OnCourse Software

martinlest wrote:

Quote:

As I said earlier being cleared to cruise height immediately upon arriving at SID ceiling is not an error or a bug in PF3

No, I know, I didn't say it was a bug - I agreed with you after your last post. That's fine.

Quote:

Sticking in at least two more wypts after WELLF may resolve you issue.

OK, no harm in trying that. But the issue still remains that the majority of my flight plans are probably similar in construction to the CYXX-CYYC one, with a last waypoint at a similar distance from the airport. I haven't had any problems with those, so I wonder why this particular approach is different.

When I get round to adding a few closer waypoints and flying the route, I'll post back. Meanwhile, maybe Dave will spot something..

Thanks

Probably due to the complexity of CYYC's layout. You should however try to improve your fpls as the last wypt being 100+nm from the destination is unusual. If a waypt or a VOR/NDB isn't on the fpl it makes it extremly difficult for the crew in terms of navigation. "Umm where do we go from here?" ICAO do very little in the way of vectoring compared to FAA.
PF3 will always identify the last wypt in a fpl as "End of STAR" if STARs are selected. This can cause problems if it is too distant and from that point you have to navigate around high ground etc., to get to the runway.
The solution is to have a parallel fpl which you input into your a/c navigation system which includes wypts after the end of STAR. In your case though you do need to study the charts for CYYC more closely so that you can programme the correct approach into your a/c and PF3 and also to be able to meet the published altitude constraints. You don't have to keep on doing it!
Once done PF3 remembers so the next time you use that same fpl it requires little or no change.

Quote:

You should however try to improve your fpls as the last wypt being 100+nm from the destination is unusual

Mine aren't.. it's the Air Canada flight plan that is, if you recall.

martinlest wrote:

Quote:

You should however try to improve your fpls as the last wypt being 100+nm from the destination is unusual

Mine aren't.. it's the Air Canada flight plan that is, if you recall.

Yes but the AC fpl you have doesn't include the SIDs and STARs that they use. And that's the part that you have to add to your PF3 fpl to ensure correct step climbs and descents.

Quote:

the AC fpl you have doesn't include the SIDs and STARs that they use. And that's the part that you have to add to your PF3 fpl to ensure correct step climbs and descents.

Could Dave M. please confirm this, that it's essential to add the SIDs and STARs for a flight plan in order to get correct climb/descent instructions in PF3 (or any instructions at all: as I say, I was just left to fly on at FL190 approaching CYYC)? It's not been my overall experience in the past.. I hardly ever added SID/STARs in PFE and rarely had this kind of problem with ATC giving no heading/elevation instructions. (And not that often in PF3 either, come to that).

martinlest wrote:

Could Dave M. please confirm this, that it's essential to add the SIDs and STARs for a flight plan in order to get correct climb/descent instructions in PF3

I'd say no, but doing something in a slightly different way could prevent running into a situation (bug or whatever) that happens with the currently used way. But if there is a bug, it is still a bug, even if you can circumvent it.

martinlest wrote:

Quote:

the AC fpl you have doesn't include the SIDs and STARs that they use. And that's the part that you have to add to your PF3 fpl to ensure correct step climbs and descents.

Could Dave M. please confirm this, that it's essential to add the SIDs and STARs for a flight plan in order to get correct climb/descent instructions in PF3 (or any instructions at all: as I say, I was just left to fly on at FL190 approaching CYYC)? It's not been my overall experience in the past.. I hardly ever added SID/STARs in PFE and rarely had this kind of problem with ATC giving no heading/elevation instructions. (And not that often in PF3 either, come to that).

No, you don't HAVE to include SIDs/STARs and PF3 should handle all types of flight plan for both novice and experienced pilots and everything in between!

That's what I thought, thanks.

I am trying the CYXX-CYYC flight yet again - I have set PF3 to use both SIDs and STARs now - in the two 'generic' checkbox option (I was only using SIDs before) to see how that changes what happens when it comes time to start the approach to Calgary airport. I have also added a closer waypoint to CYYC (ROVMA) as Mr. V. suggested. (I haven't as yet tried setting the end of SID and start of STAR in the fp waypoint adjustments, but that will be my next move if the current settings aren't satisfactory. I am trying to set things so that I don't have to set up every flight individually in the various options boxes, even though that might be closer to reality!).

In any case, Dave said he thought he saw some sort of bug/problem in the log I sent, so we'll wait and see what happens..