Jump to content

SimBrief

Members
  • Content Count

    45
  • Donations

    $0.00 
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

23 Neutral

1 Follower

About SimBrief

  • Rank
    Freeware Developer
  • Birthday 10/25/1987

Contact Methods

  • MSN
    mayerderek@hotmail.com
  • Website URL
    http://www.simbrief.com
  • ICQ
    0

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Montreal, QC, Canada
  • Interests
    Aviation, computer graphic and game design, music, video gaming.

Flight Sim Profile

  • Commercial Member
    No
  • Online Flight Organization Membership
    VATSIM
  • Virtual Airlines
    Yes

Recent Profile Visitors

2,946 profile views
  1. My understanding is this is not a bug, I’ve posted a detailed response to this question in the SimBrief forums here: https://www.simbrief.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=1882#p5872
  2. Just a quick correction if I may: This is incorrect, SimBrief does update NAT tracks, NOTAMs, and weather on a regular basis (every few minutes actually), without the need for any subscription fee. This information is all freely available on the internet after all. It should be noted that there is no absolute requirement to file a NAT track when crossing the Atlantic. Just like real world airlines, you will occasionally see SimBrief propose an off-track routing (officially referred to as a Random Route) defined as a sequence of custom lat/long waypoints (for example, TUDEP 52N050W 53N040W 54N030W 55N020W VENER KOKIB) As far as routes go, SimBrief does try to use FlightAware routes whenever possible. Generally, this tends to give the best results as FlightAware routes are sourced from the real world and therefore should comply with any restrictions and preferential routings. Lately, there has been an increase in routes that begin with either a PBD (Place/Bearing/Distance) waypoint or a custom Lat/Long. I don't know why FlightAware has started altering routes like this, but Marc's theory on vectoring sounds logical. I'm going to look into identifying, filtering, or correcting these routes prior to including them in SimBrief. I'd like to also note that you can always select one of the other Suggested Routes on SimBrief if you don't like the default route it proposes. Generally there are up to 5 different route suggestions you can choose from. You can also generate your own custom route from scratch by using the "Route Finder" tool on the Dispatch Options page, which gives options to enable, disable, or force a specific NAT track depending on your preferences. Hope this helps!
  3. For SimBrief's part, this has been fixed by simply converting to the ARINC424 shorthand when outputting PMDG route files. I'm hesitant to add the extra fields present in the 747 native routes referenced above as I don't want to cause any compatibility issues with older PMDG products. Is there any detailed documentation available for the PMDG .rte format? It would be nice to better understand the fields and avoid any potential problems like this in the future. Thanks, - Derek Mayer
  4. Hi, 330 would be the max ETOPS rating that one can use with the B777. There is nothing stopping you from using a lesser ETOPS rating, such as ETOPS 120 or 180. In the real world, there is no need to use anything higher than ETOPS 180 when crossing the pond due to the multitude of ETOPS suitable alternate airports available to you (normally you can get away with ETOPS 120 as well depending on the day and the route). Higher ETOPS rules are normally more useful on Pacific and Polar routes, but even then it's quite rare that one requires them I believe. Based on the flight plans I've seen (real world), ETOPS 180 is the most commonly used rule when crossing the Atlantic in the 777. Hope that helps,
×
×
  • Create New...