| OnCourse Software http://www.ocs-support.co.uk/forums/ |
|
| PF3 Recent Anomalies http://www.ocs-support.co.uk/forums/viewtopic.php?t=4402 |
Page 2 of 2 |
| Author: | Dave March [ Wed Jan 10, 2024 11:43 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: PF3 Recent Anomalies |
| If you ever find yourself in that situation again where you can't make the assigned altitude just use the H or L key on their own.... that requests clearance to you current altitude. I've only just noticed that isn't mentioned in the user guide so I've just corrected it. |
| Author: | SkyCamel [ Wed Jan 10, 2024 3:12 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: PF3 Recent Anomalies |
Good to know, thanks Attached the debug log upon the moment I'm taxiing. If I can make a request, can we have the assigned runway when asking for clearance or at least when receiving push back clearance? In this flight I got 'to the south" and in the TGS the red and green where pointing like 5° to the right (top of the TGS) And of course I was pointing the wrong way after push back. I know ATIS announces the active runway but even in this case I think ATC changed it from 07L to 07C, not a problem this time as they are the same direction but sometime you have to taxi the other way. cheers, Luc |
| Author: | Dave March [ Wed Jan 10, 2024 3:52 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: PF3 Recent Anomalies |
| Well with this flight plan it was showing the last waypoint at 18,600' and it was only 15 miles from the airport, therefore PF3 reduced the altitude accordingly. The flight plan also had no procedures. Had you use a flight plan with procedures and ticked the filter option then you would have seen the result you are looking for. |
| Author: | Dave March [ Wed Jan 10, 2024 3:53 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: PF3 Recent Anomalies |
| As for providing the runway with your clearance I have not done it this way through choice, it is what I was advised it should be. At the time I had both CAA and FAA controllers on the beta team and went along with their advice. |
| Author: | SkyCamel [ Wed Jan 10, 2024 4:29 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: PF3 Recent Anomalies |
In that case I have a misunderstanding how PF3 deals with "SID active" and "STAR active" box ticked. I was following the slides I got from Martin and so I loaded the NonProc FP in PF3 and indicated SID and STAR active. So I don't understand why then you would change the last waypoint FL as you obviously don't know what the STAR is and I did indicate I will fly a STAR. If you look at this particular FP you will see there is a loooong STAR so flying it gives you plenty of time to get down. Actually Dave, what I really would like to have is an option to leave the FP as loaded without PF3 making any changes. I assume that if you make your FP with Simbrief for the airframe you're flying there's nothing to adjust. As you rightfully stated in a previous post, PF3 is not a flight planner, and I agree. So people should make a FP with a correct flight planner and then PF3 should give the option to leave it as is. In other cases PF3 or the user can make adjustments but I really don't understand why PF3 or the user should start making changes to a perfect FP that is made for the aircraft he's flying |
| Author: | Dave March [ Wed Jan 10, 2024 4:54 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: PF3 Recent Anomalies |
| I'm just making some changes to the Filtered Flight Plan feature to do exactly what you ask and that is to leave all the altitudes in the flight plan as they are, provided you have a STAR included. If your FP includes a SID the first waypoint in PF3 will be the same altitude as your FP SID exit point, then the next waypoint will have your cruise altitude |
| Author: | pointy56 [ Wed Jan 10, 2024 5:43 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: PF3 Recent Anomalies |
Unfortunately, that's not always the case; I am currently seeing altitude errors in flight plans produced by Simbrief. Specifically, constraint altitudes not being set for STAR entry points (so incorrect entry altitude & descent steps), and cruise levels above airway limits. I am trying to raise these problems with Navigraph support, but have so far received no response. The way that I work around these issues is to load the Simbrief FP into Little NavMap, which will then correctly apply constraints, and then export the plan in MSFS format; that plan should then load correctly into PF3. Alternatively you can manually adjust the PF3 waypoints to match your FMC. Hope this helps, Martin |
| Author: | SkyCamel [ Thu Jan 11, 2024 7:31 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: PF3 Recent Anomalies |
Granted, and as I said in some post a month ago, If there any constraints to be respected (and Simbrief doesn't) that's on us to correct them when loading them in to PF3. Actually I did have the problem with Simbrief with the flight EHAM-EDDF where cruise altitude was set to FL390. After loading it in Little Navmap it complaint it couldn't calculate the TOC and TOD because TOD should be before TOC. And that is on me to correct in PF3. My point is that it's not for PF3 nor the responsibility to correct FL in a flight plan when it is specified that SID and STAR will be flown. Could you please tell me how to do this, I mean for LNM to apply the constraints? I use to do that too, making my flight plan in LNM and export it to SImbrief, re-import it to LNM and the export to MSFS format. But I did that because of the AIRAC discrepancy between LNM and Simbrief. But at your suggestion (I think) I did get a month subscription to Navigraph so now I have all my AIRAC synchronized to the latest one. So now I make the FP directly in Simbrief. I only load it in LNM to follow my flight. That's also the reason why I automatically download the FP both with and without the PROC so I can load the NoProc in PF3 and the full one in to LNM. I will try out the "filter option" one of these day to see how it goes. Cheers, Luc |
| Page 2 of 2 | All times are UTC+01:00 |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited | |