FeelThere E-Jets grossly underpowered?

[thepilot 571]

Hi all,

 

I just completed a flight between NYC-La Guardia and Montréal-Dorval on the FeelThere Embraer E175. On take-off roll I was pretty shocked about the aircraft's lackluster performance: I needed almost the whole length of RWY 04 (7001´ / 2134m) finally becoming airborne overhead the piano keys on the 22 end. The loadfactor was fairly light - only 31 tons TOW for this short flight. I selected T-O 1 with no derate, flaps 2, for which the performance charts suggest V1-122, Vr-131 and V2-137. That seemed accurate to me as the aircraft lifted off easily at Vr, but it took forever to reach that speed. Granted, it was a hot day (+31°C) with a slight headwind and I have no elaborate performance figures at hand, however things don't add up. In real-world aviation, the E-Jets can be operated even on very shorts runways like at LCY or SDU without any issues. I would like to know if maybe someone else has made similar observations with this otherwise fine addon.

[spearmint_flyer 579]

I have observed the same behaviour by I noticed adjusting your trim before the take off roll you will be able tp rotate quicker and fly off quicker. Notice that the aircraft climbs at a vedy reasonable rate so it is not so much a lack of thrust.

 

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk 2

 

 

[Appliance 51]

My memory seems to recall a couple of threads here about 2 years ago where some 'expert' (whose name I don't recall) provided (more) accurate details for changes to the E-Jets cfg. Might be worthwhile doing a search if you are sufficiently interested.

 

Haven't flown them in a little while now so I have no currency with which to provide another opinion.

[Dillon 2,197]

I have noticed with some models in FS9 even though the thrust rating is set correctly in the 'aircraft.cfg' file the planes themselves seem to have less thrust than their real world counterparts. I had this same problem with the Feelthere 737. My test for the 737-300 was it's ability to take off from KMDW. Researching fuel Southwest used and the destination traveled the Feelthere 737 could barely make it off the runway. I got sick of this and adjusted the thrust rating for more realistic performance.

 

In the case of the E-Jet's they are indeed underpowered in the sim. All one has to do is look at the POH and see your not getting the takeoff and climb performance you should even though the thrust rating is correct in the 'aircraft.cfg' file. Maybe the newer engines can do more with a lower thrust rating than was possible before.

 

 

- Throwing realism to the wind and going into the realm of enjoyment I upped the thrust for the 170/175 to 20500 in their aircraft.cft files. The planes fly good now.

 

 

- For the 190/195 I upped the rating to 30000 (especially for the Lineage which has the ability to take off from shorter runways).

 

 

- I adjusted the flap drag in the .air file to have more drag because with flap 2 the speed brakes no longer deploy and you find yourself in trouble as you can't properly slow the bird down in a decent (maybe I should adjust the gear drag as well). If the real world design calls for flaps 2 to have enough drag to slow the bird down without ever the need for speed brakes the simulated version should reflect this as well.

 

 

- There's a great sound package offered on Simmarket for the E-Jet's. I installed this and replaced the wind and flap sound with the original Feelthere sounds which is an outstanding combination for this simulated aircraft (I changed out the ground roll sound as well). The sounds convey the since of flying in the cockpit versus over the engines in the cabin.

 

 

The E-Jet's have a service ceiling of 40,000ft. Good luck getting to that altitude without MOD's in Feelthere's version. I've pretty happy with the bird now which is the joys of being able to adjust these models in FS9. From my experience flying in this awesome birds and the specs I've read it feels about right now. We can have a debate about realism which is irrelevant when the thing can barely get off the runway.

[thepilot 571]

 

 

I noticed adjusting your trim before the take off roll you will be able tp rotate quicker

 

Reminds of this Russian-style take-off!

 

 

 

My memory seems to recall a couple of threads here about 2 years ago

 

Your memory serves you well, sir. I think this is the thread you meant? http://forum.avsim.net/topic/297039-feelthere-embraer-175-improvements/?hl=embraer%20cfg

 

Unfortunately, most links seem to be down. I hope to find the improvements somewhere else?

 

 

 

Throwing realism to the wind and going into the realm of enjoyment

 

I hope the aforementioned edited files will add realistic improvements.

[RWFeldman 159]

 

 

- Throwing realism to the wind and going into the realm of enjoyment I upped the thrust for the 170/175 to 20500 in their aircraft.cft files. The planes fly good now.

 

Tried this and now it has the characteristics of a F-15 strike Eagle. Strap some rockets on it and would make a great attack plane. . Also goes to overspeed before you can get flaps up and climbs at 6000+ fpm. 17200 lbs worked much better. Still believe it has more due to do with ground friction, or similar,  than thrust or drag settings. The climb and cruise power never really seem to be an issue. Just T.O. roll. CFM engine for the E-175 are rated at 14200 lbs RW.. You can certainly decrease TO roll with more powerful engines but it drastically effect other criteria. Just an observation.

[HUSSAR 263]

Marius,

 

I did some digging and I found the .cfg and .air files you are looking for, they are saved in .rar format:

 

http://www.4shared.com/rar/ddiD1b2x/EMB175LR.html

 

The download process is pretty simple, log in (or create an account), under the .rar file you will see "Download" which will take you to "Select Download Type", unless you have an account you will have to press "Free Download" which begins after 20 seconds.

 

I haven't modified the aircraft but looking forward to giving the aircraft a spin.  It has been a while since I have flown the E-Jets so let us know if you see a difference.

[thepilot 571]

Thanks Robert. I noticed Paulo had also uploaded some beta versions - is the download file at hand the final version? I am going to try it out anyway, very likely still tonight. I have two DVDs/BluRays featuring the E-Jets on Air Canada so I will use them as a reference.

[Dillon 2,197]

Tried this and now it has the characteristics of a F-15 strike Eagle. Strap some rockets on it and would make a great attack plane. . Also goes to overspeed before you can get flaps up and climbs at 6000+ fpm. 17200 lbs worked much better. Still believe it has more due to do with ground friction, or similar, than thrust or drag settings. The climb and cruise power never really seem to be an issue. Just T.O. roll. CFM engine for the E-175 are rated at 14200 lbs RW.. You can certainly decrease TO roll with more powerful engines but it drastically effect other criteria. Just an observation.

I might have mis-quoted my numbers as I'm at work not at home to look for reference. I did the mod a month ago. I liked the higher power because at altitude I wanted the quieter cockpit noise from the engines (you should try the sound set combination I mentioned above). You are correct in your assessment that thrust adjustments affect other areas. Either way I'm enjoying the aircraft allot more than before.

 

 

ACA 4049, on 11 Jul 2013 - 10:32 AM, said:

Marius,

 

I did some digging and I found the .cfg and .air files you are looking for, they are saved in .rar format:

 

http://www.4shared.com/rar/ddiD1b2x/EMB175LR.html

 

The download process is pretty simple, log in (or create an account), under the .rar file you will see "Download" which will take you to "Select Download Type", unless you have an account you will have to press "Free Download" which begins after 20 seconds.

 

I haven't modified the aircraft but looking forward to giving the aircraft a spin. It has been a while since I have flown the E-Jets so let us know if you see a difference.

 

I'll check this out as well. Hopefully what's covered is the whole series.

[Appliance 51]

 

 

Your memory serves you well,

 

Getting on a bit Marius ... problem is with my short term, not long term memory, apparently.  :lol:

 

Hope you have enough enthusiasm, investigative skills not to mention persistence, to modify the E Jets to your entire satisfaction.

 

Best of luck.

[betelgeuse 41]

I don't own the E175 but thought I'd pitch in anyway with a few ideas.

It should not be necessary to turbo-boost the model by ramping up the thrust settings. FeelThere will have given the FDE a lot of thought and changes in one parameter are likely to impact negatively on parameters elsewhere, as other posters have indicated.

Which version of the E175 are you using? Apparently v.1 was upgraded to v.2.

The E175 uses the FADEC (Full Authority Digital Engine Control) system as in the RW aircraft. If you over-ride this in some way the plane will not fly as FeelThere intended. If you are using a throttle quadrant you may get odd effects as this may not be directly compatible with the FADEC system.  In other words, FADEC requires continuous autothrottle. 

Have you set the take-off trim to the correct value?

Hope this helps.

[Don t moderate me this way 882]

AFAIK, the models were changed from v1 to v2.: 170/190 (v1) vs. 175/195 (v2).

 

I own the v2 EMB175/195 and from a purely flight simmer's point of view their performance feels o.k. for me.

[thepilot 571]

I did another test flight, this time the other way around, YUL-LGA. The runway for take-off there is a little bit longer, so I didn't feel potential shortcomings in the performance as much. I'd say that the changes on T/O roll are only marginally, if there are any at all. Then again, I am not sure if this was meant to be "fixed". I am certain I'm doing everything correct - FADEC is active, ATTCS armed and A/T takes over as soon as I advance the throttles far enough - just like on the real plane! Trim set to the upper area of the green band, around 4.5 deg nose up for a very smooth rotation. The climbout was pretty strong actually, especially below 10000´. ITT higher than before. The aircraft felt pretty stable.

 

Appliance, on 12 Jul 2013 - 08:05 AM, said:
Getting on a bit Marius ... problem is with my short term, not long term memory, apparently. :lol:



Hope you have enough enthusiasm, investigative skills not to mention persistence, to modify the E Jets to your entire satisfaction.



Best of luck.

Same with my memory actually :biggrin: Well, I have tweaked the aircraft so much already (especially in terms of soundset and ambience sounds), pieced together a checklist based on the ones used by actual air carriers like Air Canada, that I am over all pretty satisfied. I can live with some shortcomings, story of my (FS) life :smile: ...
Thanks!

[Dillon 2,197]

I did another test flight, this time the other way around, YUL-LGA. The runway for take-off there is a little bit longer, so I didn't feel potential shortcomings in the performance as much. I'd say that the changes on T/O roll are only marginally, if there are any at all. Then again, I am not sure if this was meant to be "fixed". I am certain I'm doing everything correct - FADEC is active, ATTCS armed and A/T takes over as soon as I advance the throttles far enough - just like on the real plane! Trim set to the upper area of the green band, around 4.5 deg nose up for a very smooth rotation. The climbout was pretty strong actually, especially below 10000´. ITT higher than before. The aircraft felt pretty stable.

 

Same with my memory actually :biggrin: Well, I have tweaked the aircraft so much already (especially in terms of soundset and ambience sounds), pieced together a checklist based on the ones used by actual air carriers like Air Canada, that I am over all pretty satisfied. I can live with some shortcomings, story of my (FS) life :smile: ...

Thanks!

 

With your changes above I'd like you to try the ultimate test. Azul flys the 190's from São Paulo to Rio. Both airports have short runways. With fuel factored in for the trip as well as a high passenger load (especially during Carnival season), can you jets make it off the runways of these two airports?

 

Les Abend has a great write up about this route in this months Flying Magazine which for me is the perfect test for the FS rendition of the E-Jets.