As for derated thrust, yes we don't pay for fuel and don't have to worry about wear and tear costs but I like derates mostly for the fact I like to use my more of the runway on takeoff rather than rocket by V1/Vr and taking off only halfway down the runway. Realism factor doesn't hurt either.

With light/short-haul flights, maximum takeoff thrust indeed seems to be overkill. I decided trying full thrust for my last flight of 2012 (LSZH–LOWW) in order to celebrate the occasion. The performance change of my B747 was startling, and I ended up doing my first real tail strike (although a light one of approximately 13 degrees). Pilot error, but still a testament to the strong correlation between takeoff thrust and takeoff performance.

 

Anytime I use anther fuel planner, it either over estimates by a massive amount or it underestimates, and its not nice having to glide to the Azores because a fuel planner on the internet couldn't accurately work out the proper amount of fuel you needed for the trip.

Have you tried following the fuel planning techniques described in the PMDG B747 manual? If you find the results to be satisfactory, create an Excel spreadsheet that will automate the tedious calculations for you.

Have you tried following the fuel planning techniques described in the PMDG B747 manual? If you find the results satisfactory, create an Excel spreadsheet that will automate the tedious calculations.

 

Thank you for the advice- I guess i'll have to blow the dust of my manual and get reading :wink:

Have you tried following the fuel planning techniques described in the PMDG B747 manual? If you find the results satisfactory, create an Excel spreadsheet that will automate the tedious calculations.

 

Someone had created an online one and linked it in another thread, I'll see if i can find it.

 

EDIT: Found the topic where the spreadsheet is mentioned: http://forum.avsim.net/topic/392536-limited-fuel-range/

Someone had created an online one and linked it in another thread, I'll see if i can find it.

 

EDIT: Found the topic where the spreadsheet is mentioned: http://forum.avsim.n...ted-fuel-range/

I remember that thread. The reasons I prefer to design my own fuel calculator are (1) so I can implement my own minor adjustments and customizations and (2) so I can better understand the concepts involved in fuel planning. So much of the commercial pilot's job is already automated, so I feel that we as pilots should at least develop solid understandings of what basic calculations are required during fuel planning, and what factors may influence the amount of fuel required.

 

The fuel calculation techniques described in the PMDG B747 manual seem to produce fuel loads that are slightly heavy, so I made the following customizations with ideas from the FAA and United Virtual Airlines fuel planner:

1. Minimum landing fuel = alternate fuel + fuel for 45 min of cruise

2. Contingency fuel = 4500 lb (minimum) + 5% of flight time * 18000 lb/h (approximated cruise fuel burn rate)

3. Taxi fuel = fuel for 20 min of cruise derated to 40%

Let me in on the secret for where you get flight plans with optimized flight levels and routes for current winds aloft, weather based enroute alternates, full ETOPS compliant contigency fuel planning, cost index and bias based fuel burns and routes for destination and enroute alternates. Yes, technically you can do all this by hand. However, it is quite tedious to say the least and requires many, many charts and tables...not all of which am I aware are available to the flight simulator community.

 

LOL No, I won't get all that, that's true. But I don't need at all that. ^_^ But as Dave said: "It comes down to how much realism do you want in your flight sim experience." I for instance want to simply experience what a real world pilot experiences on a regular day. And afaik a real world pilot is NOT a dispatcher ^_^ , so using TOPCAT or an advanced planner are NOT things that would fit into my definition of realism. A real world pilot will of course work with all the data you just described but he will not figure it all out (again afaik).

So when I simply enter setup my FMC with all the mandatory information plus some fun things like winds aloft (not mandatory to make it to my destination but fun to do) I WILL experience what a real world pilot experiences. The fact that the data itself may not be very precise doesn't matter at all: it might as well be 100% spot on. A real world pilot also inputs the data he has been given simply trusting it will be okay (I guess)... (And btw that data isn't always perfect and spot on as some simmers think it is...!!! In that regard simmers often desire way too much precision and perfection...)

 

A lot of simmers think they are simulating a pilot's job if they run the entire company, are the (ultimate and perfect) dispatcher and turn and twist every possible knob and switch in the cockpit themselves... Wrong. Imho. Well, there obviously is nothing wrong with doing everything yourself but too often it is mistaken for 'complete and realistic simulation'. ^_^ So yes, "it comes down to how much realism do you want in your flight sim experience" but also to how you define realism.

2) People need to learn more about dispatch, what it is, why it exists and why it is important to flight operations.

 

I'd love to hear if you have any sources for the public to learn more depth on these operations, or you'd like to share some information with us about dispatch. I try to know as much as I can about them, but information on flying the aircraft is far more forthcoming to the public and I could learn much more.

 

I for instance want to simply experience what a real world pilot experiences on a regular day

 

See, to me this is part of experience what a real pilot would. An emergency, while rare, could force use of a contingency fuel plan, require diversion to an enroute alternate or so many other situations. I want to respond in the same way they would to such a problem. Of course, I also am one of those who has a QRH ready in case something does go wrong...which is rarely used given the infrequency of failures in modern aircraft. After all, while dispatch may do much of the planning, the pilot is responsible for everything contained in the dispatch once he signs his name to it.

I would reccomend TOPCAT mainly for rough estimations in regards to payloads. TOPCAT allows you to view the loading chart for the foward and aft loading sections for cargo. I also like the accurate fuel calculations and takeoff thrust calculations.

A real world pilot will of course work with all the data you just described but he will not figure it all out

 

A real world pilot also inputs the data he has been given simply trusting it will be okay

Yes, but as I mentioned in my previous post, understanding the basic concepts involved in fuel planning is more realistic than not understanding (though there are probably too many variables for complete understanding by pilots to be necessary or practical). Regardless, blindly plugging in figures is neither intelligent nor realistic—while one does not need to perform the calculations him or herself, he or she should know a little bit about every aspect of his or her job.

 

By the way, does the van E in your forum name simply stand for your real surname? Every time I see your forum name, I think of Jan van Eyck. . . .

By the way, does the van E in your forum name simply stand for your real surname? Every time I see your forum name, I think of Jan van Eyck. . . .

 

 

LOL Yes, it stands for my real surname. But it isn't van Eyck. ^_^

 

Yes, of course it is good to know a little bit about every aspect of the job, and I think I do know enough about it, but for me rough estimations are good enough. I recently upped the realism a bit (I think) by using FS2Crew and going through the entire startup procedure everytime, which I really like, but going into detail for the planning just isn't my cup of tea. ^_^

 

On the other hand... in the past I thought using FS2Crew and doing all thoses procedures sucked big time because I simply wanted to fly... But now I really like the time I spend on the ground preparing the cockpit and so on: it makes the flight itself even more real and fun. The experience is more complete now. So who knows... maybe in the future you will hear me raving about TOPCAT and that new upcoming planner and how much fun it all is and how it adds to the immersion...

I don't know how people fly without TOPCAT, or even better the actual takeoff/landing performance charts. Perhaps if you always fly from airport A to airport B - both with 11,000ft+ runways then using them is slightly academic and trivial, but if you're flying an aircraft in/out of an airport with a runway that provides some limitation in regards to weight, level of autobrake - then it's pretty much an absolute must. Also, the NGX actually uses quite a lot of runway all things considered, it can be quite easy to think "Well, a 560 tonne A380 can takeoff from this runway, what issue am I going to have with an 80 tonne 737?" - when in reality the difference in the takeoff roll is about 15% at these weights.

 

Also, anything TOPCAT does, a real-life airline pilot would without a doubt need to understand - it's pretty basic. While there is a dispatcher who does most of the legwork, the decision still falls to the pilot regarding how much fuel to take and it'd seriously worry me if there were pilots, in real life, just religiously following whatever the printed flightplan says.

The free Utopia however works with all my airliners. It does these things for me

 

Could you provide a link as I can not find it on google. Thanks

 

Could you provide a link as I can not find it on google. Thanks

 

This is the latest one in the avsim library:

http://library.avsim.net/esearch.php?CatID=fs2004util&DLID=128375

 

You can find profiles for other planes on the various addon developer forums and lots of fs forums

This is the latest one in the avsim library:

 

Thanks! I did not think of looking in the Library.

if you're flying an aircraft in/out of an airport with a runway that provides some limitation in regards to weight, level of autobrake - then it's pretty much an absolute must

 

Maybe that's it then. I always do short flights so fuel is often around 1/3 and I never had problems taking off or landing, not even on flights that were meant for a 737-700 (I always fly the 737-800). I once got a warning that the runway would be too short for take off but I got up in the air without problems anyway. So for me the use of TOPCAT is 'academic and trivial' right now. But as I said, maybe one day I will feel the need to enter ZFW and V-speeds etc. myself instead of using the automated method and then I am sure TOPCAT will come in handy.

 

 

 

 

A lot of simmers think they are simulating a pilot's job if they run the entire company, are the (ultimate and perfect) dispatcher and turn and twist every possible knob and switch in the cockpit themselves... Wrong. Imho. Well, there obviously is nothing wrong with doing everything yourself but too often it is mistaken for 'complete and realistic simulation'. ^_^ So yes, "it comes down to how much realism do you want in your flight sim experience" but also to how you define realism.

 

Just wanted to add that TOPCAT replicates the onboard laptop software that flight crew use for there take off and landing data. when I first saw TOPCAT the layout and feel of the software was exactly the same as the one I was used to seeing.

 

Regarding using PMDG FMC calculations, 99% of the time it is wrong, it doesn't take into account obstacle limits or minimum single engine performance based on surrounding terrain.

 

If you are using high resolution mesh and operating out of Quito,Zurich and many other airfields your V2 will be incorrect and potentially result in a CFIT, especially if you lose an engine.

 

Another thing to consider is your max allowable take off weight, again extremely important when terrain or elevation is a factor.

 

Kind regards