throttle level on takeoff!

[Saucey12 38]

ok guys i only have this issue on commercial jets (FS speaking of course).. 

When I power up on the take off roll (for instance on the CR7, 737 etc).  I have the plane at normal operating weights and I advance the power to about 85 percent with flaps set to around 10 or 20 depending on winds.. After I left off the plane accelerates really rapidly to the point of over speed unless I decrease the power to around 65 percent (and this is with a positive rate of 2,000 fpm climb).  Am I doing something wrong or is that just standard SOP for those planes?  

Thanks,

Jason

[Orlaam 306]

I don't know how I'd answer that.  Most of these jets can climb out at about 4,000 feet FPM if needed (weight and type limiting).  Thrust is usually set with TOGA and A/T which allows the plane to manage thrust through the phases of flight.  Otherwise, you'd follow the required N1 for example (based on figures in FMC, performance calculations with Boeing/Embraer/Bombardier software) and manually manage the speed like any other plane.  If your V2 is 145 for example, you'd pitch up for 145 plus 20 knots, so 165 knots IAS, regardless of FPM climb.  Initially you aim for 15 degrees on the PFD, then follow the flight director, and don't fall below V2+20 with all engines operative.  This is your goal until reaching thrust reduction altitude (1500 feet in some cases), then you lower the nose and slowly climb to 250 knots until reaching 10,000 feet (in the US).  Thrust and pitch will lower some to acquire the 250 knots.  Upon reaching 250 knots you will generally increase pitch again and might see a change in thrust.

Problem you are having, if I had to guess, is that you are using default planes.  They are not realistic at all.  A payware plane will perform much closer to the real thing.  So for instance, a 737 might produce an N1 of 85% or much higher, depending on any derates used, but eventually wash out and start producing 98% or even 100% N1 in the climb. 

If you are gonna fly default planes, be mindful that the numbers reflected aren't accurate. 

[Saucey12 38]

31 minutes ago, Orlaam said:

I don't know how I'd answer that.  Most of these jets can climb out at about 4,000 feet FPM if needed (weight and type limiting).  Thrust is usually set with TOGA and A/T which allows the plane to manage thrust through the phases of flight.  Otherwise, you'd follow the required N1 for example (based on figures in FMC, performance calculations with Boeing/Embraer/Bombardier software) and manually manage the speed like any other plane.  If your V2 is 145 for example, you'd pitch up for 145 plus 20 knots, so 165 knots IAS, regardless of FPM climb.  Initially you aim for 15 degrees on the PFD, then follow the flight director, and don't fall below V2+20 with all engines operative.  This is your goal until reaching thrust reduction altitude (1500 feet in some cases), then you lower the nose and slowly climb to 250 knots until reaching 10,000 feet (in the US).  Thrust and pitch will lower some to acquire the 250 knots.  Upon reaching 250 knots you will generally increase pitch again and might see a change in thrust.

Problem you are having, if I had to guess, is that you are using default planes.  They are not realistic at all.  A payware plane will perform much closer to the real thing.  So for instance, a 737 might produce an N1 of 85% or much higher, depending on any derates used, but eventually wash out and start producing 98% or even 100% N1 in the climb. 

If you are gonna fly default planes, be mindful that the numbers reflected aren't accurate. 

Oh yeah I am sure they are not too accurate. My downfall is I like to try to control everything manually. (definitely not an Airbus kinda guy then lol). I usually do not set any autopilot controls until I am at a cruising assent.  I do not have any payware stuff yet.  But I am working on getting a dc9/md80 payware as far as commercial aircraft goes.  I appreciate your input.  I manage the decent and landing well , i guess i just use too much of my experience with the old air breathing prop engines on the accent.  What is your favorite payware commercial aircraft?  

[Orlaam 306]

Well it all depends.  Different aircraft serve different purposes.  My favorite jet in the sim would be the PMDG 737 NGX.  Overall, despite having some faults compared to the real deal, it's about as close as one can get.  Most of the faults are things no one would know exist.  But the systems management and flight dynamics are superb.  Great for short flights or longer ones, depending on your style.  

I do really like the new PMDG 747, but I'm runnng FSX:SE and find that at times it crashes (freezes) with what I consider low settings (low AI, no road traffic, lower autogen, and so forth). Some flights are flawless but tonight I attempted a one hour hop from BOS to PHL and it froze on approach.  Pretty ridiculous.   Never have have problem with the NGX.  

My second favorite aircraft for payware is the A2A Piper Comanche.  A simple training level aircraft, but faster than some and very realistic. The sounds and effort they put into making this plane handle and mimic the real deal puts it above anything else imo.  But you have to like GA single prop airplanes.  

The next best choice for someone who prefers less automation is the Majestic Dash 8.  An extremely accurate rendition of the real Dash.  Excellent performance due to the programming and flight model.  Great graphics, sounds, and features.  Only issue I have is that the lack of automation makes certain phases of flight a bit taxing and not enjoyable.  It's really a two man high workload aircraft.  Trying to set up for approach and monitors so many things, plus adjust rudder trim, set up FMS, switch on pumps and other things gets difficult at. times.  I'd say 50% if my flight in this plane are almost perfect whereas others are just a mess. 

I do not have the PMDG 777. It's more automated than the 747 but fewer shorter routes can be found for it and I just opted not to buy it.  I have a feeling it would crash my sim like the new 747. 

In order of what I'd vote best for me:

A2A Comanche 250 with Flight1 GTN 750

PMDG 737 NGX (-700 variant specifically) 

Majestic Dash 8 (turboprop commuter)

PMDG 747 V3 (QOTSII)

RealAir Duke (no longer sold) 

 

I'd have rated the 747 above the Majestic if I didn't have problems with freezes and poor performance.  When it works it is more enjoyable than the Dash.  The Dash is a clear winner in overall performance.  

I don't buy Alebao, Carenado, Aerosoft, or any others at the moment.  Many of the developers around make products that look good or ok but lack heavily in systems.  A2A, PMDG, and FlightSimLabs are probably the top for realism and overall study level simulation.  

Also, to be focused on hand flying and avoiding automation (autopilot) in jets or larger turboprops is unrealistic.  Very few pilots would hand fly commercial jets very much after take off or during approach.  

 

[Captain Kevin 586]

3 hours ago, Orlaam said:

Also, to be focused on hand flying and avoiding automation (autopilot) in jets or larger turboprops is unrealistic.  Very few pilots would hand fly commercial jets very much after take off or during approach.  

I guess that depends on where you are. I think most pilots at US carriers hand-fly for a good bit after take-off.

[swood721 28]

1 hour ago, Captain Kevin said:

I guess that depends on where you are. I think most pilots at US carriers hand-fly for a good bit after take-off.

You're correct. I always try to hand fly up to around 20,000ft depending on workload. The only issue with flying around busy airports is that it takes the Pilot Flying out of the game and requires the Pilot Monitoring to basically do everything. But we don't fly into many busy airports at my airline so it usually isn't an issue. 

[Saucey12 38]

8 hours ago, Orlaam said:

Well it all depends.  

Thank you so much for your input. My next purchase is gonna be active skies 16. Then I'm gonna move on to my payware aircraft. My only fear is getting a plane I love and having the issues you described. A ctd or freezing up .and not being able to fix it or change the settings to stop it. 

Edited July 15, 2017 by n4gix
Deleted excessive quote! Again!

[Orlaam 306]

http://pilotjobs.atpflightschool.com/2016/07/27/how-much-do-airline-pilots-actually-fly-an-airliner-by-hand/

And it's all relative, but not all do, and to expect someone to hand fly a complex aircraft solo in a sim is kinda setting them up for failure.  When you need to control rudder trim, turn off pumps, lights, bleed air, or whatever, it's kinda hard to do a perfect job executing a turn on climb out.  It's easier in say a 747 with lower workloads but I'd not like that much in a Dash 8.  And if you need to change anything in the FMC on any plane, you can't forget hand flying.  These planes are flown by two pilots for a reason, they're high workload.  

I think if the OP wants to climb up the ladder and buy pay ware, then he should feel comfortable engaging the AP so he can handle other tasks.  Then as he gets comfortable hand fly more often.  Personally I find hand flying the climb boring.  It's not really a challenge.  Only the final to runway is challenging to me.  

 

[Orlaam 306]

1 minute ago, Saucey12 said:

Thank you so much for your input. My next purchase is gonna be active skies 16. Then I'm gonna move on to my payware aircraft. My only fear is getting a plane I love and having the issues you described. A ctd or freezing up .and not being able to fix it or change the settings to stop it. 

What are your specs?  Some payware don't result in crashes or freezes.  I actually never had any issues with freezes or crashes until the 747.  Sooner or later you'll get a crash or freeze.  Happens no matter what.  FSX, P3D, and FSW are based on a dated imperfect code.  It's mostly the settings and system capabilities that cause this too.  Not too many people have issue with the PMDG 737 NGX.  Same for the Dash 8.  I don't think the A2A aircraft either.  

[Captain Kevin 586]

1 hour ago, Saucey12 said:

My only fear is getting a plane I love and having the issues you described. A ctd or freezing up .and not being able to fix it or change the settings to stop it. 

I can tell you that PMDG is a reputable company and if you have any issues, you can submit a support ticket, and they'll do their best to help you out. Although Chris may be having issues with the PMDG Boeing 747-400, I can safely say that since its release last February, I haven't had any issues up until today, and even so, I'm not sure if it's a computer issue (my computer had been acting wonky in the last 24 hours) or a scenery issue. I would be surprised if the 747 was the issue, given that I've flown many flights prior without any issue.

[Orlaam 306]

I have flown the 747 without any issue until today as well.  However, it is a more complex aircraft behind the scenes.  I do think I get lower frame rates and worse performance with it.  PMDG is reputable for sure, but they aren't perfect, no software is.  TBH, FS9 had far better performance than FSX no matter what I did with it.  I had a ton of add ons in FS9 with PMDG aircraft, among others and never had the performance issues I have with FSX.  FSX quite frankly sucks IMO, but I can't afford to upgrade and take a chance to see if P3D would be better.

[Saucey12 38]

9 hours ago, Orlaam said:

What are your specs?  Some payware don't result in crashes or freezes.  I actually never had any issues with freezes or crashes until the 747.  Sooner or later you'll get a crash or freeze.  Happens no matter what.  FSX, P3D, and FSW are based on a dated imperfect code.  It's mostly the settings and system capabilities that cause this too.  Not too many people have issue with the PMDG 737 NGX.  Same for the Dash 8.  I don't think the A2A aircraft either.  

I have an i7-6, 16gb of ddr4, and a geoforce 750 graphics card.  Still have a hard drive, upgrading to an SSD soon hopefully.  Also gonna push the ram up to 32.  

[Orlaam 306]

Ah ok, your performance might suffer some with the graphics and HDD.  CPU is good.  Mine is likely a bottleneck, but the other stuff helps.  Some pay ware is more resource heavy. 

One thing I would recommend, research.  There a lot of pay ware items I won't touch.  They may look pretty and others might like them, but I want realism.  So you have to look at that factor too.

[Saucey12 38]

16 hours ago, Orlaam said:

Ah ok, your performance might suffer some with the graphics and HDD.  CPU is good.  Mine is likely a bottleneck, but the other stuff helps.  Some pay ware is more resource heavy. 

One thing I would recommend, research.  There a lot of pay ware items I won't touch.  They may look pretty and others might like them, but I want realism.  So you have to look at that factor too.

Ok . Well that's why I ask people like you who have already went through all that experience . Ha-ha . You're right I have sifted through a lot of payware but I don't wanna just start having to buy one after the other..  

What do you think of active skies 2016? Worth the money? Tell u what I hate is the weather transitions when you cross from one reporting stations weather into another.. very unrealistic .

On 7/15/2017 at 5:09 AM, Orlaam said:

Well it all depends.  Different aircraft serve different purposes.  My favorite jet in the sim would be the PMDG 737 NGX.  Overall, despite having some faults compared to the real deal, it's about as close as one can get.  Most of the faults are things no one would know exist.  But the systems management and flight dynamics are superb.  Great for short flights or longer ones, depending on your style.  

I do really like the new PMDG 747, but I'm runnng FSX:SE and find that at times it crashes (freezes) with what I consider low settings (low AI, no road traffic, lower autogen, and so forth). Some flights are flawless but tonight I attempted a one hour hop from BOS to PHL and it froze on approach.  Pretty ridiculous.   Never have have problem with the NGX.  

My second favorite aircraft for payware is the A2A Piper Comanche.  A simple training level aircraft, but faster than some and very realistic. The sounds and effort they put into making this plane handle and mimic the real deal puts it above anything else imo.  But you have to like GA single prop airplanes.  

The next best choice for someone who prefers less automation is the Majestic Dash 8.  An extremely accurate rendition of the real Dash.  Excellent performance due to the programming and flight model.  Great graphics, sounds, and features.  Only issue I have is that the lack of automation makes certain phases of flight a bit taxing and not enjoyable.  It's really a two man high workload aircraft.  Trying to set up for approach and monitors so many things, plus adjust rudder trim, set up FMS, switch on pumps and other things gets difficult at. times.  I'd say 50% if my flight in this plane are almost perfect whereas others are just a mess. 

I do not have the PMDG 777. It's more automated than the 747 but fewer shorter routes can be found for it and I just opted not to buy it.  I have a feeling it would crash my sim like the new 747. 

In order of what I'd vote best for me:

A2A Comanche 250 with Flight1 GTN 750

PMDG 737 NGX (-700 variant specifically) 

Majestic Dash 8 (turboprop commuter)

PMDG 747 V3 (QOTSII)

RealAir Duke (no longer sold) 

 

I'd have rated the 747 above the Majestic if I didn't have problems with freezes and poor performance.  When it works it is more enjoyable than the Dash.  The Dash is a clear winner in overall performance.  

I don't buy Alebao, Carenado, Aerosoft, or any others at the moment.  Many of the developers around make products that look good or ok but lack heavily in systems.  A2A, PMDG, and FlightSimLabs are probably the top for realism and overall study level simulation.  

Also, to be focused on hand flying and avoiding automation (autopilot) in jets or larger turboprops is unrealistic.  Very few pilots would hand fly commercial jets very much after take off or during approach.  

 

Thank you so much for your input. My next purchase is gonna be active skies 16. Then I'm gonna move on to my payware aircraft. My only fear is getting a plane I love and having the issues you described. A ctd or freezing up .and not being able to fix it or change the settings to stop it. 

[Orlaam 306]

ActiveSky 2016 is more than worth it!  AS has been the gold standard since way back in 2002.  They constantly update their engine and make improvements.  It's a whole new world being able to adjust things the way you like.  Smooth transitions, wind transitions, wind throttling, turbulence settings, and much more.  Once you get it where you want it, it's just a run and play program.  I recommend limiting certain factors just to keep things happy.  Turbulence usually has to be brought back some.  A couple settings I keep off to avoid excessive movements.  I limit cloud layers to keep performance up, have icing at 30%, cloud draw distance at 90 nm (set to 80 in sim), cloud motion effect on (love this!), wind turb 40%, turb effect 50%, wind sheer 20%, enhanced turb off, max turb strength 50%, up and down drafts both at 500 fpm, light chop at 35%.  Everything else you can kinda toy with or leave default.  Some complex payware don't like a lot of Wx transitions, so you use AS to tame this.

I do not use the default textures or AS ASCA though.  I use REX Texture Direct with Soft Clouds.  Better performance textures and ability to pick and choose things.  ASCA is probably fine, but personal preference.  I already had REX, so I opted to not get ASCA, but some like it, others don't.

What kind of plane are you wanting?