Sign in to follow this  
YukonPete

Almost didn't buy it!

Recommended Posts

I am a huge PMDG fan and have been a customer for more then a decade. I am also a long time X-Plane user of about 10 years. I didn't think the DC-6 would do if for me. I love my modern jets. Boy was I wrong. So glad I purchased this beauty. Can't wait to get the rest of PMDG's products for XP.

 

Quick question,

 

Whats the typical cruise Alt for the DC-6 on a 1-2 hour flight?

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

 

 


Whats the typical cruise Alt for the DC-6 on a 1-2 hour flight?

 

I've been using 8-10. Takes forever to come down, so...

 

The tutorials only get up to 8 on 40-60 min flights.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also just from talking to one of our tech team pilots who flies the real thing, he said it's very dependent on whether the airplane actually has superchargers installed. A lot of the ones still flying today don't have them and thus they tend to stay below the flight levels. If you put the superchargers on high blower in the sim though you can easily go up into the low 20s with it. As Kyle says though, descent planning and how much time you'd actually have at cruise has to factor into whether you want to go up that high.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've been using 8-10. Takes forever to come down, so...

 

The tutorials only get up to 8 on 40-60 min flights.

Thanks.  I was using 10K

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A good rule of thumb would be 0.5 x flight distance, with a good cruise segment.

 

e.g. 180 NM x 0.5 = 90(00) ft cruise alt.

 

You could try 0.6 or 0.7, but it doesn't give the opportunity to accelerate, so could extend flight times.

 

Unlike jets, props don't benefit from high cruise altitudes. This is not so much an efficiency problem as a speed problem. It's better to cruise lower and faster than spend additional time climbing at slower speeds.

 

This is also why, generally speaking, props are better on short flights (less than 300 NM), turboprop are good to about 500 NM, and jets are best over 500 NM.

 

Props lose efficiency with speed, so you can either climb slowly, or cruise fast, but generally can't do both. Jets however can accelerate as they climb, and gain efficiency from altitude. This is why jets are not so good on short sectors, as they climb higher sooner, but then lose time coming down again. If you fly a prop profile in a jet, you burn lots of fuel unnecessarily, so jets then lose the economics argument, whilst only gaining a minute or two vs. a prop aircraft.

 

Something you can try in the sim: fly the same route (say, 150 NM), once in the DC-6 (flying a prop profile) and again in the 737 (flying a jet profile). You will be amazed how close the two aircraft are in terms of flight time.

 

Rob Smith.

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 


can easily go up into the low 20s with it.

 

I have a friend who flew the "6B" in Bolivia and he said they regularly cruised in the "high teens".  

 

blaustern

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A good rule of thumb would be 0.5 x flight distance, with a good cruise segment.

 

e.g. 180 NM x 0.5 = 90(00) ft cruise alt.

 

You could try 0.6 or 0.7, but it doesn't give the opportunity to accelerate, so could extend flight times.

 

Unlike jets, props don't benefit from high cruise altitudes. This is not so much an efficiency problem as a speed problem. It's better to cruise lower and faster than spend additional time climbing at slower speeds.

 

This is also why, generally speaking, props are better on short flights (less than 300 NM), turboprop are good to about 500 NM, and jets are best over 500 NM.

 

Props lose efficiency with speed, so you can either climb slowly, or cruise fast, but generally can't do both. Jets however can accelerate as they climb, and gain efficiency from altitude. This is why jets are not so good on short sectors, as they climb higher sooner, but then lose time coming down again. If you fly a prop profile in a jet, you burn lots of fuel unnecessarily, so jets then lose the economics argument, whilst only gaining a minute or two vs. a prop aircraft.

 

Something you can try in the sim: fly the same route (say, 150 NM), once in the DC-6 (flying a prop profile) and again in the 737 (flying a jet profile). You will be amazed how close the two aircraft are in terms of flight time.

 

Rob Smith.

 

Jets are always worser in fuel efficiency than turboprops are. But they are faster. Faster means you can do more leg's on a day and get more money with this airplane and crew. On short range leg's turboprops and jet flight time will be much more equal because an jet won't be this long in cruise. Lufthansa only uses jets on short haul's because of capacity reasons or when they don't have a prop on hand.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this