Reference Speeds?

[Diego_Costa 1]

Ryanbatcund, you should match your KIAS with the M0.63 cruise speed, use the match window of the speedometer, 160 above FL300 is quite slow...you should be over 185-195...

 

I mantain 200 knots after take off all the way up to FL300 aprox that means 88-95% power with some mods into performance specs in the aircraft.cfg, you can't get that with the original values, so doing that, above FL300 I were somewhere between 180-195 depending on the cruise altittude, in the FL400 level is 160-165 aprox, that's where the M0.63 speed is...

 

What mods you did in the aircraft.cfg?

[ryanbatc 12,854]

No kidding? At 200 KIAS I barely get 500fpm at ISA above FL200

[Guest BeaverDriver]

Ryan, check your PM please.

[jjmp 2]

What mods you did in the aircraft.cfg?

 

I don't remember exactly which sections I modified, but here is what I've been doing, and now it's a rocket!!!!!!!

I got this values according with a friend of mine, who has a friend that he's an S550 Citation II pilot, so it's pretty real and now it performs like the real thing...try it out!m you'll enjoy it pretty much!

 

With this values you'll be able to even climb at 3,000fpm at gross weight, like the real Citation and continue climbing that fast all the way to FL180-200 aprox, then you can reduce it to 1,800 and it still climbing with no prob, using no more than 90% of the power and mantaining 200-210KIAS...that's at gross weight 8 pax, baggage and fuel, so for lighter weights you will be at FL400 in no more than 20 minutes using no more than 88% of the power and man, now with this mods, the fuel didn't burn like a V8 car engine!, hope you like it!, I'm in love with this mods!

 

[GeneralEngineData]

engine_type =              1

fuel_flow_scalar =       1.55

min_throttle_limit =    -0.5

engine.0 =    -10, -3.5, 0.5

engine.1 =    -10,  3.5, 0.5

max_contrail_temperature=-35

 

[TurbineEngineData]

fuel_flow_gain =       0.001 

inlet_area=             7.35 

rated_N2_rpm=          31777

static_thrust=          2600 

afterburner_available=     0 

reverser_available=     0.55 

 

[jet_engine]

thrust_scalar= 1.15

[KenG 492]

 

 

 

 

It's called the slowtation for a reason. Keep the nose down and the speed up to stay on the front side of the power curve. I keep 210 - 220 to about FL200 then eek her back to 200 to FL250 up to the bottom of the RVSM window at FL280.

 

You are not going to get 3,000 fpm in the upper atmosphere. That is an ISA number useful only for marketing. (Well you may get 3,000 fpm right before the stall horn goes off if you speed up then honk back on the yoke.)

 

Forget ISA hold until you are stabilized on climbout. It does not work correctly. Whatever you do don't hit the pitch wheel to adjust IAS hold. If you do it will pitch madly. I go back to ALT SEL and use the pitch wheel to set VS then once IAS comes to where I want it I hit IAS. works well enough. 

 

The N1 digital readout stops at 99.0% you have to look at the Marconi strip and you will see the N1 speed creeping toward 106% as the temp gets cooler. The N2 section in these old engines are a simple centrifugal compressor attached to a single turbine. The single axial compressor is attached to the fan turbines. As far as simple engines goes it doesn't get any simpler. Don't expect 2015 performance out of an engine built in 1980. (Late 60's if you consider the core.)

 

Watch out for weather programs that do not inject correct temperatures at altitude. A temp of +30 when it is suppose to be -30 will kill performance.

 

Someone already pointed out it is rare to see these airplanes above Fl280. Even if they are RVSM certified you still have to fight all of the airline traffic in the mid to upper 30s. Since the citations have the straight wing they are often the ones who get kicked out of altitude.

 

My testing so far shows this airplane close to meeting AFM book numbers. If you consider most manufactures put their best foot forward on flight testing so the airplane performs at its best and the actual airplane will suffer about 5% or so this is really not that bad. IMHO, I wouldn't go messing with the FDE in this airplane unless you are trying for an F44 reengine. Your mileage may vary. (i.e. FSX-SE or P3D may have different experience.)

[raymar 969]

I don't remember exactly which sections I modified, but here is what I've been doing, and now it's a rocket!!!!!!!

I got this values according with a friend of mine, who has a friend that he's an S550 Citation II pilot, so it's pretty real and now it performs like the real thing...try it out!m you'll enjoy it pretty much!

 

With this values you'll be able to even climb at 3,000fpm at gross weight, like the real Citation and continue climbing that fast all the way to FL180-200 aprox, then you can reduce it to 1,800 and it still climbing with no prob, using no more than 90% of the power and mantaining 200-210KIAS...that's at gross weight 8 pax, baggage and fuel, so for lighter weights you will be at FL400 in no more than 20 minutes using no more than 88% of the power and man, now with this mods, the fuel didn't burn like a V8 car engine!, hope you like it!, I'm in love with this mods!

 

[GeneralEngineData]

engine_type =              1

fuel_flow_scalar =       1.55

min_throttle_limit =    -0.5

engine.0 =    -10, -3.5, 0.5

engine.1 =    -10,  3.5, 0.5

max_contrail_temperature=-35

 

[TurbineEngineData]

fuel_flow_gain =       0.001 

inlet_area=             7.35 

rated_N2_rpm=          31777

static_thrust=          2600 

afterburner_available=     0 

reverser_available=     0.55 

 

[jet_engine]

thrust_scalar= 1.15

You are doubling up on the thrust numbers. You added 100 to the 2500 static_thrust and then used the thrust_scalar as a 1.15 multiplier so you have 2600 x 1.15 = 2990 for SL static thrust. Very unrealistic.

 

The Citation V using very much the same fuselage and wing as the S/II but was stretched to add another row and seats and more baggage. The thrust for the V is 2,900 pounds.

 

Probably the highest number for the static thrust should be 2820, the same as SIJET uses for their Super SII with FJ44-3A Williams engines (same as used in the CJ3)

 

A good number for a start is either change 2500 to 2820 or the scalar from 1.0 to 1.13 but not both. The upper altitude performance will be screwed up but it will fly much better until we get the tables corrected for the 'Power Mod'

 

A quick check is to see what TAS you have at FL310 at at full power. It if goes past the mmo of 0.72 then you have too much power. Mine will barely get to 425 TAS at FL310 (where the S/II should achieve the best speed) vs 403 for the rw S/II with no power mods.

 

Regards,

 

Ray

[jjmp 2]

Well ok I'll check at FL310 and I'll send this to my friend and low the numbers...

[CraigC 0]

 

 

 

 

 

It's called the slowtation for a reason. Keep the nose down and the speed up to stay on the front side of the power curve. I keep 210 - 220 to about FL200 then eek her back to 200 to FL250 up to the bottom of the RVSM window at FL280.

 

You are not going to get 3,000 fpm in the upper atmosphere. That is an ISA number useful only for marketing. (Well you may get 3,000 fpm right before the stall horn goes off if you speed up then honk back on the yoke.)

 

Forget ISA hold until you are stabilized on climbout. It does not work correctly. Whatever you do don't hit the pitch wheel to adjust IAS hold. If you do it will pitch madly. I go back to ALT SEL and use the pitch wheel to set VS then once IAS comes to where I want it I hit IAS. works well enough. 

 

The N1 digital readout stops at 99.0% you have to look at the Marconi strip and you will see the N1 speed creeping toward 106% as the temp gets cooler. The N2 section in these old engines are a simple centrifugal compressor attached to a single turbine. The single axial compressor is attached to the fan turbines. As far as simple engines goes it doesn't get any simpler. Don't expect 2015 performance out of an engine built in 1980. (Late 60's if you consider the core.)

 

Watch out for weather programs that do not inject correct temperatures at altitude. A temp of +30 when it is suppose to be -30 will kill performance.

 

Someone already pointed out it is rare to see these airplanes above Fl280. Even if they are RVSM certified you still have to fight all of the airline traffic in the mid to upper 30s. Since the citations have the straight wing they are often the ones who get kicked out of altitude.

 

My testing so far shows this airplane close to meeting AFM book numbers. If you consider most manufactures put their best foot forward on flight testing so the airplane performs at its best and the actual airplane will suffer about 5% or so this is really not that bad. IMHO, I wouldn't go messing with the FDE in this airplane unless you are trying for an F44 reengine. Your mileage may vary. (i.e. FSX-SE or P3D may have different experience.)

 

 

Thank you for bringing some sanity to this discussion. It has been a few years since I have flown the aircraft, and I only have a couple hundred hours in it, but I KNEW the values weren't THAT far off. Yes, I think the Carenado model is a little short on power or heavy on drag at upper altitudes, but it doesn't climb well when heavy and high.

[jjmp 2]

 

 

Don't expect 2015 performance out of an engine built in 1980. (Late 60's if you consider the core.)

 

Well, the engines are quite fast enough...you have the Learjet 20 series those engines are completely different than the Citation but they were built in late 60's too and they are powerful as hell even nowadays...

[KenG 492]

Well, the engines are quite fast enough...you have the Learjet 20 series those engines are completely different than the Citation but they were built in late 60's too and they are powerful as hell even nowadays...

 

Apples to Oranges. The Lear 20 had the GE CJ610 which was a 8 stage axial flow compressor and produced 2800 to 3100 lbs of thrust on a very sleek airplane. This engine was based on the J85 used on the T-38 and capable of breaking Mach 1. As compared to the PW JT15D-4B with a single axial and single centrifugal compressor high bypass fanjet producing 2500 lbs of thrust.

 

This is like trying to compare a top fuel dragster to a muscle car. B)

[raymar 969]

Remember the FanJet vs the Real Jet discussions in the early Citation days?

[jjmp 2]

Yeah, I agree with that, I said they are completely different, but it has nothing to do if it was built in the 60's...that's my point

[Jmg22511 0]

I tried to download the link above that supposedly contains a checklist and performance data but it just brings me to the file drop website. I even opened an account with no luck. Can someone please help me get the file associated with that link.

 

Thanks, john

[Saul500NE 7]

I second that!