Engine performance off

[Mad_X 12]

I have checked the engine thrust against real world Flacon 50 manuals (not the EX version with more power but the orginial) and this one is significantly off. 

For example for a .8 Mach cruise at FL350 with 27,000 - 28,000 lbs the table stats around 96% N1 and fuel flow of about 700 lbs /hr per engine.

With this Falcon you can maintain the speed with around 83-84% N1 while the engines are burning 1000 lbs /hr each.

 

[Flysimware 647]

9 hours ago, Mad_X said:

I have checked the engine thrust against real world Flacon 50 manuals (not the EX version with more power but the orginial) and this one is significantly off. 

For example for a .8 Mach cruise at FL350 with 27,000 - 28,000 lbs the table stats around 96% N1 and fuel flow of about 700 lbs /hr per engine.

With this Falcon you can maintain the speed with around 83-84% N1 while the engines are burning 1000 lbs /hr each.

Thanks for bring this to my attention. I think back when we updated in March of 2019 we had to fix an issue where the throttle range was too short at the top end causing little movements to be too sensitive. Solving that issue may have reduced the top end range. We did in fact go over these setting back in our original air file build. Here is the page on our operating manual that matches the same as you posted So this is confirmed. I will update the high altitude settings and confirm the low altitude as well since we are in the process of updating this product right now.

Keep in mind setting up the correct specs for 1 scenario does not mean all the other will hit exact numbers due to flight sim limitations. But being this far out we should adjust them again!

 

Edited February 10, 2020 by Flysimware

[Flysimware 647]

Here is the new aircraft.cfg for the new fuel consumption value. Keep in mind this new value favors high altitude over lower altitude. Can't get both accurate. Also the new air file for the new N1 values based on temperature, weight, speed and altitude. We got very good results. Also the max N1 is more accurate as well.

http://www.mediafire.com/file/slkksm0mzv99kii/F50_Dynamics.zip/file

[Mad_X 12]

Thx will check it out with different wheights, speeds and altitudes in the 30s to FL410. 
 

personally I would favor high over low but than the takeoff power is off, isn’t it?

Edited February 10, 2020 by Mad_X

[Flysimware 647]

2 hours ago, Mad_X said:

personally I would favor high over low but than the takeoff power is off, isn’t it?

I can still adjust the takeoff power but this was already good based on pitch and speeds from a pilot who flew this bird and some other methods we use to get decent results. I was talking about altitudes like 10K and 20K the fuel consumption and N1 around 95% will not give the results we have listed in the operating manual since we made it more precise for cruise altitude.

Edited February 10, 2020 by Flysimware

[Mad_X 12]

I think we can neglect this because the Falcon will not cruise there and will bust through these altitudes rather quick wouldn’t it? 

Edited February 10, 2020 by Mad_X

[Mad_X 12]

The recent flights show values very close to operating manual. I will report if I find a corner case.