist letter?

Yes. I just recently purchased Photorico's KONT for P3Dv5.

Sorry to not be able to provide definitive help, but it would seem that adjusting fuel bias for that a/c might do the job.

Yep, up and running. This morning was the first time I've flown without Active Sky weather in at least 15 years. 🙂

I've had decent success with the 757 in v5.4. However, the FMC/CDU is poorly done and really was quite disappointing, compared to their 737 Classic. Makes me not want to fly it (757), which is unfortunate.

Another satisfied P3Dv5.4 user here. Until I ever get a powerful enough PC to handle MSFS as smooth as what my meager one runs P3D, I'm ok where I am. I have lots (and I mean LOTS) of airport scenery and 3rd party a/c. I mostly fly PMDG 737NGXu and 777 with Radar Contact 4.3. Long live P3D!!!

Could be bad like this:

The issue has been resolved. I updated my P3Dv5.3 client to v5.4 and have flown 4 flights in PMDG 737-800 & CS 757-200 without any problems. I'm glad it was an easy fix. No more head scratching! Case closed.

Bad links, so we're not able to help until it is fixed.

I received an email response to my inquiry from them - they had some unplanned server maintenance. Possibly hardware failure, i would guess. They are back up, now.

Roger that & thanks!

Is it recommended to install Prepar3D_v5_SDK_Setup_5.4.9.28482.msi if I plan to only update my P3Dv5.3 to V5.4 - client and not content or scenery? If yes, then should the v5.3 sdk be uninstalled first? I would have posted on P3D forum, but, as I'm sure you are aware, it's been down hard for 2-3 days, now. Thanks!

@Luke - do you recommend doing the full update or just the 5.4 Client? The other concern has arisen after reading the thread on higher cpu temps with 5.4. Here are my pc specs: i5-4690K CPU @ 3.50GHz oc to 4.3, 32 GB ram, RTX 2060 12 GB, air cooled mid sized tower case. This system performs very well with frame rate limiter set at 30. I use lots of addon scenery and generally see vram usage in the area of 4-5gb with temps < 80C, as best as my memory can recall.

I can't access P3D's forum for the past 4-5 hours, so I'll ask here: Should I decide to upgrade to P3Dv5.4, is it worth upgrading Content and Scenery or just do the Client? I have so many addons (a/c and scenery) that would take me ~80 hours to uninstall and reinstall, if that is necessary moving up to 5.4. If I don't have to do that when only upgrading the 5.4 Client, how about those installed inside the main P3D folder, such as PMDG a/c? This is what has kept me on 5.3, thus far. I'm just thinking ahead in the event I can't isolate the electrical gremlin.

No, I'm not sure it is FSUIPC. But, it is a starting place to troubleshoot. I'm in the process of saving event log files right after the incident occurs (only once so far) and will compare several logs and John Dowson also offered to review them to help determine if there is any evidence of causation. As far as attaching files, I don't see an option for that, only a link to a host for viewers to download the file, if that is what you mean. I know some forums have the option to attach/insert a file, but as I said, I don't see that option here.