Peter wrote:
My understanding is that FF cannot provide a performance model which is outside the POH data, which is obviously a problem for not just the TB20 but also many others. You have to make your own. Why this has not come up before in the USA is interesting… A lack of Eurocontrol is one reason.
Well I suppose how else can they get the performance model if it isn’t described in the POH?
I understand that, and perhaps a responsibility issue, but how old is FF and how old is say the TB20?
1984 for the latter.
It is really curious why this is so. It would be interesting to know what sort of flight plans US TB pilots have been filing.
Peter wrote:
It is really curious why this is so. It would be interesting to know what sort of flight plans US TB pilots have been filing.
I am not sure the US flight plan system validates aircraft climb profiles etc in the same way. It may not affect things over there as it does here.
They do have mountains there, which would need a FP over 12500ft.
But as so often in GA there can be multiple factors which gradually water down the exposure to a specific scenario, to the point where it does not arise. Start with say 300 tb20s, take out those without an IR, those who don’t use FF, those who file by phoning 1 800 wx brief, those who fly low, those who fly 10hrs a year…
They keep updating the airplane database. Just a couple of days ago I noticed (there was an alert in the web-version) that they now have most (all?) sub-models of the C182. That said, you can always create your custom profile. N.B. I am referring to the US version of FF.
A little update: the TB20 (“TB20GT” it is actually called) now has a 20k ceiling. The model is based on my climb and cruise data. This now allows autorouting up to FL200. The TB21 model needs the same treatment but I have no data for a TB21 and it is clearly very different to a TB20… maybe somebody can supply some, up to FL250? @paul had some, IIRC.
It works pretty well too in the web app. I think some other fixes have been done.
One big missing thing, apparently missing in the IOS app also, is the lack of fly-by waypoint specification, so there is no way to tailor the route to e.g. avoid weather, regions on ATC strike, etc.
One thing I haven’t sussed is whether one can edit the generated route prior to filing. There seems to be no way to view the raw flight plan text, for sure not in the web version (not even in the briefing pack, which is a serious omission – you really should know what is being filed). Editing is a good tool for the French ATC strikes, whereby you insert VFR and IFR words into the route but otherwise file it as-is. It is also a good tool for other hacks… Can anyone confirm whether the IOS app allows this?
It’s funny to think none of this stuff is needed in the USA and nobody out there had ever noticed the 12500ft TB20 ceiling 
Unlike the Garmin Pilot Autorouter implementation, you can file whatever you put in the flight plan page (assuming it validates of course)
Could you please post a screenshot?
Peter wrote:
Could you please post a screenshot?
Peter, if you hit “proceed to file” at the bottom right when you have a new flightplan form up you have the flight plan filing form and can edit whatever you like.
Is this in IOS or web version?
