Project Sunrise

[AntillesFlyer 58]

Hi Guys

I'm looking to do the Project Sunrise trip this Monday from Heathrow to Sydney using the Boeing 787-10 in one hit (all 19-20 hours worth). I know it's not technically able to, however it's fuel economy seems to be no where near as bad as it should be so I feel it'll give me a pretty good chance. I often fly EHAM to the Caribbean and only use half of what it would normally be by flight sim which is about half the distance to Sydney.

Has anyone attempted this at all? Are there any tips on how best to do this. I'm also trying to work out why do the airliners tend to stay at around 36-39k before moving up to max height. I've seen this on numerous flight plans (on flight aware) and wondered if it was because of fuel economy, Is it worth considering this at all?

Thanks

Brendon.  

 

Edited May 12, 2021 by AntillesFlyer

[EGLD 439]

ignore

Edited May 12, 2021 by EGLD

[ThomseN_inc 1,128]

You'll probably end up running out of VRAM somwhere over the indian ocean.

 

The choice of FL will be pretty much related to many factors and i'd assume Aircraft weight is one of them.

Edited May 12, 2021 by ThomseN_inc

[Cpt_Piett 4,650]

55 minutes ago, AntillesFlyer said:

I'm also trying to work out why do the airliners tend to stay at around 36-39k before moving up to max height.

I’m guessing this has to do with optimal weight before climbing to higher FLs. Hence the concept of step climbs.

Interesting idea of a flight though. For me patience would be the main limiting factor. Longest trip in MSFS so far was from Boston to London in the A320. I’m doing a round the world trip eastbound, last leg from Hong Kong to Taipei, but can’t find the motivation to cross the Pacific Ocean.

[cianpars 1,165]

1 hour ago, Cpt_Piett said:

I’m guessing this has to do with optimal weight before climbing to higher FLs. Hence the concept of step climbs.

Interesting idea of a flight though. For me patience would be the main limiting factor. Longest trip in MSFS so far was from Boston to London in the A320. I’m doing a round the world trip eastbound, last leg from Hong Kong to Taipei, but can’t find the motivation to cross the Pacific Ocean.

Haha, that's what the 'slew' button is for 😀

[AntillesFlyer 58]

3 hours ago, Cpt_Piett said:

I’m guessing this has to do with optimal weight before climbing to higher FLs. Hence the concept of step climbs.

Interesting idea of a flight though. For me patience would be the main limiting factor. Longest trip in MSFS so far was from Boston to London in the A320. I’m doing a round the world trip eastbound, last leg from Hong Kong to Taipei, but can’t find the motivation to cross the Pacific Ocean.

I have to admit I may have to have a few coffees to stay awake. I'm looking at a 4.30 am start which will be fun, just so I can hopefully finish at midnight. 

The over water trips I've tended in the past to just leave the sim running whilst I take the better half to the shops for a drink. I figure the co-pilots taken over for that leg.

Good luck with your round the world trip. I've been meaning to do it as well, but haven't worked out on an aircraft to use yet, although the corsair looks like fun.

Cheers

Brendon 

 

[AntillesFlyer 58]

3 hours ago, ThomseN_inc said:

You'll probably end up running out of VRAM somwhere over the indian ocean.

 

The choice of FL will be pretty much related to many factors and i'd assume Aircraft weight is one of them.

I'm a little concerned about this as well but definitely worth the risk.

Cheers

[JimBrown 596]

6 hours ago, AntillesFlyer said:

I'm also trying to work out why do the airliners tend to stay at around 36-39k before moving up to max height. I've seen this on numerous flight plans (on flight aware) and wondered if it was because of fuel economy

It's an economy thing. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Step_climb

...jim

 

[ThomseN_inc 1,128]

4 hours ago, AntillesFlyer said:

I'm a little concerned about this as well but definitely worth the risk.

Cheers

Yes, i'd give it a try too. I did some flights of around 6-8 hours duration in the Latitude and it worked out quite well. Nothing to lose except time 😉

[mobeans10 197]

It's weight. As the air density drops with altitude and the associated decrease of dynamic pressure, the aircraft can't generate enough lift to maintain level flight at an economic angle of attack. Once fuel has burned, the lift requirements decrease and eventually the aircraft can climb and maintain level flight at an economical angle of attack

Edited May 12, 2021 by mobeans10
Extra explanation

[mobeans10 197]

The other alternative would be to slow down as fuel burns to maintain optimum angle of attack and hence lift/drag ratio. Both options would get you the same range for a given fuel load out but the first would get you there faster 😃

[mobeans10 197]

Both of the above assume you are controlling altitude and airspeed. It you  just hold angle of attack constant and allow altitude and airspeed to vary then you would enter the classic phugoid motion trading airspeed and altitude. This would also get you the same range but there would be controllability issues at the top of the arc and it would also likely end the beverage service  which nobody wants.

[himmelhorse 1,276]

15 hours ago, AntillesFlyer said:

I know it's not technically able to, however it's fuel economy seems to be no where near as bad as it should be so I feel it'll give me a pretty good chance.

Hello,

Fortunately for all of us silly enough to forgo hard earned sleep for 19-20 hours, there is available to all of us, an aerial fuel tanker during any stage of your flight.  This is available even if you do not have a fuel probe built in to your aircraft.  It is in your pull down menu.  I would advise taking only small sips though as it tends to upset the balance of your aircraft I believe.

Also, regarding your stepped heights, I have been told that this is due to waiting for fuel burn off in order to achieve some semblance of climb performance up to the higher altitudes.  Further, I think this is fairly common practice especially on long haul routes.

Tony 

[AntillesFlyer 58]

Thanks guys

So I did a few test flights over the last few days to make sure I had it all set up correctly and so far it's been rough

1. CTD after 2 hours.

2. CTD after 4 hours.

3. CTD after 1 hour.

Funny thing is I can fly to North, Central and South America to and from Europe flawlessly, with flights up to 12 hours.

I've now lowered all the graphic settings to med, turned off AI traffic, turned the fans up and updated the drivers so if it doesn't work I may have to try JFK to YSSY (2nd project Sunrise route). It's really bizarre that heading East from Europe seems to crash for me.

Another alternative could be to fly a more southerly route via Dubai etc, but that'll really screw around with the fuel/time etc.

The good news though is I have the week off to try and sort it out.

I also used the step approach and it definitely cruised better at 33k and we averaged 5% fuel usage/30 mins so we should just sneak in with 5% fuel left if I can just get it to work!

Brendon