Just Flight Forum Homepage
Forum Home Forum Home > Air Hauler > Air Hauler General Discussion
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - The Aircraft Performance Thread!!
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

The Aircraft Performance Thread!!

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12345 9>
Author
Message
Hank View Drop Down
Check-In Staff
Check-In Staff


Joined: 21 Oct 2008
Points: 44
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Hank Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 30 Mar 2009 at 2:35pm
After surfing the net......all info about the DHC-4 Caribou (brochure) :

http://www.dhc4and5.org/Caribou_Brochure.pdf

And on the main site of above all info (incl.manuals (!)) about both the  DHC-4 and DHC-5 !!

http://www.dhc4and5.org/

Cheers Smile
Back to Top
Herege View Drop Down
First Officer
First Officer
Avatar

Joined: 10 Mar 2009
Points: 362
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Herege Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 30 Mar 2009 at 3:22pm
Very useful Hank, I was a long time looking the official specs of caribou, and now it's here, great!Clap
 
If you find more offical brochures, are more than welcome!
Back to Top
Paragon View Drop Down
Check-In Staff
Check-In Staff
Avatar

Joined: 28 Mar 2009
Location: KNQA
Points: 25
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Paragon Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 04 Apr 2009 at 4:59pm
Unless I overlooked it, any specs for the ATR 72 yet? I have not had any luck finding them on the net.
David "Paragon" Mays
Back to Top
Herege View Drop Down
First Officer
First Officer
Avatar

Joined: 10 Mar 2009
Points: 362
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Herege Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 04 Apr 2009 at 5:36pm
ATR 72-200F
 
Max cruising speed (at 15,000ft): 526km/h (284kt)
Economical cruising speed: 460km/h (248kt)
Range with reserves at max optional weight 1195km (645nm)
Service Ceiling: 25,000ft (7,620m)
Normal Cruising Altitude: 14,000 - 18,000 feet (4,267 - 5,486m)
 
Max Payload: 8,500kg (18,739lbs)
Max takeoff: 22,000kg (48,502lbs)
Max landing: 21,850kg (48,171lbs)
Max ZFW: 20,000kg (48,502lbs)
 
8,500kg (18,739lbs) payload comprising of nine compartments
 
Wink
Back to Top
fritchka View Drop Down
Check-In Staff
Check-In Staff
Avatar

Joined: 06 Mar 2009
Location: KTOC, Georgia
Points: 21
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote fritchka Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 04 Apr 2009 at 5:55pm
Cessna P210 Centurion
 
Production 1957 to 1985
P210R - One 240kW (325hp) turbocharged and fuel injected TSIO-520-CE
Normal cruise 150-170 kts
Max speed 225kt at 20,000ft
max cruising speed 213kt at 23,000ft
Initial rate of climb 1150ft/min
Service ceiling 25,000ft
Range with reserves and optional fuel 1190nm
Empty wt 2470lb
MTOW 4100lb
Estimated Cargo 1160 lb
Estimated fuel consumption 20gal/hr
Back to Top
Paragon View Drop Down
Check-In Staff
Check-In Staff
Avatar

Joined: 28 Mar 2009
Location: KNQA
Points: 25
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Paragon Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 04 Apr 2009 at 8:47pm
Thanks Herege 
David "Paragon" Mays
Back to Top
JD-LincsUK View Drop Down
Ground Crew
Ground Crew


Joined: 10 Apr 2008
Location: Pluto
Points: 72
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote JD-LincsUK Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06 Apr 2009 at 7:31pm
withdrawn
uler Beta Test Team
Back to Top
Paragon View Drop Down
Check-In Staff
Check-In Staff
Avatar

Joined: 28 Mar 2009
Location: KNQA
Points: 25
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Paragon Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06 Apr 2009 at 11:13pm
Thanks JD for this wealth of information and your work into gather it all. Much appreciated!
David "Paragon" Mays
Back to Top
TiggerToo View Drop Down
Check-In Staff
Check-In Staff


Joined: 28 Mar 2009
Points: 31
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote TiggerToo Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11 Apr 2009 at 6:57pm
For the Citation Mustang:

AH will do the rest but Range is 1,150nm : Fule burn is 89USG p/h

also, it's a really fun little plane!! ;o)
Back to Top
GTOMW View Drop Down
Check-In Staff
Check-In Staff


Joined: 13 Apr 2009
Points: 15
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote GTOMW Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14 Apr 2009 at 10:36pm
Has anyone tried to import the FSD Porter PC6? For some reason it only has a cargo capacity of 27.1001 lbs???
Back to Top
allardjd View Drop Down
Moderator in Command
Moderator in Command


Joined: 02 Apr 2008
Location: Florida - USA
Points: 4505
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote allardjd Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14 Apr 2009 at 10:51pm

Copy the Weigth and Balance section and the Fuel section of the aircraft.cfg file into this thread, please.

John
John Allard
Back to Top
hobofat View Drop Down
Check-In Staff
Check-In Staff
Avatar

Joined: 08 Apr 2009
Location: Honolulu, HI
Points: 42
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote hobofat Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15 Apr 2009 at 2:44am
Just to be aware, the MAAM-SIM DC-3 comes in at about 92-116 gallons/hr rather than the 216 JD lists as default.  This is much more consistent with real world numbers than the default, so if you're a serious DAK driver, you might consider purchasing their DC-3!
Back to Top
JD-LincsUK View Drop Down
Ground Crew
Ground Crew


Joined: 10 Apr 2008
Location: Pluto
Points: 72
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote JD-LincsUK Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15 Apr 2009 at 9:28am
Most, if not all, of the default aircraft seem to be rather thirstier than their real-world counterparts.

I forgot to mention that the fuel burn figures were calculated immediately the aircraft was settled into the cruise, rather than an average over the entire range - so they were quite heavy.

In this way, the fuel burn figures should always be considered a maximum, and therefore safe to use for calculations - rather a smidgen too much in the tank than trying to glide a loaded 747...! Wink

JD
uler Beta Test Team
Back to Top
Killieboy64 View Drop Down
Check-In Staff
Check-In Staff
Avatar

Joined: 04 Apr 2009
Location: Scotland
Points: 8
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Killieboy64 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15 Apr 2009 at 10:19am
Can anyone help sort out the Wilco Airbus A400M? AH reads the cargo capacity as minus 44541lbs! Here are the weight & balance and the fuel sections of the cfg
 

[weight_and_balance]

max_gross_weight = 264550

empty_weight = 154321

reference_datum_position = 0, 0, 0

empty_weight_CG_position = -2, 0, 0

empty_weight_pitch_MOI = 3400000

empty_weight_roll_MOI = 3300000

empty_weight_yaw_MOI = 3800000

empty_weight_coupled_MOI = 0

CG_forward_limit = 0.000

CG_aft_limit = 1.000

 

max_number_of_stations=50

station_load.0=6804, 0.0000, 0.0000, 0.0000, Payload

Payload_type=1

Payload_Vehicles=1

[fuel]

//Longitudinal (feet), Lateral (feet), Vertical (feet), Usable(gallons), Unusable (gallons)

fuel_type = 2

number_of_tank_selectors = 1

electric_pump = 0

Center1 = -1.0, 0.0, 0.00, 7700, 3

LeftMain = -1.0, -10.00, 0.00, 7700, 3

RightMain = -1.0, 10.00, 0.00, 7700, 3

Thanks in advance if you're able to assist.
 
(Also, if anyone has worked out the fuel burn already?)
 
Derek
Back to Top
Killieboy64 View Drop Down
Check-In Staff
Check-In Staff
Avatar

Joined: 04 Apr 2009
Location: Scotland
Points: 8
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Killieboy64 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15 Apr 2009 at 10:23am
Hang on I've just spotted it has a load manager. I'll try loading it via this and then re-importing it.
Back to Top
Killieboy64 View Drop Down
Check-In Staff
Check-In Staff
Avatar

Joined: 04 Apr 2009
Location: Scotland
Points: 8
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Killieboy64 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15 Apr 2009 at 11:50am
Nah, that didn't work.Cry  I've just worked out the fuel burn from a test run though: 1800 Gal/hr ( full load at 30000ft 315kts). So over to you guys again.
 
Cheers
 
Derek
Back to Top
allardjd View Drop Down
Moderator in Command
Moderator in Command


Joined: 02 Apr 2008
Location: Florida - USA
Points: 4505
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote allardjd Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15 Apr 2009 at 2:56pm

Quote I forgot to mention that the fuel burn figures were calculated immediately the aircraft was settled into the cruise, rather than an average over the entire range - so they were quite heavy.

The engines burn what they burn at a given air density and power setting.  The engines are unaffected by whether the AC is light or heavy.  If the measure is fuel consumed per unit of time (as opposed to fuel consumed per unit of distance) it's not going to vary as you burn off fuel.

John

John Allard
Back to Top
allardjd View Drop Down
Moderator in Command
Moderator in Command


Joined: 02 Apr 2008
Location: Florida - USA
Points: 4505
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote allardjd Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15 Apr 2009 at 3:08pm
I agree with the AH figures...
 
Cargo Cap'y = MTOW - Empty Weight - Full Fuel Weight
 
Cargo Cap'y = 264,550 - 154,321 - (7700 X 3 X 6.7)
 
Cargo Cap'y = 264,550 - 154,321 - 154,770
 
Cargo Cap'y = - 44541
 
Your beef is with the developer of the AC.  According to his figures, it's 22 tons overweight with full fuel tanks and no cargo.
 
John
 
EDIT:  According to Wiki
 
MTOW = 310,852 lb
 
Total Internal Fuel = 103,000 lb
 
Applying those will make quite a difference.  Since the real AC  hasn't flown yet the publicized figures are probably a bit fuzzy and may be changing as the design is tweaked by Airbus.
 
JDA
John Allard
Back to Top
Killieboy64 View Drop Down
Check-In Staff
Check-In Staff
Avatar

Joined: 04 Apr 2009
Location: Scotland
Points: 8
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Killieboy64 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15 Apr 2009 at 5:41pm
Many thanks for your swift reply, that has worked a treat.
 
PS. I didn't really have a beef with anyone.
Back to Top
hobofat View Drop Down
Check-In Staff
Check-In Staff
Avatar

Joined: 08 Apr 2009
Location: Honolulu, HI
Points: 42
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote hobofat Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15 Apr 2009 at 11:16pm
Originally posted by allardjd allardjd wrote:

Quote I forgot to mention that the fuel burn figures were calculated immediately the aircraft was settled into the cruise, rather than an average over the entire range - so they were quite heavy.

The engines burn what they burn at a given air density and power setting.  The engines are unaffected by whether the AC is light or heavy.  If the measure is fuel consumed per unit of time (as opposed to fuel consumed per unit of distance) it's not going to vary as you burn off fuel.

John



This is very true, and especially important with regards to piston powered aircraft.  Power management is key, and the numbers fluctuate depending on power settings, altitude, temperature etc.

I did not mean my post to denigrate in any way the hard work you put in compiling those numbers JD!  Your performance table is brilliant.  I Just wanted to highlight the difference for users of the MAAM-SIM DC-3.
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12345 9>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down