Meyerflyer

climbs like on 3 engines (try 1.2.0.1 for a fix)

Recommended Posts

Mhm, to be honest, I would rather like to fly a plane, that behaves like the real one than a plane, that behaves like other people want it to.

 

Of course, here is/was something wrong with the flight dynamics, but Aerosoft should take it to the level, on which their testers and real life pilots say "it feels like flying the real one".

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's a fine balance between realistic and expectations. A long time ago we had a incredibly realistic flight model for an F-16, customers hated it because they simply could not handle it. And to be perfectly honest, we have more than a handful of people who worked for us and are now flying commercially. The one thing they all agree on after their first flight, flightmodels in FS/P3D are not very good. It is just not possible to make something where the control inputs result in the same thing in the sim as in the real aircraft. For our normal customers that is not a problem as they have long since been accustomed to how the sim flies. 

 

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I said " but Aerosoft should take it to the level, on which their testers and real life pilots say "it feels not like flying the real one". " The "not" was of course not right and I have edited my post. Sorry. :D

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Mathijs Kok said:

 The one thing they all agree on after their first flight, flightmodels in FS/P3D are not very good.

 

I agree. The data that AS put in their models may be correct and accurate, but the way the sim reads and interprets the data causes the developers to "distort" the flight model to behave more or less like the real one.

Not an easy task, not at all. But, I would have preferred an updated FD than other nice additions we had. Sure, I'm only one customer, most customers are okay with it, so I just can politely ask and thank you to check this out.

Ok, it is a balance between the real one and the sim expectations, but I'm sure we agree that the data right now needs some adjustment. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We have three testers flying at this moment. But again, we still see differences between systems that we simply do not expect. So we are probably re-installing the sim on those systems.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Computers are a pain...

 

Once we get past the teething with this climbing behavior and the freefall-like open descents, we definitely have a winner.  Hopefully this will provide some insight into tweaking the A330 performance so that'll be a little closer to optimum out of the gate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe the A320 CFM drag needs tweaking, too. I had a climb rate of 5000fpm o a flight yesterday below FL100. The A320 behaves a lot more realistic than A319 and A321, but it is not optimal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And what your weight and what was the weather? Of course that is a climb rate that is certainly not impossible and that systems tell the aircraft to get as fast as economically possible to the optimal altitude.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Takeoff weight must have been about 62t. That's not very heavy, but even for that weight, I think, 5000fpm is too steep. I'm alyways comparing it to the old Airbus and it never climbed that fast even with 62t.

The weather upon takeoff has been this: EDDT 171920Z VRB01KT CAVOK 17/08 Q1018 NOSIG so not even a good headwind pushing the climb.

 

Maybe have a look onto this video. This is an A320 takeoff in Stuttgart, probably from Eurowings, Germanwings or Airberlin as the pilots are speaking in a German accent. Don't know the destination, but as it turns right after departure on runway 25, it was probably heading to Berlin Tegel or Hamburg as there are less flights to the north that go further than Hamburg. So the take off weight should basically be comparable. The A320 in the video never reached more than 3500fpm climb rate even after having accelerated to 250kt.

 

So I hope you can understand why I have to say, that the 5000fpm must be too much if the real one only climbs at max 3500fpm. And yes, of course there are factors, which can have an effect on the climb performance, but I would expect a 5000fpm climb only with an empty plane.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=noiFh2dUj-A

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Meyerflyer,

According to my A320 FCOM "In Flight Performance - Climb" 3.05.10 Section Table in ISA condition with a weight of 62 tons at brake release and normal climb profile (250kt/300kt/0,78Mach) you should arrive at FL100= 4min (burning 420 kg of fuel), FL200= 8 min (about 800 kg fuel), FL250= 11min and 1000 kg, FL330= 17 min and 1370kg, FL350= 19min and 1460kg, FL390= 24 min and 1720 kg.

Anyway Mathijs said they have been working and tuning all flight dynamics so we must have a little more patience, I'm sure they are doing an hard and very good work "behind the scenes" and we'll have a very realistic bird ASAP

Best Regards

Andrea Buono 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

 

I don't want to push the tweaking by Aerosoft in a timely manner, I just wanted to report that, because I said earlier, that the A320 doesn't need tweaking. I now think, that all Airbus Professional planes need tweaking in regard of climb performance. That is all I wanted to say.

 

So, take your time. As the A321 climb performance has been clearly improved (reduced), I'm fine for the moment and can go flying with the Airbus until the tweaking is done. Don't hurry. :)

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The latest A320/A321 Update notes some further drag tweaks. Have they been made for the A321, A320 or both?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just another one: did two flights with the A319 CFM recently out of LEBB from ORBX and in both cases (different SIDs used) the plane rocketed into the sky with more than 5000ft/min. And in contrast to earlier situations, this time it was not related to an altitude hold. Means: I do the initial climb with 2500ft/min out from the runway and at 1300ft I connected the autopilot. More precisely:

 

- I took of with MAN+FLEX, climbed to roughly 1300ft, I take the thrustlevers back to CLB, then I switch on the autopilot and activate VNAV, all while the bus climbs at roughly 2500ft/min. As soon as the AP took over, the throttle was acustically increased and the plane rocketed into the sky with more than 5000ft/min.

 

- one of the flights was LEBB - LSZH, the other one LEBB - LPPT. Means: the A319 was not heavy, yet the 5000ft/min seemed unrealistic.

 

I hope that the fixes mentioned above make this post obsolete, if not, I can try to provide further details.

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