Last week I planned a Dreamliner flight in the web based planner first (rather than starting in Navigraph) in an attempt to make my peace with it and see if I could live with it a little. Saved my plan in my account then booted up 24. By the time I got to the flight deck, 24 had completely changed the approach procedure and arrival STAR I had selected! I just gave up, not wanting to reroute at the FMS level for fear of CTD or who knows what defects would ruin the next few hours. Yesterday I flew the Dreamliner in 2020 for 3 flawless hours using Navigraph/SimBrief; the Dreamliner user experience is so much better in 2020 than in 24, it just gets out of the way.
Do you have a specific set of waypoints or a plan we can use to reproduce this behavior? Weâre not able to reliably reproduce this report so far.
I tried to copy a flight plan in the MSFS Planner that Simbrief created for me. The aircraft is the A321, the departure is LHBP, the destination is LEMD. The route should go like this:
GILE2L GILEP ZOLKU SUNIS RIFEN GEKBA VAMTU UM984 KOLON UZ184 GANGU UM984 DIVKO UN975 ADUXO ADUX2D
I can properly add the departure and arrival procedures and thereâs no problem until there are direct waypoints. The problem starts when at VAMTU, I should add the UM984 airway with KOLON as the exit point.
I highlight KOLON and press Select, but KOLON doesnât get added to the plan, instead it looks like this:
Now, I realized that since the same airway (UM984) appears twice in the plan, I can instead choose DIVKO as the exit point and the airway will be created up to the last waypoint until DIVKO. Which, again, I donât know why is the case. I have to add DIVKO as a direct.
Then, according to the Simbrief flight plan, the UN975 âairwayâ from DIVKO to ADUXO should look like this.
In the MSFS Planner there is simply no way to define the airway like this, since this is my only option:
Again, inserting this only adds DIVKO as a duplicate but not NILDU. Even so, Iâd have to add all other waypoints directly. To be fair, I donât understand how the UN975 airway can look like that on the Simbrief plan. From NILDU to ADUXO, all the other waypoints must not be on an airway since the route just snakes around, but all those waypoints are not mentioned anywhere on Simbrief, apart from being visible on the map.
I havenât tried adding the Simbrief plan to the aircraft directly because Iâm only testing to see how the MSFS Planner works. So I donât know how the aircraft would figure out the rest of the route without any mentions of all the remaining waypoints.
TL;DR my Planner route ends up like this (without adding the rest one by one) compared to Simbrief:
Of course, itâs fully possible that Iâm doing something wrong. Either way, the Planner doesnât seem to add the actual exit point of an airway when selecting it.
1 Like
A part of the problem is that the route is for an outdated AIRAC (in your screenshot it says 2303, and the current cycle is 2413). The UN975 segment in your plan is not valid for the current cycle.
One tip for copying routes from SimBrief: you donât need to do it by hand, adding each waypoint. Instead, you can select your origin and destination, then click the route textbox, and paste the text route from SimBrief directly between the origin and destination in the textbox.
Additionally, you can now also open MSFS2024 PLN files generated from SimBrief in the web planner, by clicking the Open Flight Plan icon at the lower right corner of the screen (on desktop/tablet) or in the menu drawer (on mobile) and then clicking Upload.
That being said, we have been able to reproduce the issue with the airway dialog you are reporting and will have a fix for that in an update soon. Thank you very much for the comprehensive report, that helps us get to the root of issues quickly!
8 Likes
Very interesting: I just tried this using a flight plan I flew this morning and it did not look correct in the web based flight planner. Then I tried with a flight plan from yesterday and it looked correct. Both were PMDG 777F plans, so I will plan a new Dreamliner flight from scratch in SimBrief this afternoon, download for MS2024 and upload it into the Flight Planner. If it looks correct, I will then download to the Dreamliner in 24 and fly it. Wish me luck.
1 Like
Youâre not running into an outdated AIRAC conflict are you?
Are you a Navigraph subscriber?
Donât think so, SimBrief is set to current cycle, 2413.
Also I noticed that there was a new SimBrief version update yesterday.
And yes, I have a Navigraph subscription.
1 Like
Importing a SimBrief FP into the web based Flight Planner (and my Xbox account), then loading to the EFB in the Dreamliner for download to the FMS worked. Unfortunately the flight terminated with a CTD at the end of pushback. Will reboot the Series X and try the flight againâŠ
Flight under way after rebooting the box. For those who want to try this method of bringing the SimBrief FP into 24, one thing I am doing is loading the SimBrief Block Fuel to the aircraft before the flight starts (after verifying/selecting Controller presets). Later, after LOAD FLIGHT PLAN to EFB (on the flight deck) and SEND TO AVIONICS, Iâm setting the SimBrief passenger count and cargo weight in the CDU Weight + Balance page.
To make my life easier, Iâm setting a pax count of 300 in SimBrief and the Dreamliner, and taking the nominal 16,500 cargo weight from SimBrief (or whatever it throws in for the flight). All this seems to be working reasonably well over a few Dreamliner flights in 24. What I am not doing is using the EFB before launching the flight nor am I manipulating fuel or payload in the EFB. There are just too many opportunities to create conflict or CTDs.
@Bishop398 Do you plan to address the discrepancies in the weight of the 737 MAX 8? For instance, there is a significant difference in the ZFW.
The web planner just gets the data as defined by the aircraft package CFG files. So it would need to be fixed in the aircraft package itself by the aircraft developer.
Thank you for your reply.
If I understand correctly, in this case, the aircraft developer provided you with data that differs from the ones available directly in the MSFS 2024?
We do not receive any data in any sort of side-channel from developers. In other words, we are directly reading the simâs packages to get the payload information. Instead of reading the packages from your local disk, we get the inventory of aircraft you own, and read the packages through the cloud via various internal cloud service APIs. This provides us with the payload configuration data from the aircraft package directly.
If the data is incorrect on the web planner, then the developer will need to update their aircraft package in the sim to have the correct payload data in the aircraft CFG files.
1 Like
But doesnât this lead to incompatibilities to âlocal onlyâ aircraft and mods which are not linked to the user tag? For example the Fenix A320 is unlikely to ever end up on the cloud, also the FBW A380 is also far away from being maybe available on a possible freeware section of the Marketplace so if the data is not read from local storage at all how will this be tackled? Is there some sort of fallback for that case?
Local only aircraft and mods
I imagine the Community Folder packages are being read as part of the plannerâs scan of SimObjects to draw that data from. It wouldnât make sense to exclude them.
Not at this time. Only Marketplace owned and default aircraft are supported.
We are looking into custom third party aircraft package support and would like to bring it to the planner in the future, if possible.
2 Likes
Ok so, If you are reading data directly from the aircraft configuration files, in this case,737 Max 8, why is there such a large discrepancy in ZFW - weight of the aircraft without passengers, fuel and cargo?
The difference is over 20 tons.
We have deployed a new version this evening which should address this airway insertion issue. Let us know if it helps for you!
It looks like there is a unit conversion issue somewhere, as the lbs value on the web planner matches exactly the kg value showing on the in-sim EFB. We will log and investigate.
3 Likes
Iâve noticed that too and I needed confirmation. Thank you for addressing the issue.
Thereâs also a difference in the passenger weight. In MSFS 2024 - 737 MAX 8 - is set to 68.3kg, while in web flight planner, itâs set to 75kg.
It looks like I am not able to save a flight plan (WT web flight planner) - there is a msg âCould not save flight planâ. Any idea why this may happen?
I have seen that as well and the only solution I have found is to logout and login again. You loose your current flight plan and have to enter it again but then it is possible to save it.
My guess is that there is some problem with keeping the session alive or maybe if the session is closed, the web app is not aware of that. It is also a bit annoying that you have to login every day you want to use the planner. If they could remember me on my device I would be happy but I guess there are security reasons why the sessions have a limited life span.
1 Like