rsrandazzo

[29SEP18] PMDG 747 QOTSII Update 3.00.9019 Released via OC

Recommended Posts

12 hours ago, Captain Kevin said:

I was loading it in pounds, so I'm not sure what the issue is. The PMDG fuel loader only gives you the option to load in either pounds or kilograms, so I don't know where gallons would come into play here.

It appears to me that the PMDG fuel loader takes the number of pounds that the user attempts to input, converts that number to the nearest gallon and displays that gallon figure in pounds.  I have never seen a fuel tank capacity that was rated in pounds, it was always in gallons.  

Share this post


Link to post
Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

1 hour ago, Captain Kevin said:

248,000 is nowhere near close to the fuel tank volume

Volume of liquids is in gallons.  The number of gallons a fuel tank will hold will change daily based on the temperature of the fuel. 

Share this post


Link to post
12 hours ago, JRBarrett said:

the refueling truck (or bowser) meters will show the amount dispensed in either gallons or liters,

Jim,

I think that we are for the most part in agreement. 🙂

My point was (and I didn't do a very good job of explaining it)  liquid capacities are in gallons (and dispensed in gallons) and at some point during the refueling process those capacities will have to be converted to pounds for flight planning purposes.  

Grace and Peace,

Share this post


Link to post
14 hours ago, Cocobellomann said:

Let‘s play

what is wrong here?

6013CF47-646D-4434-92BD-D33E8DF5FFEB.jpg

 

 

 

How has he done that? 😜

Such an engine weighs tons.

 

 

Josef K

Nice photo shop job. 

Share this post


Link to post
34 minutes ago, Bluestar said:

It appears to me that the PMDG fuel loader takes the number of pounds that the user attempts to input, converts that number to the nearest gallon and displays that gallon figure in pounds.  I have never seen a fuel tank capacity that was rated in pounds, it was always in gallons.  

You wouldn't have a fuel tank capacity rated in pounds because the total weight of the fuel would change based on the density of the fuel.

28 minutes ago, Bluestar said:

Volume of liquids is in gallons.  The number of gallons a fuel tank will hold will change daily based on the temperature of the fuel. 

Yes, I am aware that the volume of liquids is in gallons, but you don't get that information in the fuel loading page in the FMC. The PMDG fuel loader only allows you to enter a weight for the fuel. According to the Boeing documentation I have here, the Boeing 747-400 has a fuel capacity of 57,285 gallons. Assuming a fuel density of 6.7 gallons, this would put your fuel weight at 383,810 pounds. 248,000 pounds is nowhere near 383,810 pounds, as that's only 37,015 gallons. My point being, even with the PMDG Boeing 747-400 taking fuel density into account, which would affect the weight of the fuel that could be loaded, this should NOT be an issue when you are nowhere near close to hitting the limits of the fuel tanks. At the low extreme of a fuel density of 6.30, 57,285 gallons of fuel would translate to 360,896 pounds. If you tried loading any more than that weight at that fuel density, it wouldn't let you because you've already maxed the fuel tanks out volume wise. But 248,000 pounds is nowhere near close to that 360,896 pounds, so why it only loads 230,000 pounds at that fuel density is beyond me. That's the point I'm trying to get at. I don't understand why this got so complex in the first place.

Share this post


Link to post

I just loaded the 747-400F in the Atlas N475MC livery. I initially set my payload to zero, (ZFW 364,000), and requested 248,000 pounds of fuel at standard density of 6.7 lbs/gal, and it loaded 247,998 - just two pounds shy.

I then set payload to MAX, which gave a ZFW of 610,000. I thought perhaps it would prevent loading an amount of fuel that would put the aircraft over MTOW. But, when I requested 248,000 pounds it again happily loaded 247,998, putting me 8000 pounds over the MTOW of 850,000 pounds. (I first set the fuel load back to 40,000 pounds before increasing the payload to MAX).

Tried it again with fuel density set to 6.3, and got 247,992

This is with the .9019 update on P3D 4.3 running on Win 10 Pro

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, Captain Kevin said:

You wouldn't have a fuel tank capacity rated in pounds because the total weight of the fuel would change based on the density of the fuel.

Yes, I am aware that the volume of liquids is in gallons, but you don't get that information in the fuel loading page in the FMC. The PMDG fuel loader only allows you to enter a weight for the fuel. According to the Boeing documentation I have here, the Boeing 747-400 has a fuel capacity of 57,285 gallons. Assuming a fuel density of 6.7 gallons, this would put your fuel weight at 383,810 pounds. 248,000 pounds is nowhere near 383,810 pounds, as that's only 37,015 gallons. My point being, even with the PMDG Boeing 747-400 taking fuel density into account, which would affect the weight of the fuel that could be loaded, this should NOT be an issue when you are nowhere near close to hitting the limits of the fuel tanks. At the low extreme of a fuel density of 6.30, 57,285 gallons of fuel would translate to 360,896 pounds. If you tried loading any more than that weight at that fuel density, it wouldn't let you because you've already maxed the fuel tanks out volume wise. But 248,000 pounds is nowhere near close to that 360,896 pounds, so why it only loads 230,000 pounds at that fuel density is beyond me. That's the point I'm trying to get at. I don't understand why this got so complex in the first place.

I noticed today in the 747 when adding an airport in the fix page, I couldn't set the ring to 540nm. Is this really how it is or is it on my side? I cant set a range higher than 510nm, I usually put about 600-800nm for ETP points

Edited by captainsazzman

Share this post


Link to post
4 hours ago, JRBarrett said:

I just loaded the 747-400F in the Atlas N475MC livery. I initially set my payload to zero, (ZFW 364,000), and requested 248,000 pounds of fuel at standard density of 6.7 lbs/gal, and it loaded 247,998 - just two pounds shy.

I then set payload to MAX, which gave a ZFW of 610,000. I thought perhaps it would prevent loading an amount of fuel that would put the aircraft over MTOW. But, when I requested 248,000 pounds it again happily loaded 247,998, putting me 8000 pounds over the MTOW of 850,000 pounds. (I first set the fuel load back to 40,000 pounds before increasing the payload to MAX).

Tried it again with fuel density set to 6.3, and got 247,992

This is with the .9019 update on P3D 4.3 running on Win 10 Pro

I tried it just now with a freighter, as I was using the passenger variants before, and I note no difference on my end. The only other difference is that you're running P3D and I'm not, because I don't have access to my computer at home, and this laptop only has FSX on it. When I get home at the end of the month, I'll have to investigate this on the other computer.

Share this post


Link to post
On 9/30/2018 at 12:05 AM, rsrandazzo said:

- 0007244: [General - Unsure] Number of passengers in PAYLOAD page change when fuel is set (mfrantzeskakis) - resolved.

 

I have not yet purchased/installed the 747-8 extension. The above issue is also present in the 747-400 - it was not there before 747-8 release and 747-400 updates. According to OC all is up-to-date.

Edited by Nemo

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Nemo said:

I have not yet purchased/installed the 747-8 extension. The above issue is also present in the 747-400 - it was not there before 747-8 release and 747-400 updates. According to OC all is up-to-date.

In the release of the 747/748 there was a chnage on how the passengers would load. In these releases we make sure the passengers are correctly redistributed so the CG is always in limits. Load fule first and then passengers and you should be all set.

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Olympic260 said:

In the release of the 747/748 there was a chnage on how the passengers would load. In these releases we make sure the passengers are correctly redistributed so the CG is always in limits. Load fule first and then passengers and you should be all set.

Understand, but why was it then listed as a resolved issue in the update log?

Edited by Nemo

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Olympic260 said:

In the release of the 747/748 there was a chnage on how the passengers would load. In these releases we make sure the passengers are correctly redistributed so the CG is always in limits. Load fule first and then passengers and you should be all set.

quick question for you, is there a limit on the range circle you can input for a fix in the FMC? in the 747, it looks like no more than 510nm. just wondering why Boeing would put a limit on such things? on the 777, I could put 1,00nm range arcs if I felt like it

Share this post


Link to post
55 minutes ago, Nemo said:

Understand, but why was it then listed as a resolved issue in the update log?

There was another issue that was affecting proper operation

Share this post


Link to post
47 minutes ago, captainsazzman said:

quick question for you, is there a limit on the range circle you can input for a fix in the FMC? in the 747, it looks like no more than 510nm. just wondering why Boeing would put a limit on such things? on the 777, I could put 1,00nm range arcs if I felt like it

511 is the limit on the real FMC. It was wrong in the initial 747 release corrected now.

Share this post


Link to post
4 hours ago, Olympic260 said:

In the release of the 747/748 there was a chnage on how the passengers would load. In these releases we make sure the passengers are correctly redistributed so the CG is always in limits. Load fule first and then passengers and you should be all set.

I noticed this happening with the cargo rather than the passengers. I had submitted a support ticket last night, to which Paul had responded telling me it was intentional. I figured that to be the case since I noticed a correlation with the center of gravity with increasing fuel load, but then my question is, is that something that's going to be added into the introduction manual? This didn't happen prior to the last major update, so you can imagine it can cause quite the confusion.

Share this post


Link to post
14 hours ago, rcoultas said:

Nice photo shop job. 

No Photoshop job. Install it on prepar3dv3 and you‘ll see. I decided to restore version ...09 because of this, hence I cant give you screens from a different point of view. Sorry.

 

 

Josef K

Share this post


Link to post
52 minutes ago, Cocobellomann said:

No Photoshop job. Install it on prepar3dv3 and you‘ll see. I decided to restore version ...09 because of this, hence I cant give you screens from a different point of view. Sorry.

 

 

Josef K

Ok, I only use P3Dv4, and the model is spot on in my installation.  I find it interesting that there would be a  different model between versions, but hey I'm not a developer.

I'm assuming you made a support ticket, if you feel there is a discrepancy?

Share this post


Link to post
On 9/30/2018 at 1:24 AM, Captain Kevin said:

Certainly a support ticket, but I have to ask, does it appear to be anything like this?

 

No, not about that one. Even though I get a difference of around 500kgs at 80% fuel load and standard density.

I'll open a ticket on my specific issue tomorrow. The fuel distribution logic, how fuel is distributed in the tanks automatically, is not correct. It is distributed in a way that is forbidden by Boeing.

Share this post


Link to post
On 9/29/2018 at 11:05 PM, rsrandazzo said:

 

Thank you for your support of this (and all!) PMDG products-  you guys have really been incredibly kind and supportive of this one.  She is simply a magnificent airplane and it makes us very happy to see how much you are enjoying this new expansion to the PMDG 747 product line!

It really is the best of both worlds Robert, just when I got homesick for the 777, the 747-8 comes along with it's goodness and 777 interior. A great plane. Thank you. 

Share this post


Link to post
21 hours ago, Captain Kevin said:
On 10/1/2018 at 11:08 AM, Olympic260 said:

In the release of the 747/748 there was a chnage on how the passengers would load. In these releases we make sure the passengers are correctly redistributed so the CG is always in limits. Load fule first and then passengers and you should be all set.

I noticed this happening with the cargo rather than the passengers. I had submitted a support ticket last night, to which Paul had responded telling me it was intentional. I figured that to be the case since I noticed a correlation with the center of gravity with increasing fuel load, but then my question is, is that something that's going to be added into the introduction manual? This didn't happen prior to the last major update, so you can imagine it can cause quite the confusion.

A few clarifications on the new payload redistribution feature:

1. It is indeed the cargo load that is automatically distributed. Chris mentioned passengers instead of cargo by mistake.

2. Automatic distribution happens when you enter in the FS ACTIONS>PAYLOAD page a total ZFW or LOAD LEVEL, or use the  SET FULL or SET RANDOM prompts. It will not happen if you set individual cargo hold loads.

3. Automatic re-distribution will also happen when you change the fuel quantities from the FS ACTIONS>FUEL page. This is necessary because changing fuel affects the CG, so any cargo distribution that was determined for an optimum CG needs to be recalculated.

4. In the initial release there was a bug that resulted in changing the number of passengers when fuel was changed. This has been fixed in the 3.00.9019 update and now only cargo is affected, as it should have been from the start.

5. In case you want to avoid the automatic distribution and maintain specific loads for each cargo hold there two ways to do this:

  • Set the required fuel first in the FUEL page and then go to the PAYLOAD page and enter the desired payload
  • Use the EFB OPT WT & BALANCE application. With this application you can set both payload (pax and cargo) and fuel in much more detail (individual payload stations as opposed to aggregates in the PAYLOAD page) and then use the SEND TO AIRCRAFT button to apply to the sim.

This new FS ACTIONS>PAYLOAD logic is already described in the Introduction Manual (page 171: Update Supplement>Setting the Payload)

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, mfrantz said:

This new FS ACTIONS>PAYLOAD logic is already described in the Introduction Manual (page 171: Update Supplement>Setting the Payload)

I just looked at it just now. Whilst I agree that that section itself is in there, I had a slightly different issue that the manual didn't clarify, hence my confusion. It only mentions the weight being distributed for optimum CG if you either entered a ZFW or if you used one of the pre-set load prompts. I have done neither. What I did was manually enter the weights myself, and adjusting the fuel would cause the cargo weight to be distributed accordingly. That's why I got confused until it was clarified.

Share this post


Link to post
23 hours ago, Cocobellomann said:

No Photoshop job. Install it on prepar3dv3 and you‘ll see. I decided to restore version ...09 because of this, hence I cant give you screens from a different point of view. Sorry.

 

 

Josef K

748pylons.jpg
Same for me, the pylons of engine 2 an 3 are not in the correct position  (in P3Dv3). The last part of the pylons clip through the inner aileron when it's pointing down.
748pylon2.jpg
748pylon3.jpg
Edited by Gombo
more screenshots added

Share this post


Link to post
23 hours ago, rcoultas said:

 

I'm assuming you made a support ticket, if you feel there is a discrepancy?

Yes.

 

 

Josef K

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Gombo said:
748pylons.jpg
Same for me, the pylons of engine 2 an 3 are not in the correct position  (in P3Dv3). The last part of the pylons clip through the inner aileron when it's pointing down.
748pylon2.jpg
748pylon3.jpg

Did you submit a support ticket?

Share this post


Link to post

I wanted to when I land at LAX, but since Cocobellomann already submitted one about the same problem I guess thats not necessary.

Share this post


Link to post
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.