Aerosoft official retail partner for Microsoft Flight Simulator !! 
Click here for more information

Jump to content
007

Excessive Fuel use

Recommended Posts

UTC time predictions are ok for me. 

 

Were all your UTC time predictions completely off or only after the discontinuity?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, RALF9636 said:

UTC time predictions are ok for me. 

 

Were all your UTC time predictions completely off or only after the discontinuity?

 

After disco, Jan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
vor 7 Minuten, vysous sagte:

After disco, Jan

 

I'd assume that is a different issue then. The EFOB values for all waypoints are wrong right after takeoff.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@masterhawk according the closed thread, I want send the promised ecam-logfile from the last flight EDDM-CYUL. Same weird fuel-calculation in the MCDU. On ground in MUC EFOB 11t, decreasing during the flight down to -0.3t, increasing to 7.6t short before landing. Landed with 10.5t on board - near the calculated flightplan-fuel. Before the loading was finished, the CG showed 0.14 in red. When loading was finished, I got 15.2. During the descent, the CG in ECAM went to  .11 (in red). will attach same ECAM-screenshots during the flight (beginning on ground until onblocks). I used the Fuellanner/loadsheet function and used the wind uplink from NOAA-server.

Merry x-mas

 

Capture.JPG

Capture2.JPG

2019-12-22_12-18-46-586.jpg

2019-12-22_12-40-21-763.jpg

2019-12-22_17-45-51-61.jpg

2019-12-22_20-37-56-452.jpg

2019-12-22_20-48-57-422.jpg

ECAM_Systems.log

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I haven't seen excessive fuelflow actually reported by the aircraft, but I have run out of fuel crossing the atlantic eastbound with a 40 to 80kts tailwind using the aerosoft fuelplanner. The A320 consumption and prediction was dead on.

 

Here is a screenshot. I close to always see a negative EFOB at the destination. This is during a flight from EGLL to OMDB. Also don't know if the messed up UTC contributes, but haven't seen that before.

Anyways I attached the logs, hope it helps.

 

distance: 3041nm with waypoints

FL: 370

CI: 50

Starting fuel: 42.000KG (the calculator wanted 38030 )

Pax: 300

Cargo: 17.070

TOW: 207.055

ZFW:169.596

 

971806721_A330fuelpred.thumb.jpg.d9fb0dde8320aed2b4ddc10a7df2884d.jpg

Data.rar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Funny thing. Since last post I step climbed to FL400. I'm a lot closer to the destination and now the UTC between the clock and MCDU is more coherent. And now the fuelpred is much more beliveable. The Xwind has been basically been there the whole flight, just with some more tailwind component.

 

 

Data.rarA330.thumb.jpg.d5079462ceb8410a782e0248eef97135.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, moby said:

I haven't seen excessive fuelflow actually reported by the aircraft, but I have run out of fuel crossing the atlantic eastbound with a 40 to 80kts tailwind using the aerosoft fuelplanner. The A320 consumption and prediction was dead on.

 

Here is a screenshot. I close to always see a negative EFOB at the destination. This is during a flight from EGLL to OMDB. Also don't know if the messed up UTC contributes, but haven't seen that before.

Anyways I attached the logs, hope it helps.

 

distance: 3041nm with waypoints

FL: 370

CI: 50

Starting fuel: 42.000KG (the calculator wanted 38030 )

Pax: 300

Cargo: 17.070

TOW: 207.055

ZFW:169.596
 

 

Having very similar issue with my LX9 flight from KORD to LSZH. 

 

Used the fuel planner just like u got similar number added another 4 tons on top and still -0.6 EFOB. I am about 1890 nmi away and 16000 kg FOB with 542 kts GS and 2700 kg/h burn rate. Im not gonna make it. 

 

I decided to slew thru some waypoints since i cant refuel in the air. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have the same issue. I will post the AS fuel plan and the plan from Simbrief. I don't know what else I can do short of adding more miles to the planner. Should have been adequate but ran out of fuel and the aircraft shut down.

flightplan.jpg

fuelplan.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Captain Fred97 said:

I have the same issue. I will post the AS fuel plan and the plan from Simbrief. I don't know what else I can do short of adding more miles to the planner. Should have been adequate but ran out of fuel and the aircraft shut down.

flightplan.jpg

fuelplan.jpg

 

 

Sorry, but exactly what issue?  Is the issue with actually running out of fuel?  Or is it the EFOB?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just to get things sorted:

 

It seems there are at least five different issues mentioned in this topic:

 

1. The total fuel amount calculated by the Aerosoft Airbus X Fuel Planner is too low for the A330. Workaround: Enter the value calculated by Simbrief / PFPX.

 

2. The preflight trip fuel calculation on the INIT FUEL PREDICTION page inadequatly depends on the value entered for the Block fuel.

I see this on every flight preparation.

 

3. The GWCG is incorrect when loading via GSX.

It is okay when using Instant Load.

 

4. The EFOB values in the MCDU are too low during cruise, but the actual fuel consumption is correct compared to the Simbrief calculations and the preflight calculations in the MCDU.

I have this issue on every flight.

 

5. The actual fuel consumption of the A330 is too high.

I never had this problem so far and I am not sure if anybody really had or just aborted the flight due to the misleading EFOB predictions.

 

 

Just to confirm: Am I correct that none of these issue has been adressed in 1.0.0.5?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, RALF9636 said:

Just to get things sorted:

 

It seems there are at least five different issues mentioned in this topic:

 

1. The total fuel amount calculated by the Aerosoft Airbus XFuel Planner is too low for the A330. Workaround: Enter the value calculated by Simbrief / PFPX.

 

2. The preflight trip fuel calculation on the INIT FUEL PREDICTION page inadequatly depends on the value entered for the Block fuel.

I see this on every flight preparation.

 

3. The GWCG is incorrect when loading via GSX.

It is okay when using Instant Load.

 

4. The EFOB values in the MCDU are too low during cruise, but the actual fuel consumption is correct compared to the Simbrief calculations and the preflight calculations in the MCDU.

I have this issue on every flight.

 

5. The actual fuel consumption of the A330 is too high.

I never had this problem so far and I am not sure if anybody really had or just aborted the flight due to the misleading EFOB predictions.

 

 

Just to confirm: Am I correct that none of these issue has been adressed in 1.0.0.5?

 

 

 

Yeah, too many different topics in one thread.  People come in and post unrelated / different matters in existing threads. We do out best to fix this, but it's not easy.

 

1. This issertion/assumption is merely user error or misunderstanding.  I've posted at least 4 times about this in numerous threads in the forum, but instead of searching the forum user jump in and create no posts even though we've addressed it many times over.   Later today I will do a video that shows the proper way to perform fuel planning for the Airbus Professional.  Of course I'll post it, but I can't force people to watch it.

 

2.  I honestly don't know what  you are getting to my friend, perhaps a detailed explanation? 

 

3.  I'll take another look at that.

 

4. EFOB Values are completely wrong.  We've posted about this, and we're still conducting an investigation and reworking the code.  This is the only real fuel related problem I've experienced.

 

5. Our developers have all the data they could possibly need to look into this and they will be back to work after the 1st of the New Year.  That said, I likely have 10 or 20 times the flights (2 to 4 hour flights only) in the A330 and I really haven't seen an issue provided the fuel planning is performed properly, but one of our developers has a theory that some types of winds may be having an exagerrated effect.  Moreover, small or insignificant errors on short lights become large errors when the flights are much longer.  Again, I'm going to do a video on Fuel Planning. 

 

Let me say that 70% or better of the Out of Fuel issues I've seen reported were based on the person reading the EFOB, which we've long said it wrong and should not be looked at until fixed. 

 

At any rate, most of the Dev team is away until after the 1st, so we're asking for some paitence here.  I'll get the video out as soon as possible.

 

Best wishes!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for your reply.

 

vor 16 Minuten, DaveCT2003 sagte:

Yeah, too many different topics in one thread.  People come in and post unrelated / different matters in existing threads. We do out best to fix this, but it's not easy.

 

I was one of those, sorry for that 😞

 

 

Zitieren

 

1. This issertion/assumption is merely user error or misunderstanding.  I've posted at least 4 times about this in numerous threads in the forum, but instead of searching the forum user jump in and create no posts even though we've addressed it many times over.   Later today I will do a video that shows the proper way to perform fuel planning for the Airbus Professional.  Of course I'll post it, but I can't force people to watch it.

 

Yes, I've read what you wrote about it somewhere and just wanted to sum up this thread.

 

Zitieren

 

2.  I honestly don't know what  you are getting to my friend, perhaps a detailed explanation? 

 

The trip fuel varies massively when entering different block fuel values in the INIT FUEL PREDICTION page. It should only differ by small amounts according to the different fuel weight, shouldn't it? It seems not have an adverse effect on the flight, I just noticed it and thought it might be related.

 

 

 

Zitieren

 

3.  I'll take another look at that.

 

Thanks.

 

 

Zitieren

 

4. EFOB Values are completely wrong.  We've posted about this, and we're still conducting an investigation and reworking the code.  This is the only real fuel related problem I've experienced.

 

Indeed, this is the only real issue I encountered so far.

 

 

Zitieren

 

At any rate, most of the Dev team is away until after the 1st, so we're asking for some paitence here.  I'll get the video out as soon as possible.

 

 

 

Take your time. I love the A330!

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, I am flying the A319 so the fuel calculations done by AS fuel planner are not accurate? I should use the figures from Simbrief, is that correct? Would doubling or even tripling the miles in the AS fuel planner provide me with enough fuel?

Let me get this straight: Use Simbrief's fuel calculations and skip the AS fuel planner.

However, checking Simbrief's OFP, there is an entry labeled G/C DIST and it has the same number as the AS fuel planner for the distance.

Finally, how much of an influence does the Cost Index have on fuel consumption? Does it really matter in the sim?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I too can confirm, just took off ACA808 CYUL-GMMN with 1.0.0.5. was 10.0 as EFOB at take off power set. Turning Left to first way point on LNAV and then EFOB bang! -7.0 and EFOB is now 3.0. I'm sure it will wash back in just at the T/D like it always does. Not complaining. Just adding more details that still exists in 1.0.0.5. Tankering it will be :) Thanks Aerosoft. Hopefull this can be fixed and included in 1.0.0.6 ? 

 

Jody

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/11/2019 at 12:50 PM, Mathijs Kok said:

Btw, we love to get some logs for this. During a flight (not too soon after starting) zip up the data folder Aerosoft A330 Professional\Data and post it here. That will allow us to track this down fast.

Zipped up the files from Data for a flight EDDF to DNMM. EFOB at destination varying between -0.6 to -0.1 both up and down.

Hope this helps.

 

Ray

 

Data.zip

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ETRKvwT.png

 

No. Just No. That FF is ridiculous. Latest experimental version.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello @Delta_Who

The problem seems to be that your ISA reading is +71 °C. There isn't really any model to do calculations with this kind of numbers and therefore the Fuel Flow and other values can be very much off.

But what is causing your temperature reading to be so high is another question. What weather engine are you using? Does the aircraft fly otherwise normally in such conditions at high altitude?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just to be 100% clear, we checked the code and that temp is not 'interpreted' in any way, what you see is the raw temp the sim reports at that moment.  And that fits pretty well with what we see using different weather engines. We have logfiles (using default aircraft!) with the weirdest wind and temps. We are trying to find a way to prevent these things to affect the aircraft. We are doing that in discussion with other aircraft developers as we are not the only ones seeing this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem of course is, if you start ignoring certain values you're runnign the danger of ignoring valid numbers as well and thus make your aircraft less "flexible" according to certain external influences.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/11/2019 at 12:50 PM, Mathijs Kok said:

Btw, we love to get some logs for this. During a flight (not too soon after starting) zip up the data folder Aerosoft A330 Professional\Data and post it here. That will allow us to track this down fast.

Another data directory contents zipped up.

Flight      EDDF to OMDB

FL            370

Init Fuel   43451kgs (Fuel tool calculated 32,213)

ZFW         161.1

CI              20

Cruise Speed  Mach 0.807

 

From start of flight to collecting the data the EFOB at destination is -1.8

 

Simbrief calculates the distance as -

 

GND DIST      2778
AIR DIST      2718
G/C DIST      2615

MCDU showing DIST = 3431 at present

 

Ray

 

Now with files

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Data.zip

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I

10 minutes ago, Ray Smith said:

Another data directory contents zipped up.

Flight      EDDF to OMDB

FL            370

Init Fuel   43451

 

I see no file attached and can you tell us what the issue in that flight was?

Share this post


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

I

 

I see no file attached and can you tell us what the issue in that flight was?

Post updated with file.

 

The distance is not an issue as the FP had not been followed. Corrected with a DCT and the distance is correct but the EFOB at destination is still showing -1.8

Share this post


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

Post updated with file.

 

The distance is not an issue as the FP had not been followed. Corrected with a DCT and the distance is correct but the EFOB at destination is still showing -1.8

 

EFOB is not currently accurate, we're currently testing a fix for this and it will be in the next update.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/5/2020 at 12:16 PM, Secondator said:

Hello @Delta_Who

The problem seems to be that your ISA reading is +71 °C. There isn't really any model to do calculations with this kind of numbers and therefore the Fuel Flow and other values can be very much off.

But what is causing your temperature reading to be so high is another question. What weather engine are you using? Does the aircraft fly otherwise normally in such conditions at high altitude?

 

Weather engine is Activesky. Nothing else really to modify the numbers. But interesting spot. Will take a further look.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We have seen events like this more often. Very weird winds, very weird temperatures for a few seconds. They are not related to the aircraft as we test them in a default aircraft, but they do have a surprisingly heavy effect. So the aircraft systems are actually reacting correct to an impossible situation. 

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

×
×
  • Create New...