SimBrief

Hi Zoran, I'm looking into it. I appreciate all the support you guys have been giving me, I'm going to look into the legal obligations a "Donate" button would impose on me and will make a decision then. ^_^ Thanks for the report, it was very helpful. I have applied a fix to the SimBrief system, let me know how it works during your next flight!

Interesting, thanks for the report. I'll look into getting that fixed when I get a chance this week.

Thanks for the kind words! Might I ask what the problem with the route was? Was it related to the route containing SID/STAR waypoints, or something else? Let me know and maybe I can fix it. Thanks!

I know it's not really my place to comment as I don't own the PMDG 777, but since you still haven't received an answer: All indications are that the fuel burns match up nicely with the PMDG. No fuel factor required. While we're on the subject, I'd just like to mention that the "Fuel Factor" isn't just a way to correct inaccuracies between SimBrief and an specific FS aircraft (though it certainly works well for this purpose)! Real world flight plans use Fuel Factors all the time to correct for aging airplanes and engines which might not be performing as efficiently as they once were. In fact most airlines use a different fuel factor for every fin number in their fleet, based on their observations of each plane's performance on past routes. Generally, the older the aircraft, the higher the fuel factor. For example, real world 747 OFPs I have seen use a fuel factor between P04 and P06, while most real world 777-200LRs use P00 to P02. Since SimBrief is calibrated to the same manufacturer data as real world dispatch tools, this explains why the PMDG 777 requires little to no fuel factor, while the PMDG B747 requires P05 or so (or so I've been told, I don't own that one either). Right, I've gone and written a novel again. Anyways, hope that helps!

That depends, do you have an AAL OFP I could use as a guide? OFP formats take me about 12 hours of work each to implement, so I need to prioritize which ones to add when. Right now I'm adding the most popular airlines used by SimBrief users and working my way down; AAL would be coming up soon but I have yet to receive an OFP sample to use as a guide. WJA is quite a bit farther down the list, but someone sent me a WJA OFP some time ago so it might come sooner than planned.

Hi CoolP, For now a Navdata Pro option isn't possible because Aerosoft doesn't have the necessary access code system in place. Without such a system it would be impossible to verify which users have actually bought the AIRAC before unlocking it for them. I believe users have already requested this feature several times on the Aerosoft forums but with no luck as of yet. Another update, I just added the MD82, MD83, MD88, and MD90 to the system. This one was long overdue, sorry for the delay in adding it. Thanks,

Update: I have just added the Emirates (UAE) format to the system! This is one of my favorite layouts so far, I find it's very clean and organized. Also, because the Emirates format is LIDO based, there are many similarities with the default LIDO layout which should help reduce the learning curve. This layout also contains new features such as ETOPS Entry/Exit/ETP reference points located directly in the navlog for ease of reference. I've uploaded a quick preview here: http://www.simbrief.com/previews/UAE216_KLAXOMDB.pdf Thanks,

Thanks for the nice comments! Perhaps someday, though I haven't had anyone send me a KLM flight plan yet so that would have to happen first. If you have one you'd like to send, the best way would be to send it to contact@simbrief.com ! Thanks again,

Thanks it's nice to hear people are still enjoying it! ^_^ Another update, I have just added the United Airlines (UAL) format to the dropdown list on the Dispatch Options page. That covers the 3 most popular airlines as requested by SimBrief users (BAW, DAL, and UAL), the next most popular would be DLH but I haven't had anyone send me an OFP sample from them yet so I might do BER next instead. We'll see.

Hi again, Just an update on the website as it's been a while since my last post. Several new features and fixes have been implemented over the past month, some examples include: 2 new OFP formats: British Airways and Delta Air Lines (more on the way). Several new aircraft types including the B703, E170, E195, BBJ1/2/3, A310, B747F, MD11F, B777F. Several new options allowing pilots to specify Contingency Fuel, Reserve Fuel, custom Zero Fuel Weights, Fuel Factors, and Extra Fuel. Proper flight plan units in Eastern Airspace (speeds in km/h and altitudes in meters where applicable). Added FMS download formats for X-Plane and PMDG products. I've also created a Facebook page where I will be posting updates as they occur, users who wish to be advised of all the latest updates can "Like" our page here: www.facebook.com/simbrief ! Thanks for your continued support,

Well, I just triple checked my fuel table for the 738 and it's almost an exact match to the official Boeing table I have, I don't know what to say. I'd really be curious to have an example of the NGX's fuel flow in cruise, something just isn't adding up here. I'll keep investigating though, for now at least the fuel factor option should help you guys out! Thanks,

Thanks for the report, Joe. Not sure what's up with the fuel, I'm using real Boeing figures now so I'm hesitant to change them. The good news is there's a "Fuel Factor" option now that you can use to correct the fuel flow manually. Next time you fly, could you take a note of your cruise fuel flow? If you could, I'd need the altitude, airspeed, weight, and OAT observed for that fuel flow as well. Thanks, - Derek

bursco: There is no need to manually delete your old flight plans. Every time you generate a new flight plan, your old one is automatically deleted by the system! GodAtum: Currently I have defined a "standard" taxi fuel for each aircraft in the system. Where possible I have used the standard taxi fuel listed in the applicable aircraft manual, for the NG series that number is 400lbs. I just did the math on the figures you provided above and arrived at 390lbs so 400lbs sounds very reasonable to me! I think that at large airports I might multiply this value by 2 to allow for any taxi delays, such as being #20 for takeoff or something. Can't remember off the top of my head right now. Thanks,

Understood Joe, thanks for the report. One more question, did you set your takeoff weight in the FSX payload editor to match the takeoff weight that SimBrief calculated? The weight can have a big difference on the fuel burn, so I just want to make sure. Thanks,

Hi tooting, The answer is pretty much no to all those questions unfortunately. I'm not a dispatcher by trade, and being Canadian I don't really have much experience with the Eurocontrol system. I don't really have any plans on adding any of the validation stuff right now, since the tool doesn't generate routes (users need to provide their own routes for the system to parse). The generated ATC flight plans should be in line with the latest ICAO 2012 standard though, if that makes any difference. I'm unfamiliar with the concept of 4d flight planning. Care to elaborate on that? Thanks,

HighTowers: There is an option towards the bottom where you can choose your passenger count. If you don't specify the passenger count the system will simply choose a random count for you. To arrive at a payload weight, the system calculates 230lbs of weight per passenger (175lbs for the passenger and 55lbs for their baggage). I recognize that many users are looking for more control over the weight than is offered by the current options, so I will be adding a place where you can specify the desired ZFW soon. GodAtum: Unfortunately Navdata Pro doesn't provide the require infrastructure for a site like mine to use their Navdata. At least not yet. Thanks for the detailed report! When did you generate the flight plan in question? I recently updated the fuel burns for the 738 using official Boeing tables and fixed a bug in the fuel flow code so it might be better now. I applied the changes this morning, so if you generated yesterday could you please try again and see if it's any better? I have made a few test briefings since the new fuel figures and I have found the calculated burns to be pretty close to a real life 738 flight plan I have. Please let me know what you find, thanks.

Hi all, thanks for all the responses! I'll try to address a few questions/comments here: I see now that there is an extra exclamation mark in the link I posted. Doh! Unfortunately I don't seem to be able to edit the post, maybe a moderator can do so for me if they read this? ESzczesniak: I see you also posted these suggestions in the SImBrief forums, I will respond to you in there shortly! bennyboy75: I'm not yet aware of any bugs with the altitude selections, but it's definitely possible. Note that if you were flying a NAT track, it is possible that the system chose an altitude that would normally be incorrect for direction of flight. NAT tracks operate differently with regards to altitude selection. If ever you don't want the system to override your altitude selection, simply uncheck the "Plan Stepclimbs" option. Note that you can also plan your own stepclimbs by defining them in your Route (i.e. JFK BOS/N0450F350 PQI). With regards to the Q400 fuel figures, you'll have to get back to me on that one, but I think the Q400 is one of the better aircraft simulations the SimBrief system offers. I had access to several real world flight plans and references for the Q400 during development so I was able to get the numbers pretty close. Still, let me know if you have reason to believe this isn't so and I'll look into it further. GrahamBu: You are correct, the MORA is actually based on the altitude of the terrain directly under the waypoint, rather than the actual safe altitude for that segment. It's one of the few portions of the system that I wasn't able to simulate properly. It's on the todo list, if I can find a terrain model to use that has enough resolution. Right now all I have is model containing terrain altitudes every 0.5 degrees of latitude/longitude, which is far from precise enough to calculate a proper MORA. fakeflyer737: I think you might have posted this in the SimBrief forums as well, I will answer in greater detail over there but I will definitely be fixing this. Thanks again everyone,

After years of work, I'm pleased to announce that the most in-depth freeware flight planning tool ever developed, "SimBrief", is now available for use! Planning a scheduled flight for a major airline is a complicated task with many factors to consider. In order to maximize efficiency, major airlines around the world employ specially trained Flight Dispatchers. Using specialized flight planning software, they check weather, select a route, make fuel calculations, choose suitable alternates, and check current NOTAMs to ensure the flight is conducted as safely and efficiently as possible. Once the dispatcher has completed their calculations, they use their flight planning software to generate a detailed "Operational Flight Plan" for use by the airline's pilots, who benefit from having all the pertinent data for their flight in one complete package. SimBrief effectively simulates the Flight Dispatcher's role, allowing virtual pilots to generate in-depth Briefing Packages containing the same layout and data as the ones used by real airline pilots every day. SimBrief is capable of generating flight plans which include: A detailed waypoint listing (i.e. Navlog) Accurate performance and fuel calculations for over 50 aircraft types Fuel figures satisfying all legal requirements, such as reserve and alternate fuel Step climb planning based on actual aircraft weight In depth ETOPS calculations, including entry, exit, and equal time points between ETOPS alternates Selection of suitable destination and ETOPS alternates based on current weather forecasts Real world weather and winds aloft forecasts Real world NOTAMs provided by the FAA A link to prefile the generated flight on VATSIM in just a few mouse clicks All you provide is the departure, destination, and route, and the SimBrief system calculates the rest! A sample flight plan can be viewed here: http://www.simbrief.com!

Think he's answered that long ago. Twice actually.

Thank you very much!Derek Mayer

This is a message for Ryan Maziarz,Your forum inbox is full. Any chance I could contact you via email or otherwise?Thanks in advance!Derek Mayer

Search for LPMA instead. :(

If the lights are different in the spot view versus the inside view, I suspect they are hard-coded and therefore impossible to change. Have you tried asking the developer for support?