P3D running but CPU not running at max speed

[Ray Proudfoot 8,964]

30 minutes ago, SteveW said:

IF10 calculates the fuel from measuring the actual fuel used in the flights and homes in on a more accurate estimate than that one. I see you got a new sim and it didn't bother you that FSX was already out. Perhaps you wrote to LM to mention that P3D was a waste of time? lol.

I've read that three times now and it makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.

[SteveW 1,792]

Recording how much fuel is used on a flight? So you can know how much fuel you are likely to use next time. But also that recording produces the real range of the aircraft in the sim. So that the range is known then the distance (and time) is known and the circle of available airports can be determined.

[SteveW 1,792]

...to be able to work with new aircraft in the future their fuel use must be measured to determine the range since there will be no entries for that plane in the performance tables until it is flown. A bit like a test flight procedure.

[Ray Proudfoot 8,964]

6 minutes ago, SteveW said:

What it needed to do was generalise for every aircraft. To go into some specifics, especially on unique aircraft like the Concord, would require a growing database. Instead it handles all the functionality common to aircraft but not certain specifics on the Concorde. I required the navigation programmed because of the amount of GPS waypoints to handle. The app you mention is indeed a specialised version for that particular plane. Other than that all the common functions are taken into account. Anyway I thought you might like to know that I was using that for the navigation function.

There is very little Concorde had in common with other aircraft as I'm sure you know. Fuel loading and weight distribution was critical to get the correct weight balance for take-off. Other aircraft have an elevator which can be trimmed for a correct flight profile. Concorde didn't so the fuel had to be pumped around to maintain the correct CG which changed during the various stages of the flight. But simply put, fuel was pumped rearward during the climb and cruise phases and forwards on decelleration and descent.

Generating the waypoints required for the INS systems is good but is just one aspect of what was required for a successful Concorde flight.

[SteveW 1,792]

10 minutes ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

I've read that three times now and it makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.

You fill up the Rover and go into town. When you get there you fill up again. Say you used 1 gallon and town is 10 miles away, your range is 10 miles per gallon - on that trip. if it's all uphill then you'll likely use less on the way home. If you see the range of the aircraft on a website and get a sim version, it's interesting to see if that uses the same fuel in the sim, generally they do very well. With IF I tested several fuel planners and the only ones close to actual in sim use were those like the Quality Wings that have a table specifically for that plane. However, IF always predicts closer all the time because it measures the actual fuel used and monitors the fuel flow. 

 

 

[Ray Proudfoot 8,964]

8 minutes ago, SteveW said:

Recording how much fuel is used on a flight? So you can know how much fuel you are likely to use next time. But also that recording produces the real range of the aircraft in the sim. So that the range is known then the distance (and time) is known and the circle of available airports can be determined.

The amount of fuel required depended on upper air temperatures as well as pax load. That was critical to how well the engines performed. Too warm and climb was severely restricted. Every flight was different. The London - Barbados route sometimes required a refuelling stop in Shannon, other times it didn't. On some occasions a second Concorde had to be used as the weight would be too great for the pax load for one aircraft.

Did you know Concorde did not have cruise levels? It just kept climbing until it needed to slow down and start down. So you would never know how high you would get. And the temperature in the troposphere was constantly changing so nothing was constant. Unless a program reads the temperature of the upper atmosphere and uses that in its calculations fuel requirements will not be accurate.

[SteveW 1,792]

Yes I did get into it many years ago and I made IF handle specifically some functions for the Concorde even though I said it doesn't generally do specifics.

[Ray Proudfoot 8,964]

2 minutes ago, SteveW said:

You fill up the Rover and go into town. When you get there you fill up again. Say you used 1 gallon and town is 10 miles away, your range is 10 miles per gallon - on that trip. if it's all uphill then you'll likely use less on the way home. If you see the range of the aircraft on a website and get a sim version, it's interesting to see if that uses the same fuel in the sim, generally they do very well. With IF I tested several fuel planners and the only ones close to actual in sim use were those like the Quality Wings that have a table specifically for that plane. However, IF always predicts closer all the time because it measures the actual fuel used and monitors the fuel flow.

You're forgetting the simple fact that the atmosphere is constantly changing and temps have a big effect on Concorde's performance. Your analogy is far too simplistic.

[Ray Proudfoot 8,964]

Just now, SteveW said:

Yes I did get into it many years ago and I made IF handle specifically some functions for the Concorde even though I said it doesn't generally do specifics.

But it's the specifics that are so important.

[SteveW 1,792]

Even so the fuel you used is the exact fuel you used on that flight. The question is how much temp changes and weight and climb rates changed and throttle use and so on makes - that's available only in IF I think.

Edited January 15, 2019 by SteveW

[SteveW 1,792]

 

Maybe check this out, he's a pro and says IF shows you how to fly. It does SIDS and STARS and the weather function in IF should be disabled when using another weather app, he doesn't make that too clear.

Edited January 15, 2019 by SteveW

[Ray Proudfoot 8,964]

8 minutes ago, SteveW said:

Even so the fuel you used is the exact fuel you used on that flight. The question is how much temp changes and weight and climb rates changed and throttle use and so on makes - that's available only in IF I think.

You can't base fuel used on one flight as the basis for the next. As I said before temps have a big effect. And so do pax numbers. CPS-X has a random pax feature which I use. That guarantees a different fuel load plus a different ZCFG so fuel in the tanks will need to be different.

I've already said temps are critical to Concorde performance - far more so that subsonic aircraft.

One other question. Concorde could only go supersonic once clear of populated areas. I tell CPS-X where that point is. It will vary depending on the routing. For example, London - Bahrain could not go supersonic until it reached the Adriatic near Venice. So it flew subsonic to that point. The extra fuel usage was significant. Unless any program can take that into account it cannot accurately calculate fuel requirements.

Can we bring this discussion to an end please? It bears no relation to the topic title.

[SteveW 1,792]

But it was you getting into it in an attempt to deride it in your confrontational way.

Leaving me no option but to defend it.

I didn't know if you knew I am involved in the delivery of real every day addons so I mentioned that along with my PC specs, you wanted to know in general what I was flying.

It was not my intention to discuss it - I didn't provide a link because it was non-specific.

And you had a good poke at that as if I should have provided one. lol

Those programs cannot be written without prior knowledge of flight - by the way.

Edited January 15, 2019 by SteveW

[SteveW 1,792]

Talking about temperatures is always of interest, how do you know the temperature gradient injected? If I'm that concerned I can produce a graph. Anyway enough of that. lol.

[Ray Proudfoot 8,964]

I’m trying to smooth things over but you just keep posting confrontational replies. I have never denigrated your software. I just said it didn’t have any features I wanted. You seem to take exception to that. Strange way to behave.

You have a unique attitude which I haven’t come across before. You’re clearly an intelligent man but seem sensitive to those who take a different opinion on things.

You clearly have a knowledge of flight but Concorde cannot be treated the same as other aircraft. It was unique and requires a specialist program to calculate the data for it. Probably best if you accept that.