B-767-300 data engine more power

It's me again, new question I haven't flown the SkySpirit2010 AW Boeing 767-332ER in awhile, the last time I flew it I was climbing at 2400vs to FL370. My AS was decreasing, I lightened the fuel as I always have a full tank. Was wondering what to change in the CFG? I change MACH no's to what I think might work. when approaching my ALT level off I am stalling. What recommendation should I try to change in CFG as I 'am giving you the screen shot of what I think is the part to change. As usual thanks Kenny

Maybe nothing needs to be changed. Start with the basics...Pitot Tube heat on? Gets cold up there at altitude. Are you climbing to FTL370 straight from takeoff with no step-climbing?

With a full fuel load you are unlikely to be able to reach 37,000 until you have burned off some fuel.

Do a goggle search for some 767-300 performance tables.

 

Climbing should be done at climb power and climb speed (off the top of my head say 320 kias) until 28000 feet, then at M0.82 until you reach the max flight level for your weight. You cannot expect to fly at a vertical speed of 2400 fpm all the way to your cruise flight level.

SkySpirit2010 AW Boeing 767-332ER

 

This can probably be found with a lot of searching,

Possibly in the flightsim.com library even.

But, probably in other sites as well. And there may be differences.

To get the best specific help, with any kind of addon,

 

Post the filename of the file you downloaded,

and what site you downloaded it from.

 

example:

Myfilename.zip

from the flightsim.com library.

 

That will get you help much faster.

 

happy flights,

il

Without getting into the plane's .air file, the only way to change the thrust available is to increase the line "static_thrust=XXXXXXXX" in the aircraft.cfg file. I would check online for what the value should be before making any huge changes though.

If you really want, we can get into the .air file, but it get's a triffle deep...

I would listen to what others are saying about fuel, payload, cargo weight, etc before you go that route though.

Just my thoughts. Do they help at all?

Pat☺

Liner, you probably won't want to hear this, but ...

 

When the earlier versions of FS came out, quite a few of them were reviewed in various aeronautical magazines by "real" pilots. The one thing that pretty well all of them said was that all sim aircraft were grossly overpowered.

 

If that is true (and not being a real pilot I have no idea), then perhaps you might want to consider what zip and the others said. Maybe you are being a little impatient. Maybe you might want to climb a little slower, stop at an intermediate height and burn off some fuel before you climb to 370. Because that is more "realistic".

 

Of course if realism is not a goal of yours (and it isn't for many, many, many simpilots; and it doesn't have to be), then go ahead with your up-powering. It's not for me to say one way or the other. I'm simply relaying what I would consider a genuine "expert" point of view.

Much appreciated to all whom answered my post. To answer I have the check mark not to run out of fuel, but when I go into the actual A/C, I read a long time ago on a posting here a simmer was having similar question. It mentioned to go into that A/C go to fuel &, payload where it say's 100% try it in half as that will lighten up the plane. I am an ex PP so I do understand certain procedures in flt sim, I always do that in sim. As for climbing out I set my final Flt level and set my VS at 2400 fpm, but ATC tells me at intervals of whatever they say till I get to my flt level off point. I thought I could change the power in CFG area to increase power, apparently not according reading one post. I guess I will have to experiment more. I usually fly B-737, B757 but in this case I haven't flown a B-767 in quite some time. Thanks to all who answered. Kenny

I think 2400f/s to FL370 is an extreme rate of climb.

You can attain 2400f/m between and 10k and 25k perhaps, but not up to 370.

Above 30.000 I would not expect much more then 800f/m

More and IAS speed will start dropping. Meaning less lift, more nose up from nose to compensate, and loss of airspeed, leading to stall.

(with something like the fsx 737_800 for example)

Thanks il88pp, I will try your suggestion. It makes some sense as the air gets thinner as you get higher. It just will take longer to get to my cruising altitude. Kenny

I'm no expert on mach.

That said, I noticed te following in fsx.

 

When flying level, on autopilot, let's say 20.000 ft.

Lower the speed, and you notice the nose points up more.

Lower the speed more, the nose points up more.

Lower the speed more, and you stall.

 

Now altiltude and mach.

If you fly level, 27.000 ft, mach0.78

Your nose will not be up much, Ias is around 360kt, and ground speed around 525 kt.

 

Now increase altitude and fly level at 30.000 at mach 0.78

Your nose will be up more, Ias will have dropped to 330, and ground speed has dropped to 500kt.

 

Increase to 33.000 and fly level at mach 0.78

Nose is up even more, Ias drops off more, and ground speed drops too.

 

Eventually you get into trouble.

Above a certain altitude, at mach 0.78, Flying level results in speeds below 250 Ias. That's when you get into trouble.

Below 250 Ias flaps 1 is called for. But, select flaps 1 and you will slow down even more.

 

The thing is, despite your mach speed, the actual speed the aircraft "feels" is lower. Because the air is thinner, colder, etc.

Ias is direct concequence of "the pressure inside the pitot tube".

Less air density means less pressure inside the pitot tube. Despite the speed actually being high.

It also means "less sensation of airflow over the wings".

 

The "sensation of airflow over the wings" is what keeps the aircraft in the air.

You could move at extreme speeds, but if you do so inside a vacuum, you won't have any lift.

 

------------------------------------------

I noticed at high altitudes the Ias drops off but also does the ground speed.

No objections about the Ias, that seems logical to me.

But I have no idea if that drop off of ground speed is realistic. It feels strange to me. I would expect it to stay higher then it does.

 

That may be an fsx thing. If FS calculates the groundspeed from the Ias value it is logical. If Ias drops groundspeed would go along with it of course.

------------------------------------------

Anyway, the point is, aircraft have a maximum altitude. Even at top mach speed, at high altitudes Ias will get to low to still give lift.

You can't just keep climbing forever.

It also depends (a little) on weight. More weight is less maximum altitude.

 

Most of my flights I try to stay at 27.000 if traffic allows. That gets me to the destination fastest. (highest groundspeed).

(that's in the fsx 737_800, it will be different for different aircraft.)

Eventually you get into trouble.

Above a certain altitude, at mach 0.78, Flying level results in speeds below 250 Ias. That's when you get into trouble.

Below 250 Ias flaps 1 is called for. But, select flaps 1 and you will slow down even more.

.)

 

You are still OK at those speeds. Even up to FL410, the usual mach speeds will

leave you a pretty good margin vs the clean maneuvering speed, which will be shown

by a thin yellow tape below the IAS. "Red tape above for overspeed"

I just looked at one snapshot at FL390 and mach .79. The IAS was 244, and the

clean maneuver speed about 212 knots. So no problemo, and no need for flaps, which

would just add drag.

As far as the OP, I agree... Won't be able to climb all the way to FL370 at 2400 fpm.

Will likely be under 1000 by the 30's... maybe less if a wide load.

The plane would normally climb using N1, and be adjusting pitch to hold speed. But if the

sim has no N1 mode, you just have to climb manual, or with vertical speed, and lower

the rate of climb as the speed drops from what is set. If you can't hold speed, you know

you need to reduce the rate of climb.

Kenny, for what it's worth, have you tried websites like planefinder.net and flightradar? They give you real time tracking of real aircraft. I'm sure that on these kind of websites you could find at least one major airport with which you are familiar and track real 767s on long range flights from it. This will give you an excellent idea of real life ground speeds and flight levels of fully fuelled and passengered aircraft, from take off until ... well, until you get bored with tracking them. For example, where I am in Mudgee, every day I get 767s from China Eastern and China Western airlines, going right overhead, from Sydney to places like Beijing, which is a good 10 hours away - about the limit for a 767.

 

If you then google something like "ground speed vs airspeed calculator" there are any number of places that can convert a ground_speed/altitude combination into an indicated airspeed. With a bit of luck you might even find a graph you could put on your desktop.

The thing to remember about "speed" is that there's a very good reason Mach numbers are used as an indication of velocity above certain altitudes. The Mach number takes into account a lot of the variables that IAS and GS do not. As you go higher, the air density drops, but the temperature lowers, causing an increase in density, air pressure changes, etc etc. Mach numbers take these into account, whereas a regular airspeed indicator doesn't.

Within certain limits, a plane that's designed to fly at let us say Mach 0.80 will fly the same at 20,000 feet MSL and 30,000 feet MSL at Mach 0.80. The TAS may change, the pressure, or temperature, will change but the plane should handle very similarly.

There are limits, naturally. Every plane has a "Coffin Corner" where nominal cruise speed approaches stall speed very closely. This is dependant on altitude, airspeed, temperature, pressure, aircraft weight, the list goes on and on. Extreme care must be taken at the coffin corner, because a variable could change, let's say you pass through a front, and pressure, tempurature and humidity all suddenly change, and bang! You are now below stall speed and fall down. As you cruise, the aircraft weight drops, now you have more cushion, and can increase altitude. And so on.

The entire field of fuid flow dynamics (yes, air is a fluid) is very involved and complex, and the more you understand about how your chosen aircraft interacts with the fluid medium it's in (air, in the case of airplanes, obviously) the better you will be able to operate that aircraft.

 

Does all this rambling and babbling help at all?

Pat☺

You all have great explanation on so many ways. I truly enjoyed reading all the input, I did not know how much info I would get on this subject, I can hope this will help other flt simmers that are possibly stepping up to fly liners as their experience of flt increases. Sometimes you forget how complex Flt Sims are no matter what Flt sim you fly ie FS9, FSX etc... I have flown in real life C-150's several hours, mostly small planes, I have flown B-757, B-767's etc.. on Flt Sim FS9 for sometime now, but on occasion I have the issues as what you simmers are explaining in your posting. I never heard of these two websites planefinder.net and flightradar. I will check them out to see if there is any help there, as I use Flightaware for realistic flights mostly. I have never looked at Flightaware to see if there is more stuff there, as I know it has real flight radar of all planes within a certain area not sure it it will do more, as I use it for Airport codes for departure & arrivals, what type of A/C, what Airlines, the times, cruising altitude, and IAS, flt numbers. I only fly to destination non-stop. I will have to try out a different approach to stepping up VS experimenting at start of flight from 2400 fps to a certain alt, and change it according to my flight until I get to my cruising altitude. Many thanks to y'all. I am wondering if by chance there are real Captains out there that fly any of these large liners using FS9, FSX to see what there input is. Thanks Kenny

Kenny, I think you still have a problem being fixated on 2400 fps climb. For example, following my own advice, yesterday on planetfinder.net I watched an Etihad 777 - an aircraft with MUCH greater power to weight ratio than a 767 - depart Sydney on its way to the Middle East. That's a 12 hour flight, so it would be close to if not at fully fueled. It took 22 minutes to climb to 32,000 feet, at which it stayed until I lost interest. Now that is fractionally less than 1500 fpm. In a plane more powerful than yours, with a greater wing area to weight.

 

And on another angle... Being an airliner, which means its in a very competitive environment, you also have to consider passenger comfort. If you need to pitch the nose up to say 10 degrees or more to climb at 2400 fpm with a full fuel and passenger load, then that is going to scare the free cognac out of all those tourists in cattle class. They ain't ever going to fly with you again. Your Chief Pilot will kick you up the afterburner.

You climb with a SPEED PROFILE, not a V/S one.

 

320 KIAS to 28,000 feet or until you are at M0.82 then climb at M0.82. You will have to constantly adjust your V/S if you are flying the default aircraft, but you will be at optimum climb rate.

The OP was concentrating on V/S, so I focussed on that. But if it keeps you happy, next time I see a 767 or 777 out of Sydney on Planefinder, I will check its speed.

Thanks pschlute & Steve as I read your posting it is good advise. I came up with this 2400 fpm v/s is because I read it sometime ago here on a posting. He was new on liners, he was having a similar question on v/s, payload & fuel load. That is why I cut the payload & fuel from 100 % to 50% that made the red numbers go away. This posting that I mentioned that a liner climb out is 2400 fpm or v/s so a long time ago I used that number to start with I also set trim. I mostly fly to 300 to 320 mostly rarely I need to get to 370 fl, but it would be great if I can do it with enough power. I mostly fly B-737's but once in awhile when using Flightaware, there is an opportunity to fly a B767 or B757 sometimes a B747. So I thought I would go to Fltsim website as I get very formative info. I will try using different fmp or v/s intervals till I get to my cruising alt. Look forward to continue reading my posts. Thanks again Kenny

Hello everyone, I did some more research on this subject. I came across this link, that had some info some are real some are related to FS. varying inputs about my post. the link is: http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/general_aviation/read.main/789701/?threadid=789701&searchid=789701&s=climb+performance+of+767#ID789701. Maybe this will help me and anyone else that might come upon this situation. Very interesting reading. Kenny

Why not buy the Level-D 767 from Flight1.

 

Very accurate representation of the 767-300, complete with fully functioning FMC.

 

It won't be at all like the freeware you are using.

Thanks pschlute, for the suggestion Level-D 767 A/C. I do not buy anything online as I have never felt safe as it is a bit of a crooked World out there unfortunately for us good people they steal ID, credit card info etc...For most part I feel that freeware the planes are good enough for me, and maybe once in awhile something like this comes up it might be me or the A/C creator has the wrong inputs. I have been using FS since 98 to FS9 for a long time. I never cared about flying liners as they had the default liners, but now that there are actual airlines I want to fly those as it is an affordable way to take vacations, unfortunately without really going there. With all the previous responses and what I read in airline.net website, I will have to experiment until it is right. Always appreciate all responds hope it helps others too. Happy simming & have a Great Thanksgiving to all, Kenny

I do not buy anything online as I have never felt safe as it is a bit of a crooked World out there

 

Your choice, but a backward view in my opinion.