Hello-My new 757 dynamics are now available on AVSIM as:757dyn.zipYou can use them with either the IFDG/EFG 757-200 using FSDS, or the new IFDG 757-200 GMAX.Please send me some comments through my email address--either positive or negative.-twilky

Very much appreciated twilky :):)

Correction to your filename....it's ifdg757dyn.zip :)

Very sorry about the filename screwup. I had to change it for flightsim.com, and I forgot that this one was different. Thanks for the fix!-twilky

Mr. Wilky, I think you've got the plane a tad overpowered. I was doing over 4000fpm using CLB2 under 10k, albeit I only had 22000lbs of fuel on board, I think that rate is a little excessive. At FL270 I was doing 2400fpm, still CLB2. Time from rotation to cruise at FL330 was less than 9 minutes. Fuel flow is also off, the FOB at destination rises like crazy the entire flight. I know this fuel flow was an issue with PIC too but we are already dealing with a compromised airplane in the IFDG/PIC combination so perhaps some playing with the fuel scalar isn't a big deal. In pointing out these thing I am not criticizing but merely pointing out areas that could be improved to make everyone's experience with this combo more pleasurable.Ryan Hoffman

Hello-Let me respond to some of your points here. First of all the climb rates. With only 2200 pounds of fuel on board, you are very lightly loaded, and, according to Captain Bball, he has seen the VSI pegged at 6000 fpm on multiple occasions with a lightly loaded 757. Also, try flying it with more fuel. The climb rates and times are very accurate (I actually timed a climb in an AA 757 LAX-EWR). I also must say that I did not change the fuel scalar from the original IFDG model. IMHO, it is more unrealistic to have an unrealistically high fuel flow that works with PIC as one that does not gel well with the PIC panel, but is accurate to the 757. Changing the fuel flow to fit PIC would entail changing the tank size to keep the range of the aircraft the same, and then also figure out exactly how much the fuel should weigh to keep the aircraft weight the same. To me...it is more realistic the way it is. Maybe I can come up with some fuel calculator to determine exactly how much fuel is needed.And also, please keep in mind that it is very (and I stress very) difficult to design an aircraft that both handles beautifully and realistically, and at the same time model it to fit a specific panel.I appreciate the constructive criticism very much. Please, If I can be of any more help, or you have some more suggestions, let me know.-twilky

Firstly, dunno if you made a typo but I had 22000lbs of fuel, and assuming that the default weights in the aircraft cfg simulate a full load of pax and bags, it doesn't seem like that is 6000fpm territory but who am I to say for sure. All I've done is sat in the left seat when boarding the plane, hehe. As for flying with more fuel, I'm simulating a semi-accurate fuel load for the leg I was flying, which was DTW-BWI. The preffered route covers about 400 miles, plus the 78 to altn PHL. So obviously my climb rates are going to be quite a bit different from what you timed on your LAX-EWR leg. I'm obviously no expert so I'm really hoping BBall can chime in and perhaps enlighten us to the performance on a comparable leg to DTW-BWI. I do have to say though that on the approach and landing the FDE is a pleasure, I tried to touch down a bit harder than usual and no bouncing! You've got something good going here Tim.Ryan

Downloaded it so far no problems. One question .Where can we find some performance info. THANKS

Per the 757 AFM Flight Without Reliable Airspeed tables, climb rates should be as follows (applicable to the 757-200 and -300, RR-535E4-B, assumes 290/.78 climb at Maximum Climb Thrust):Altitude 140k 180k 220k 260k------------------------------------------- +4.5 +4.340,000FT +1800 +900 +4.3 +4.1 +4.030,000FT +2500 +1800 +1300 +7.1 +6.3 +5.9 +4.020,000FT +3900 +2900 +2200 +800 +10.1 +8.6 +7.8 +5.810,000FT +5100 +3800 +3000 +1600 +13.3 +11.1 +9.9 +7.5SEA LEVEL +6100 +4600 +3600 +2300(Edit): The formatting is not as I would have liked. I will upload a scan tomorrow when Shaw's FTP server is back online.

Link to the full 757 Flight With Unreliable Airspeed table:"http://members.shaw.ca/andycr/757FWRA.jpg"(remove quotes)

I would like to thank you for your work. I do think your climb rates are much more realistic now compared to the atlas 5 rocket that was ifdg's model. However. I have a feeling that you did this by adding alot more drag to the aircraft. Now the aircraft descends much more quickely than a real 757. I can live with that but my main concer is in the approach phase. IFDG actaully had those dynamics down very well. The aircraft was at the correct pitch attitudes and handled very well on the ILS. Your new model pitches way too high, around 8 to 9 degrees when on the glide slope, and when using PIC autopilot and autoland, the aircraft porposes down the glide slope and has a tail strike when it lands. I do not know the first thing about how to fix this, but I thought I would give you my observations.

Hello-To Alcornl: I tried out your scenario with the PIC autoland, and I found no problems. I had a consistent 2-4 degree nose angle, and no tail strike on touchdown (see enclosed screenshot). Check your landing weights, trim, and speeds. I assume that you are not using the V-speeds from the FMC. I am not sure exactly what you mean by "descends more quickly". Do you mean that the aircraft is too easy to slow down during descent?And also about the climb rate table. On the first table, it shows the aircraft weight, and the climb rates. The first column says 140 (meaning 140,000). I was not aware that a 757 could weigh that amount--even with empty tanks. Not to disqualify your chart in any way, but I am having my doubts.Please feel free to ask me any more questions.Tim [email protected]: Sorry I don't have much time to answer questions...i'm a full-time student.

Ummm, the OEW of the average 757-200 is around 130-135,000 LBS.....

Well, it seems that you are correct. It is pretty embarassing to create dynamics for an aircraft, and not know the weights. However, keep in mind that i did not change the weights (or even look at them apparently) from the original IFDG model. Sorry about that! But if that is the case, then with 22,000 pounds of fuel on board, that would give you somewhere around 150,000-180,000 pounds TOW, which according to the chart, should give you 5100 fpm under 10000ft at full climb power. I believe you said you were getting 4000 at CLB2, so this is pretty accurate. Try the climb with full CLB power, and I bet it will average out around 5000 fpm.If I have made any more major errors in the post, please excuse me. It has been a very long day :-)-twilky

I haven't flown your FDE . I simply use my own. I was posting tables for reference as others brought the climb rates into question.Just to add.. if it was doing a positioning flight or customer delivery flight without cabin furnishings installed, the OEW would be considerably less than 130,000 LBS. The entire America West fleet averages 131,000 LBS within a few hundred pounds. A positioning flight may only call for 10,000 LBS - 7,000 reserve and 3,000 block fuel which would amount to 140,000 LBS.