Sign in to follow this  
el_kab0ng

Under powered engines?

Recommended Posts

Max cruise at FL290 with 9500lbs on board is around 415KTAS. I'm getting 100KTS less than that with a 5KT headwind at 100.1% power. Is it me, or does it seem Carenado under powered the engines on this thing?

Share this post


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

Iti's possible.  The seemed to have done that with the Aero Commander.

 

Jeff

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why do you suppose the entire of the CJx line up (except the CX of course) were given the nickname "Slowtation?" :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So are you saying this is more realistic than I'm giving Carenado credit for? Did they actually model real world performance contrary to the performance numbers in print?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now that is a question I cannot really answer as to whether it was on purpose or merely serendipitous accident. My only provable point is that the CJx series have rather anemic engines in real life. Enough so that they earned the sometimes tongue-in-cheek nickname of "Slowtations."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Which is why I can't wait for the Lear 60XR by whomever is doing it and Eaglesoft's Challenger.  These are fast.  Is the Flysimware Lear 35A worth it for a guy that loves deep systems simulations but won't like sub-par graphics?  I know the thing flies like a jet fighter in real life.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Carenado has the Hawker which is decently fast, but the systems are sub-par when compared to their 350i and TBM850. Still good enough to fly, however.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Which is why I can't wait for the Lear 60XR by whomever is doing it and Eaglesoft's Challenger.  These are fast.  Is the Flysimware Lear 35A worth it for a guy that loves deep systems simulations but won't like sub-par graphics?  I know the thing flies like a jet fighter in real life.

 

I wouldn't really call the Flysimware LJ35 a deep system simulation (In a world where PMDG and Majestic exist). What I will say is this:

 

 - The systems that are modeled function as they should    (what a refreshing concept!)

 - Support from the developer is good

 - Bug fixes come in a timely fashion

 - Sounds (inside and out) are quite good.

 - GTN750 integration is seamless. (I think they're working on implementing the Milviz Wx Radar as well)

 

 - It flies like a bat out of hell.....Climbs like a homesick angel into the (very high) flightlevels, cruises at a good clip and decent fuel burn figures....and it will punish you if you don't keep the power/speed up on approach........very Learjet-like.

 

 - Brake release to 10,000ft in under 3 minutes is routine at light weights. Good luck adhering to any of the SIDS in KTEB that require a level-off and hard turn at 1,500ft. Be prepared to haul back on the power once you're airborne...

 

 - Don't forget to turn the nosewheel steering back on after landing or you'll blow right by your exit with the rudder hard-over and a silly look on your face.  :Doh:

 

 

 - Not the best texturing, but that's long-forgiven in my books. At least I never have to worry about framerates.

 

 

Hope that helps.

 

 

DB

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Holy crap the performance of the CJ2 is miserable. 100.2% power and only getting 300-500fpm climb rates @ 160kts above FL270. Has anyone done some fiddling with the config files to get some better numbers out of this thing? Is it is, it's pretty unflyable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Holy crap the performance of the CJ2 is miserable. 100.2% power and only getting 300-500fpm climb rates @ 160kts above FL270. Has anyone done some fiddling with the config files to get some better numbers out of this thing? Is it is, it's pretty unflyable.

Sounds like your climb schedule is the culprit. You're initial climb is probably 5,000 to 6,000 FPM, with the IAS decaying with altitude increase. This won't work in a CJ2. Initial climb rate should be about 3,000 FPM, maintaining 230 KIAS with power. When full power is reached, begin using VS to maintain 230 KIAS, until reaching Mach .55. Maintain Mach .55 until reaching the desired cruising altitude. Your VS will need to be continually reduced to maintain the Mach .55.

 

It will look something like this:

 

3,000 FPM thru FL200

2,000 FPM thru FL350

1,000 FPM thru FL390

500 FPM to FL450

 

You can't just blast off in this airplane. You have to manage the IAS and VS. If not, you will run out of airspeed and energy well before reaching the airplane's max altitude. 

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