![topcat p3d topcat p3d](http://i1.hdslb.com/bfs/archive/0a823eb1603ba3e7865aac655fb2b257803bc893.jpg)
You should not use the worksheet for one tail number for another.Īnother example is your nav data. Unless their fleet all has the exact same options, the CG worksheets will be different for each tail number, even if they're the same model (a G1000 panel has a different weight than a steam panel). Go to your local flight school and look at the weight and balance forms for each aircraft. One thing a lot of simmers don't realize here is that CG/Trim is usually calculated on a per-aircraft basis, unless the whole fleet is exactly the same. Seeing that these values vary between the FS9 version and the FSX version, the FS9 PMDG 737 template will not accurately calculate loads for the FSX version, just as a 772 CG/Trim calculator wouldn't accurately calculate the CG/Trim of a 738. The values being matched there are actually aircraft specific. The inverse is true about the weight and balance side of things. Real Boeing 737 Perf Data = PMDG Perf Data PFPX Perf Data = Real Boeing 737 Perf Data Ever wonder why a lot of aviation rules of thumb that work in the real world work in the sim, or why, if you get a real world dispatch sheet, it will work for our aircraft? Their calculator is designed to match the performance data of the real plane, just as our simulation is designed to match the performance of the real plane. Heck, if it were commercially licensed, you could probably use it for real world flight planning if you wanted to given that fact. The matching here is from each simulation to the real world burn value. Logically, the 737 burns the same amount of fuel in FS9 as it does in FSX, as it does in P3D, as it does in the real world - provided the developer is at least moderately competent. I often see "is PFPX compatible with ?" Of course it is, and I'm not sure why someone would ask. In other words, remember what values are being matched. One thing that trips people up a whole bunch is this concept of "matching worlds." You always have to keep that in mind. This gives you only relevant, and actionable, data. PFPX understands all Item 2 values, and ignores Item 1 values entirely (forcing you to defer to the FMC-calculated value).
#TOPCAT P3D SIMULATOR#
These values will be the same regardless of simulator (unless the scenery changed between versions of the sim - runway shortening would be the only concerning factor, really).įor this reason, it's completely pointless to even open the program for anything 737-related. Item 2 requires the program to understand the aircraft weights and the parameters related to the airfield/runway/weather. Seeing that you're attempting to calculate aircraft performance using said calculator, this is not a good thing and will lead to bad data. The weight stations in that version are different (seating locations), along with the generic weights (ZFW, namely). The TOPCAT template for the PMDG 737 was designed after the FS9 version of the PMDG 737. In other words, it must understand all weight stations in the aircraft. Item 1 requires the program to understand all station loads. CG (necessary to calculate takeoff trim values).I'm going to make this as crystal clear as possible in hopes that those here can be ambassadors to help the rest of the community understand. For this reason, I usually err on the side of ridiculously verbose.)įor the record, this is a common thing misunderstanding in the community, so it's not anyone here in particular. (Remember that other thread, where you made note of me summarizing.? This is what happens when I summarize. I have used it for planning in FSX and P3D and since it works outside of any other program or sim, I never had any issues.