Jeppesen FLightstar 9 - POS WARNING

Gordon:
Do you anticipate having Voyager replace your paper in the cockpit?

Gordon:

Just wondering if you have any follow up on Voyager V 2.0 as far as the teething problems are concerned? Your update would be appreciated.

David Schwietert 203 RF PFD/TKS

Jaaaaaaaaaaaap!!! Are you nuts? After what happend to my post in your power tow thread?!
Oh, by the way, I do use Flight Star (didn’t check the infos on Bush International though) but I have given up on the performance database. I just ignore it. It has me going with 180 knots most of the time and I just subtract time and fuel. Not at all elegant. But for us in Old Europe it’s still the only available IFR/VFR software - I think
ralph

In reply to:


Do you anticipate having Voyager replace your paper in the cockpit?


Not entirely. It will generate nice printed flight plans and NACO charts (soon to be vector!) but I will still have paper backup chart books for alternates.

So it appears that FlightStar version 9.x is indeed a POS. I’m still using FlightStar 7.x, and would like to upgrade to something more modern. What’s the consensus among COPAns as to the best flight planner?

 - Marc -

Sounds like a good deal otherwise. What type of viewing device are you going to use to display the charts in the cockpit?

Just curious as to whether you looked at the Chart Case product from flightprep.com to see how you think their product compares to Voyager?

In reply to:


What type of viewing device are you going to use to display the charts in the cockpit?


None. I’m waiting until they show up on the MFD or a suitable tablet PC w/ a single cable emerges.

Thanks,

I thought it was …just an international flightplanning example…

a------- feet in mouth too ---------

I found on their website RMS Flightsoft supports a worldwide database (the most expensive pack).

Routing is for me the most important part.

If you print a Trip Kit using the two per page format (any of them) the airport diagram will not print. If you print full page there is no problem.

Printing can, in general, mess up. I suspect a lot of the modes weren’t tested. I have an Epson Stylus Photo 1280 and on several occasions I have gotten just junk out. Then again, I tend to print in kneeboard format.

Unfortunately, the other programs I have looked at don’t have the routing options Flitestar has. So, I still prefer Flitestar when it works.

RE:printing

When I print in the one up, one down on a page mode, all the flight plan pages come out as the same orientation, but the charts are opposite. Bizzare.

Woody S

Greg,

I would like to correct it , but haven’t learned how to quote yet.

Maybe someones can explain it up (lengthy would be good)

:wink:

In reply to:


Just wondering if you have any follow up on Voyager V 2.0 as far as the teething problems are concerned? Your update would be appreciated.


No, I haven’t followed up with them in a while. My bandwidth has been severely compromised lately. I’ll try and call them this coming week.

In reply to:


I am sure you have resolved your problems, one way or another, by now.


Nope. I sent the file to Jeppesen, exchanged a couple emails, and they promised to send me a corrected file. Never heard from them again.

I did a similar thing with the file - exported the LOP profile to a text file and munged it and imported it into the model. Despite being ordered correctly, it would still barf. The Jepp guy said something about it being defined as a complex model yet needing to be parsed internally as a simple model.

As a software developer, I can smell a mess a mile away and their aircraft model code fails the sniff test. My guess is that they are dragging a huge wad of legasy code around like a millstone. Every time they come out with a new version I think “Aha - they’ve finally re-written it” and every time I’m wrong. I feel like Charlie Brown kicking the football, ya know what I mean?

I’ll send you the file - thanks for the offer. In the meantime I’ve been using the “override cruise” option in the first wizard dialog.

Gordon,

Voyager has their version 2 out. I’ve been using it for a couple of days. It feels a little fragile, but the features are pretty complete now. If it gets even 80% of the way there, Flightstar’s going into the toilet.

The aircraft model is DUAT-style - only averages no modelling. (About like we’re using Flightstar’s right now! They recommend setting up different models for different altitudes of cruise, not a bad compromise given the small variation in our fuel flows; I use ~14.5gph from 10,000’ on up to 17,500 as I gradually shift from 25F LOP to 50F ROP. )

There are many well thought out options (“Don’t print airport charts for home airport?”). You can set up profiles for pilots, passengers, aircraft, and cargo. You can define your own standard departure procedures. I ran the router from SQL to MMH specifying 14,000 as a maximum altitude and it found a route very similar to what I fly.

The UI shares Flightstar’s unfortunate infatuation with numerous obscure icons, but all data fields and grapical objects are right-clickable and editable.

The program downloads TFR’s, weather from DUAT, approach plates from AOPA, and map updates monthly. There’s a lot there and it is very promising.

Its available with a 10-day free trial. But it may take you the 10 days to download it – the download is 150MB and must run to completion!

In reply to:


In the meantime I’ve been using the “override cruise” option in the first wizard dialog.


Gordon: After reading your posts I am glad you are doing this and not me! I just enter 173 kts. and 12.5 gph in the “override cruise” boxes. The actual flight times come out to within a minute or two. Fuel use is actually less LOP but I stick with that number anyway. I know that if I plan on 12.5 gph that the actual usage is going to be less LOP than that. Usually this works out to flying for about 3 or 3.5 hours and landing with tanks half full and feeling pretty good at being able to stand up and take a break for a while.

In reply to:


Voyager has their version 2 out. I’ve been using it for a couple of days. It feels a little fragile, but the features are pretty complete now.


Thanks, Curt. I’ll try it out to see how they’ve progressed.

Curt

Also been using Voyager for a few days. And “fragile” is VERY generous.

I’d rate it as buggy, somewhat above beta.

Basic problems like filing FAA flight plans that don’t match the NavLog, dropping waypoints, including airways to points not on the airway. Most of these seem to occur when you edit / change a flight plan developed by the routing wizard. Voyager can’t seem to deal with the airways etc.

I’d rate it as “not ready for prime time”:

Back to Destination Direct for me. Not nearly as many neat features, but at least most of the ones delivered work pretty reliably.