Jump to content

Sign in to follow this  
Matt2218

Simulating the 900ER / Derated Takeoffs

Recommended Posts

17 hours ago, threegreen said:

There's also QSimPlanner which I use and it's freeware.

QSim only gives you a choice (a wide range - a wild guess) of assume temps - no derates. I think the OP is looking for a utility that TELLS them derates and assumed temps like topcat does.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, SierraHotel said:

I use ToPs, and gives everything I need for a derated takeoff.

https://secure.simmarket.com/tops-takeoff-performance-system-fsx-p3d.phtml

 

3 hours ago, sosuflyer said:

Can't believe I've never heard of that tool before.  Does it work pretty well,  and do the takeoffs feel realistic (flight deck angle, v1 stop distance and such). It's cheap enough I'll get it anyway.  Just never heard of it before 

 

28 minutes ago, pracines said:

QSim only gives you a choice (a wide range - a wild guess) of assume temps - no derates. I think the OP is looking for a utility that TELLS them derates and assumed temps like topcat does.   

Paul is correct - I was looking for something that would just spit out a temp for me. Since it was only about $7, I went ahead and grabbed that TOPS utility from simmarket.

It seems pretty basic and TBH that is what I was after...something better than just firewalling full TOGA all the time or blindly guessing. I think it is very clever how it reads location and weather data from the sim and provides the answer without much need for manual intervention.

Thanks for the replies and tips!


Matt Smith

Prepar3D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, threegreen said:

Do you as an actual pilot like flying the 900ER? I've read some reports of pilots not being so happy with it, mainly because it's so prone to tail strike and makes rotation and flaring 'uncomfortable'.

I do like the ER.  It's obviously not a short field bird, but it flies nicely.  The tail strike threat is real, but manageable without much issue as long as you fly the plane the way it needs to be flown. 

If you have the HUD, you have a direct indication of tail strike attitude, and that helps a lot. Our entire fleet has the HUD and captains are required to use it during takeoff and landing in the -800s and -900s for just this reason.  So for me as an FO, I don't have that indication, but knowing that someone does is reassuring.  I can also say that I've seen captains rotate a -900 much more aggressively, and flare much more deeply, than I would have felt comfortable with (and much more than was necessary), and we've not had a problem.  Obviously they're more comfortable with it because they can watch the tailstrike indication... but the takeaway for me is that crews who accomplish a tailstrike managed to get themselves into a pretty goofy aircraft state in order to do it.  It's not exactly something that can just "happen" if you're maintaining a normal attitude and energy state. 

That said, we've had crews do it just like every other airline, so I never say never.  There is a gotcha situation that can develop in certain configurations / energy states during landing, where spoiler deployment (probably combined with the reversers opening) can cause the aircraft to pitch up alarmingly, and that's caught people by surprise.  I've seen it, and it requires prompt forward pressure to keep the nose from pitching up.  I could definitely see this being an issue, especially for someone relatively new to the plane, combined with a night or low vis scenario with poor horizon reference etc.  But again, hopefully the guy monitoring the HUD sees it developing in time to stop it. 

  • Like 1

Andrew Crowley

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As far as straight -900 approach speeds go, I just did this.   6,000ft runway (1,000 displaced threshold), winds gusting in the 30s, ref of 151kts with a 14kt wind additive, for an approach speed of 165kts.  Max autobrakes required on a dry runway.  Straight -900s are dumb ;-).

afLW0A5a_o.jpg

  • Like 1

Andrew Crowley

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Stearmandriver said:

That said, we've had crews do it just like every other airline, so I never say never.  There is a gotcha situation that can develop in certain configurations / energy states during landing, where spoiler deployment (probably combined with the reversers opening) can cause the aircraft to pitch up alarmingly, and that's caught people by surprise.  I've seen it, and it requires prompt forward pressure to keep the nose from pitching up.  I could definitely see this being an issue, especially for someone relatively new to the plane, combined with a night or low vis scenario with poor horizon reference etc.  But again, hopefully the guy monitoring the HUD sees it developing in time to stop it.

This would be one of those gotcha situations I guess... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=viFR1qRPKs4

 

12 minutes ago, Stearmandriver said:

As far as straight -900 approach speeds go, I just did this.   6,000ft runway (1,000 displaced threshold), winds gusting in the 30s, ref of 151kts with a 14kt wind additive, for an approach speed of 165kts.  Max autobrakes required on a dry runway.  Straight -900s are dumb ;-).

Thank you very much for the replies. I actually got myself in a situation like that in the sim recently and wasn't sure if the target speed with the wind additive I calculated (close to + 20 kts) was even permissible. It also put me uncomfortably close to the flap 30 limit speed. Looking forward to the NG3 which will hopefully include an actual 900ER.

Edit: Is it allowed to actually use flaps 40 at that weight with a target speed that high? I assume you were carrying fuel for a return trip to be that heavy on landing?

Edited by threegreen

Prepar3D v5.2 | PMDG 737NGXu/777 | FSLabs A320/A321 | www.united-virtual.com | www.deltava.org | i9 9900K 5 GHz | Corsair Vengeance RGB Pro 32 GB | RTX 3090 24 GB MSI Suprim X | Windows 10 Pro 64 bit | HP Reverb G2 VR HMD

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, threegreen said:

This should surely be the other way around? Can't cater the aft galley unless there's some in 2?

I presume I ought not to show you the Delta tail tipping video then? 🙂

Ehm yeah. Clearly, I had a long day 🙂


Cheers Henrik K.

IT Student, future ATPL holder, Freight forwarding air cargo trainee and Ramp Agent at EDDL/DUS+ FS2Crew Beta tester (&Voice Actor) for the FSlabs and UGCX

Sim: Prepar3d V4.4 Rig: CPU I7-6800K 6x4.0 GHz | RAM: 32GB DDR4-3000 | GPU: GTX 1080 FTW @2025 Mhz | TFT: DELL 3840x1600

ugcx_beta_team.png 3ePa8Yp.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, threegreen said:

This would be one of those gotcha situations I guess... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=viFR1qRPKs4

 

Thank you very much for the replies. I actually got myself in a situation like that in the sim recently and wasn't sure if the target speed with the wind additive I calculated (close to + 20 kts) was even permissible. It also put me uncomfortably close to the flap 30 limit speed. Looking forward to the NG3 which will hopefully include an actual 900ER.

Edit: Is it allowed to actually use flaps 40 at that weight with a target speed that high? I assume you were carrying fuel for a return trip to be that heavy on landing?

Yeah, that is the "gotcha" situation - it's related to the minor bounce you can see, which would not be bad but in a certain energy state can cause the spoiler deployment to create a pretty good pitch up.  You can see he didn't touch down in a tailstrike attitude, the plane pitched into it after touchdown. 

Boeing recently revised guidance on wind additive to cap it at 15kt maximum regardless of conditions, so that helps some. 

We just had some alternate fuel on board, certainly not enough for a return trip, I think we landed with around 10.7.  There's no restriction on using flaps 40 at any weight, the problem is twofold because of the conditions: it exacerbates the effect of crosswind and gusts, and provides even less leeway before hitting blowback speed.  

  • Like 1

Andrew Crowley

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, threegreen said:

 

Edit: Is it allowed to actually use flaps 40 at that weight with a target speed that high? I assume you were carrying fuel for a return trip to be that heavy on landing?

No weight limit. Flaps 40 in gusty conditions is usually a bad idea - especially in a straight -900 as they are even closer to a blowback.

I was flying a -900 last fall and the FO kept getting close to the flap limit and I was calling his speeds so we didn't exceed the limit. He got the plane on the ground, nice landing. No exceedences. Next leg is mine. Of course on that leg, I'm the one who gets the blowback. Sigh.

  • Like 2

Matt Cee

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Stearmandriver said:

for an approach speed of 165kts.

A bit of MD11 feeling 🤣🤣


,

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  

  • Tom Allensworth,
    Founder of AVSIM Online


  • Flight Simulation's Premier Resource!

    AVSIM is a free service to the flight simulation community. AVSIM is staffed completely by volunteers and all funds donated to AVSIM go directly back to supporting the community. Your donation here helps to pay our bandwidth costs, emergency funding, and other general costs that crop up from time to time. Thank you for your support!

    Click here for more information and to see all donations year to date.
  • Donation Goals

    AVSIM's 2020 Fundraising Goal

    Donate to our annual general fundraising goal. This donation keeps our doors open and providing you service 24 x 7 x 365. Your donation here helps to pay our bandwidth costs, emergency funding, and other general costs that crop up from time to time. We reset this goal every new year for the following year's goal.


    53%
    $13,405.00 of $25,000.00 Donate Now
×
×
  • Create New...