OnCourse Software

I thought that this had been fixed, my previous few flights after installing the latest update worked fine and ATC gave me descent instructions in good time; but sadly I just flew again a flight where I had the descent problem before the new update, and once again, exactly the same as when I last flew it: my cruise height is 33000' and ATC asks me to descend to 11500' (and then very soon after to 7500') when I am only 30 miles from the airport - much too late, so, I have to circle around whilst I lose height. (This is going in to VISR (Srinagar), which is at about 5500' elevation).

Is it possible that this problem happens with some airports and not others, for whatever reason?

martinlest wrote:

I thought that this had been fixed, my previous few flights after installing the latest update worked fine and ATC gave me descent instructions in good time; but sadly I just flew again a flight where I had the descent problem before the new update, and once again, exactly the same as when I last flew it: my cruise height is 33000' and ATC asks me to descend to 11500' (and then very soon after to 7500') when I am only 30 miles from the airport - much too late, so, I have to circle around whilst I lose height. (This is going in to VISR (Srinagar), which is at about 5500' elevation).

Is it possible that this problem happens with some airports and not others, for whatever reason?

Without your logs it's impossible to say. 7,500ft at 30 miles is not that drastic when for example a/c leave Biggin for Heathrow at 7,000ft. and have to get down to 2,500ft to establish at 8nm.

vololiberista wrote:

Without your logs it's impossible to say. 7,500ft at 30 miles is not that drastic

It is 27500ft in 30 miles, so with an average ground speed of e.g. 150 knots this would be about 2300fpm, or 3800fpm with 250 knots.

But yes, logs would be good.

Ooops, I meant to post the log and forgot - apologies. I can add it a bit later when I have finished my current flight. Are the log cumulative though? Maybe the old data has been wiped with the new flight... ..

It is not realistically possible to descend from 33000' to 7500' in 30 miles and maintain the speed of 180 knots ATC demands, even with spoilers that is quite a call.

EDIT: I think the data for the VIDP-VISR flight should be in this older log, according to the file date. Otherwise I'll do the same flight again later or tomorrow.

martinlest wrote:

Ooops, I meant to post the log and forgot - apologies. I can add it a bit later when I have finished my current flight. Are the log cumulative though? Maybe the old data has been wiped with the new flight... ..

It is not realistically possible to descend from 33000' to 7500' in 30 miles and maintain the speed of 180 knots ATC demands, even with spoilers that is quite a call.

EDIT: I think the data for the VIDP-VISR flight should be in this older log, according to the file date. Otherwise I'll do the same flight again later or tomorrow.

180kts at 30miles is too slow you need to adjust your profile and possibly your FAF altitude and distance. 180kts would be correct at FAF altitude of 3,000ft and distance of 7nm.

OK, another example. I just flew VOCI to VOMM. According to my a/c CDU, FSNav - and a rough calculation, by the penultimate waypoint (RESMA) before the destination, I should be at about 12000'. PF3 ATC did not even request I start my descent from FL340 (to FL240) until I was passing over it. So I passed my last waypoint (KKP) at about 24000' instead of what should be about 7000'.

To calculate descent rate, as you are doubtless aware, you basically take the distance you need to descend vertically in nautical miles and divide that by the descent angle, about 3 degrees is usual. So that means in this case, to descend from 34000 to the airport altitude (33'), I need 34000 divided by 3 = (3 degrees descent angle) = in excess of 110 nm to descend. PF3 is giving me half that, 55 miles. Then, just to add to the frustration, come ATC's almost impossible speed reduction requests, so round and round we go again whilst I lose height...

(To add insult to injury, on landing there is a queue of aircraft waiting to get off the runway. No idea why they aren't taxiing to the gates. AFCAD2 shows no problem with the AFCAD file (and I only have one for VOMM) and there were gates/parking free!! I waited and waited to see what would happen. One a/c disappeared, zapped by FS9. The next waited for a couple of minutes, then started taxiing to the gate, as did the last one. Both then stopped down the taxiway, blocking the path. Is this a CM problem again? My a/c was either stationary or moving slowly though.. In any case, the situation was there, as you see it, when I landed, so probably nothing to do with CM)



Flights that end like this spoil my whole evening!

Maybe I take this whole FS thing too seriously!

Log for this flight attached. (At 17.13 I ignored ATC and started a circle to give me time to get to a reasonable height to get on the glideslope).

martinlest wrote:

OK, another example. I just flew VOCI to VOMM. According to my a/c CDU, FSNav - and a rough calculation, by the penultimate waypoint (RESMA) before the destination, I should be at about 12000'. PF3 ATC did not even request I start my descent from FL340 (to FL240) until I was passing over it. So I passed my last waypoint (KKP) at about 24000' instead of what should be about 7000'.

To calculate descent rate, as you are doubtless aware, you basically take the distance you need to descend vertically in nautical miles and divide that by the descent angle, about 3 degrees is usual. So that means in this case, to descend from 34000 to the airport altitude (33'), I need 34000 divided by 3 = (3 degrees descent angle) = in excess of 110 nm to descend. PF3 is giving me half that, 55 miles. Then, just to add to the frustration, come ATC's almost impossible speed reduction requests, so round and round we go again whilst I lose height...

(To add insult to injury, on landing there is a queue of aircraft waiting to get off the runway. No idea why they aren't taxiing to the gates. AFCAD2 shows no problem with the AFCAD file (and I only have one for VOMM) and there were gates/parking free!! I waited and waited to see what would happen. One a/c disappeared, zapped by FS9. The next waited for a couple of minutes, then started taxiing to the gate, as did the last one. Both then stopped down the taxiway, blocking the path. Is this a CM problem again? My a/c was either stationary or moving slowly though.. In any case, the situation was there, as you see it, when I landed, so probably nothing to do with CM)



Flights that end like this spoil my whole evening!

Maybe I take this whole FS thing too seriously!

Log for this flight attached. (At 17.13 I ignored ATC and started a circle to give me time to get to a reasonable height to get on the glideslope).

Well it would appear that you did not make any adjustments to your waypoint altitudes.

Quote:

NOT Using SID/STAR or Adjusted Waypoint Altitudes...

Alt for WP: 0 - VOCI - 26
Alt for WP: 1 - KERDA - 34000
Alt for WP: 2 - CCB - 34000
Alt for WP: 3 - SL - 34000
Alt for WP: 4 - RESMA - 15000
Alt for WP: 5 - KKP - 8000
Alt for WP: 6 - VOMM - 33

So here PF3 is expected to descend you to 15,000 by RESMA not to 12,000 as you say." (RESMA) before the destination, I should be at about 12000'. "
Wypt 3 is 143nm from VOMM and about 90 from RESMA. Try lowering wypts 4 and 5 by 3,000 each and increase your descent rate if necessary. You may also have entered too low a value in your a/c profile. This is just a case of tweaking PF3's numbers. That's what the wypt adjustment page is for.

And as for your afcad. Probably too many a/c chasing too few gates. Again unlikely to be PF3.

Martin,
what do you have AI traffic set at...mines about 33% and i get enough traffic to contend with?

Vololiberista, you're a real gem, you make me laugh Everything is always the fault of the end user.. It's such a mantra with you I don't take too much notice any more. I know you're trying to help but:

First, I really shouldn't need to be making waypoint adjustments to every flight plan I load, plans moreover that work just fine in the default FS9 ATC (I've tested them)... but OK, 15000' or 12000' at that waypoint.. either would be OK, why quibble over 3000'?

Quote:

here PF3 is expected to descend you to 15,000 by RESMA

So why doesn't it then?? That's the problem, not whether it's 12000 or 15000. 15000' would be perfectly OK. How come in your reply you don't take on board the fact that with PF3 I am still at 34000' at that point? How is tweaking the PF3 numbers by a 1000 or two going to change that? And I am not the only one by any means reporting this, am I (this isn't even my original thread)?

No, the traffic blockage is doubtless not a PF3 issue per se, but someone might have a helpful suggestion. As I say, the AFCAD has no errors and I could see there were plenty of free parking spaces of the right size for the a/c queueing up. But why were they stopping on the taxiway like that?

I set traffic between 25% and 90% depending on the airport. 33% at small airports and the place is empty. I am at 50% at the moment, flying into the very moderately sized Chennai (VOMM).

Never mind, that may have been a one off. Like several others posting here, it's the late TOD calls (descent calls come thick and fast after that, but it's too late by then) that it would be good to see the end of (and I am sure Dave is doing his best to see why this might be happening. No one is pretending that this is anything but complex!). How come too that whatever setting I put as my default descent rate, 2000ft/min or 500ft/min makes no difference in the sim? I hoped that might help give earlier descent instructions, but no. That question has been asked by others too..

As it is, I think I am going to take a break from FS9 for a bit now (my family are celebrating the fact already!) - it's getting a bit too frustrating to be honest.

martinlest wrote:

Vololiberista, you're a real gem, you make me laugh Everything is always the fault of the end user.. It's such a mantra with you I don't take too much notice any more. I know you're trying to help but:

First, I really shouldn't need to be making waypoint adjustments to every flight plan I load, plans moreover that work just fine in the default FS9 ATC (I've tested them)... but OK, 15000' or 12000' at that waypoint.. either would be OK, why quibble over 3000'?

Quote:

here PF3 is expected to descend you to 15,000 by RESMA

So why doesn't it then?? That's the problem, not whether it's 12000 or 15000. 15000' would be perfectly OK. How come in your reply you don't take on board the fact that with PF3 I am still at 34000' at that point? How is tweaking the PF3 numbers by a 1000 or two going to change that? And I am not the only one by any means reporting this, am I (this isn't even my original thread)?

No, the traffic blockage is doubtless not a PF3 issue per se, but someone might have a helpful suggestion. As I say, the AFCAD has no errors and I could see there were plenty of free parking spaces of the right size for the a/c queueing up. But why were they stopping on the taxiway like that?

I set traffic between 25% and 90% depending on the airport. 33% at small airports and the place is empty. I am at 50% at the moment, flying into the very moderately sized Chennai (VOMM).

Never mind, that may have been a one off. Like several others posting here, it's the late TOD (they come thick and fast after that, but it's too late by then) calls it would be good to see the end of (and I am sure Dave is doing his best to see why this might be happening. No one is pretending that this is anything but complex!). How come too that whatever setting I put as my default descent rate, 2000ft/min or 500ft/min makes no difference in the sim? That has been asked by others too..

As it is, I think I am going to take a break from FS9 for a bit now (my family are celebrating the fact already!) - it's getting a bit too frustrating to be honest.

Everything is always the fault of the end user. That's not the case. Having said that it's the most common reason. It seems that you are expecting PF3 to somehow magic a perfect fpl profile when you don't give it the best information to work on in the first place. You are trying to fly without any SIDs and STARs which would be mandatory on this route.
Transcript: 'Out of Flight Level 205 for 2 thousand on 2979 Air India 3205 ' You are joking!!!
and maintain the speed of 180 knots ATC demands Please get your facts right as PF3 asked you to reduce your speed to 200 not 180.
MAX Speed IAS is set to 9999. No wonder you had so much trouble you were not checking your speed.

Martin I'm sorry but there are just too many end user errors in the log. You need to rerun the whole flightplan this time with the correct SIDs and STARs. With the correct altitude contraints. Just like the professionals! Fly it at the correct speeds and pay attention to any ATC instructions. If you don't give PF3 a good fpl it won't give you a good flight. You need to pay attention to the fpl. Decide what your maximum rate of descent will be and check that there is enough time and distance between the wypts to achieve the target altitudes. PF3 is not a flight planning programme it is an ATC programme and you have to help it ocassionally to get the best result.

I will fly your exact fpl tomorrow with SIDS and STARs and I will expect a decent flight.