CFP Wind Projections Reliability
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Jeddah
Age: 51
Posts: 88
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CFP Wind Projections Reliability
Despite purging a CFP closest to its departure time, i've noticed that the wind vectors and accuracy are completely inaccurate.
Whilst i'd like to consider a 10 Knot variance and a 15 Degree vector as the standard "bias", would I be too naive in considering that is the best that systems can come up with?.
Actual winds usually are completely difference on FMC and my concern here relates to fuel burn, because the CFP defines the Fuel uplift figures and i've noticed actual langing fuel, without hold is much lower than the CFP.
I'd really like as much information as possible on this.
I've been given to understand, we currently use SITA; but separately, i've heard that NAVTECH, FlygPrestranda, LIDO, AIMS and ARMS are a tad more accurate as they factor more realistic scanarios.
Many thanks
Whilst i'd like to consider a 10 Knot variance and a 15 Degree vector as the standard "bias", would I be too naive in considering that is the best that systems can come up with?.
Actual winds usually are completely difference on FMC and my concern here relates to fuel burn, because the CFP defines the Fuel uplift figures and i've noticed actual langing fuel, without hold is much lower than the CFP.
I'd really like as much information as possible on this.
I've been given to understand, we currently use SITA; but separately, i've heard that NAVTECH, FlygPrestranda, LIDO, AIMS and ARMS are a tad more accurate as they factor more realistic scanarios.
Many thanks
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: West London
Posts: 257
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Very surprised at your comments as SITA winds on the flight plan have a very high reputation among pilots who use these plans. I have been on the flight deck recently and the Captain was showing me that at the altitude we were at the reality and the plan was within 1 knot of each other. You seem a little vague as to who is your provider. Winds come from the met office and the source is from radio sondes. All the flight planning providers have good and not so good points. The overall accuracy of SITA winds on the flight plan is one of the good points of that provider. If you are certain of your facts get your dispatch department to investigate your findings as it doesn't sound right to me based on the facts you have given.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Jeddah
Age: 51
Posts: 88
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CFP Winds
We use SITAGraphFlight. I compared two extremely similar CFP's one used by Emirates which is LIDO and one used by us which is SITA.
LIDO along with CFP winds give you a Sheer Rate table and I've found that wind projections are better.
Not that all flights are alike with winds being off, but they were several that gave us winds that weren't too accurate.
Whilst my guess would be that the CFP crossed its effective validity window and winds showed different, the MET reports we pick up forecast winds for 24 hours, which seemed very accurate when compared with the FMC, but the CFP again showed the difference.
LIDO along with CFP winds give you a Sheer Rate table and I've found that wind projections are better.
Not that all flights are alike with winds being off, but they were several that gave us winds that weren't too accurate.
Whilst my guess would be that the CFP crossed its effective validity window and winds showed different, the MET reports we pick up forecast winds for 24 hours, which seemed very accurate when compared with the FMC, but the CFP again showed the difference.
