Hi Folks,

Been thinking of picking up the new Redux C310...

Did MilViz ever adjust the FDE for higher cruise speed on the new version ?

IIRC the original MilViz model topped out in the 160 KTAS range when the RW aircraft is actually a bit quicker...

RW PIREP: Speed has always been a strong 310 selling point, for good reason. With the 240-hp engines, the 310 will turn in cruise speeds of 183 knots (70-percent power at 7,500 feet, burning 25 gallons per hour total) and climb with both engines at better than 1,600 fpm from sea level. More weight in later models about makes up for the extra power: A 260-hp-a-side Q model turns in 186 knots (71 percent at 7,500 feet, on 26.5 gph) and climbs at 1,495 fpm; not bad considering the Q's 600-pound higher maximum gross weight. Finally, the 285-hp versions will do just over 190 knots on 29 gph.

Any information appreciated...

Regards,
Scott

 

 

43 minutes ago, scottb613 said:

Hi Folks,

Been thinking of picking up the new Redux C310...

Did MilViz ever adjust the FDE for higher cruise speed on the new version ?

IIRC the original MilViz model topped out in the 160 KTAS range when the RW aircraft is actually a bit quicker...

RW PIREP: Speed has always been a strong 310 selling point, for good reason. With the 240-hp engines, the 310 will turn in cruise speeds of 183 knots (70-percent power at 7,500 feet, burning 25 gallons per hour total) and climb with both engines at better than 1,600 fpm from sea level. More weight in later models about makes up for the extra power: A 260-hp-a-side Q model turns in 186 knots (71 percent at 7,500 feet, on 26.5 gph) and climbs at 1,495 fpm; not bad considering the Q's 600-pound higher maximum gross weight. Finally, the 285-hp versions will do just over 190 knots on 29 gph.

Any information appreciated...

Regards,
Scott

 

 

Haven't flown the Redux since early June. Have not flown much this summer due to personal travel and outside activities. My recollection is that I most often cruise at 11,000 or 12,000, in the high 170 knot range, and a bit under 25 GPH, for flights averaging just under 2 hours. 

Hi Frank,

Yeah - maybe that was it - I just recall the original being a tad slow as it should be a 180 KTAS plus aircraft... The PIREP above was at 70% power...

I really like the C310 so I'm tempted - I do have the Alebeo model in addition to the original MilViz model - Alebeo seems to make reported speed and actually flies quite well...

Thanks for the feedback...

Regards,
Scott

Scott. Sent you a PM here.  The Milviz flies well also, but the flight dynamics are rooted in Bernt Stolle influence and may not have changed.

Edited September 25, 20187 yr by fppilot

23 minutes ago, scottb613 said:

Hi Frank,

Yeah - maybe that was it - I just recall the original being a tad slow as it should be a 180 KTAS plus aircraft... The PIREP above was at 70% power...

I really like the C310 so I'm tempted - I do have the Alebeo model in addition to the original MilViz model - Alebeo seems to make reported speed and actually flies quite well...

Thanks for the feedback...

Regards,
Scott

Scott,  Quick question:  How does one know his aircraft is flying at 70% power?  What am I looking at that tells me I'm flying at 70%?

Hi Scott,

My experience with the RW R with 285hp engines and a VG kit that increased the MTOW to 5680 (from 5500) and reduced stall speed by approx 10 knots is as follows....

I generally cruised at 7 or 8000' as I found it was a good compromise of speed and fuel burn. Also, no O2 considerations. Usually cruised at 23'/2300 rpm for a fuel flow of about 180#/hour combined. Bumping it up to 24'/2400 (200#/hour) picked up a little but burned approaching 10% more fuel +/-. Indicated speeds in the summer were about 160 kts and in the winter 170-175 at heavier weights (a relative term in the 310). Proper leaning could give you great endurance as the ones I flew had a total fuel capacity of 1200# with the optional locker tanks. Longest endurance on a forest fire suppression mission I did was 5.5 hours and I landed with an hour of fuel left.....hard on the bladder.....I let it go right off the wing that time. In the rw aircraft one thing you had to watch for on a hot day was oil temp. Usually right after take off I'd keep I'd climb shallow and accelerate to approx 135kts then go to cruise power...25'/2500rpm, lean to 220#/hour (110#/side). The extra airflow would help with keeping temps under control. Usually would get about 5-600'/min taking off at 5680#. The book said you would have a positive rate of climb on one engine then but I had my doubts as it was a bit of a pig till an hour or two of fuel was burned especially low and slow, right on the trees during fire duties.

For 2 people it would make a great personal aircraft. If I had a negative thought on the real world 310R I would say even though it is approved for known ice  it did suck in ice and it's not the most stable aircraft for IFR though like anything you get used to it fine.

The MilViz 310R is a great aircraft IMHO. If I was to look hard to find a fault I would say maybe it is a touch fast for cruise power settings.

Next to RealAir this is my favourite piston twin for P3d.

6 minutes ago, StewartH said:

Scott,  Quick question:  How does one know his aircraft is flying at 70% power?  What am I looking at that tells me I'm flying at 70%?

 

14 minutes ago, fppilot said:

Scott. Sent you a PM here.  The Milviz flies well also, but the flight dynamics are rooted in Bernt Stolle influence and may not have changed.

Hi Frank,

Thanks - will check...

Hi Stew,

The Percent Power is usually found in the POH Cruise Performance tables... It's derived from your RPM and Manifold Pressure settings... Did MilViz include the cruise performance tables ? It's important in the RW as Lycoming recommends that you do not exceed 75% power on their engines for sustained cruise...

Regards,
Scott

Edited September 25, 20187 yr by scottb613

2 minutes ago, scottb613 said:

 Did MilViz include the cruise performance tables ? It's important in the RW as Lycoming recommends that you do not exceed 75% power on their engines for sustained cruise...

Thanks, Scott.  Yes, I believe the performance tables are in the manual.  I'll have to double check, but thanks for the tip.

15 minutes ago, dbw1 said:

Next to RealAir this is my favourite piston twin for P3d.

Hi Dbw1,

Thanks for the EXCEPTIONAL real world PIREP and comparison - wow - that's some endorsement... That's some mighty fine experience you have there... I never knew VG's could make such a substantial difference on payload... So do you think the 180 KTAS is fiction ?

Regards,
Scott

Your welcome. One correction to my post is after take off on a hot day I should have said "climb power" not cruise power.

180 KTAS is is obtainable at lighter weights on a cool day for sure depending on power setting and aircraft physical condition....cowlings fitting well and props their original shape not dressed out after large knicks* etc.

* I put a couple thousand hours on the E110 Bandit and the real work horses cruised around 195KTAS where one i managed to get a little time in that had just been rebuilt to just like new condition got 210 KTAS. Physical condition can make a noticeable difference. Also, cleaning the wing leading edges of bugs and word not allowed. It all adds up to better performance. example...I flew rotary wing for a lot of years and I used to make sure the tail rotor blades were clean especially at higher altitudes. Some could say I was paranoid but I never believed in leaving any possible performance benefit behind. I'd love to see someone make an E110 for P3d. Great machine.

Once again I really like the MilViz 310 and with the radar and GTN750/650 in the panel that's the icing on the cake.

"and word not allowed"...I have no idea what my auto-correct is doing. LOL

39 minutes ago, dbw1 said:

"and word not allowed"...I have no idea what my auto-correct is doing. LOL

Hi...

LOL - thanks so much again - yeah - seems I won't be able to pass this one either...

Added to my "To Buy" list...

Regards,
Scott

 

1 hour ago, scottb613 said:

Did MilViz include the cruise performance tables ?

Scott,
Yes. However thay appear to be merely reproduced from perhaps the actual Beech POH.  There are notes in the form of hand drawn boxes which appear to bracket ranges of performance.  Might be from Stolle's own POH.  I would surmise that the Milviz method was to model their 310 to match the tables rather than creating tables to match actual performance of their model in the sim.

I routinely log climb, cruise, and descent burn performance at/to/from a number of altitudes during flights and use results in performance tables at Fltsim.com.   I believe I have not modified my original 310R table.  Thus I am still using it for the Redux.

6 minutes ago, fppilot said:

Thus I am still using it for the Redux.

Hi Frank,

Thanks as well for all your help and info !!!

Regards,
Scott