Hi Mike,
In a normal climb to cruise altitude, can you tell me the approximate vertical speed when you are at about 15,000 ft altitude? I realize there are many, many variables so all I would like to know is just a ball park figure give or take 500fps so that I can compare it to what I am getting here.
Thanks,
Maurice
Less than 500 fp/second!
Sorry :)
Nat
Quote from: melnato on January 03, 2013, 10:43:45 PM
Less than 500 fp/second!
Sorry :)
Nat
Seconds...minutes...what's the difference? ;D
Maurice
Quote from: Maurice on January 04, 2013, 05:03:27 AM
Seconds...minutes...what's the difference? ;D
Maurice
A lot, if you are descending :(
Mountains :-)
Quote from: sagrada737 on January 04, 2013, 07:00:39 AM
Mountains :-)
Not a problem with mountains. If you disable crash detection, you go right through any moutains that are on the way. ;D
All joking aside, there is a serious side to my question. I have a feeling that the default 737-800 is able to climb much too fast so I would like to know what would be a 'normal' rate of climb with a 'normal' passenger & fuel load for a short flight (1-2 hours) once you pass the 10,000' height.
There is a setting in the aircraft.cfg named "thrust_scalar=1.000" and I think some people have changed this to 0.95 instead of 1 but I don't want to do this unless I'm sure the default 800 does climb much faster than normal. So I need an input from a real 737 pilot, thus the post being addressed to Mike L. who is probably flying right now. Lucky dog! :)
Maurice
Quote from: Maurice on January 03, 2013, 06:04:23 PM
Hi Mike,
In a normal climb to cruise altitude, can you tell me the approximate vertical speed when you are at about 15,000 ft altitude? I realize there are many, many variables so all I would like to know is just a ball park figure give or take 500fps so that I can compare it to what I am getting here.
Thanks,
Maurice
Maurice,
Your right i am flying today but ill be in a 700 so that wont help. I do take an 800 back from Boston on the 6th so ill pay attention at 15000 or so and ill give you the weight at that time. Your also right about the many variables however its really only about temp and weight of airplane so it shouldnt be too hard to nail down in FS i wouldnt think.
If i were you i would just use Xplane with x737 lol :) Now that my controls are hooked up and rigged i believe its by far the most realistic experience you can get out of a sim and ive been very happy with it.
Just saying :)
Mike L
Quote from: MLeavy737 link=topic=3040.msg23471#msg23471
If i were you i would just use Xplane with x737 lol :) Now that my controls are hooked up and rigged i believe its by far the most realistic experience you can get out of a sim and ive been very happy with it.
Just saying :)
Mike L
No can do Mike unless I go back to a single front view as I am not spending more money to get 2 more high end PCs. For me, a realistic flying experience is not that important since I am not type rated on a 737 and the default 737-800 airplane is realistic enough for me since I do not know any better. For you it's a different story of course. ;)
Having said that, I would prefer if the default plane was not able to climb like an F-14 if possible :)
Thanks & looking forward to read what you find out.
Maurice
I hear ya Maurice, mostly kidding as i know all this Xplane stuff has been discussed at length in other posts.
Oh and sometimes it does seem to climb like an F-14! Lol. 4-5000 fpm plus! Like i said, all depends on weight and temp.
Ill let ya know what i get, will help me too :)
Mike L
Maurice,
Ok heres your data. Turned out i had an airplane swap so they had us in an 800 instead of the 700. Anyhow, heres some data departing Denver a few hours ago.
Weight - 149.5k
Alt. - 15k feet
Temp - -06c SAT
Speed - 320kts
N1 - 95.7%
Climb rate - 2300 - 2700fpm.
Slight climb rate variations because it was a VNAV climb and the airplane holds a constand N1 and speed so the climb rate tends to vary slightly.
My guess is when you attempt to change one thing in FS youll mess up something else :) hopefull this helps anyhow! Good luck, let me know how it works out.
Mike L
That's very useful Mike. I'll try the same scenario as soon as I get a chance and I'll post my results.
Thanks a bunch,
Maurice
You're a champ Mike :)
Thanks
Nat
Hi Mike,
As I suspected, the default 737-800 is equipped with auxiliary rockets in the back :). I tried the same scenario as you from Denver to San Diego and here are my results with same GW and slightly warmer temperature and also on VNAV climb:
At 15,000' ~3,600 fpm
At 20,000' ~3,100 fpm
At 25,000' ~ 2150 fpm
At 30,000' ~ 1300 fpm
And just after landing in San Diego, I lost all video and the PC froze as well. One of these days...one of these days POW!!! right in the kisser of that damn FSX PC. Who knows what's wrong with it now after replacing one SSD drive, 1 CPU, 2 motherboards and one video card? This damn thing is cursed & I should really put it out of its misery forever. >:(
Maurice
About the computers,welcome to the club Maurice!
Quote from: Sam Llorca on January 07, 2013, 03:46:16 AM
About the computers,welcome to the club Maurice!
What are you talking about? I am the President of that club. I will gladly resign if you want to take over. :)
Maurice
Hey Maurice... The Jacki Gleason in you seems to suffer from post traumatic-computer-syndrome...
Take two sim flights and call us in the morning :-)
Mike
Quote from: sagrada737 on January 07, 2013, 07:10:54 AM
Hey Maurice... The Jacki Gleason in you seems to suffer from post traumatic-computer-syndrome...
Take two sim flights and call us in the morning :-)
Mike
That's what I am trying to do & tell that to my FSX PC :) . I'd rather be watching "The Honeymooners" though ;D
Maurice
Quote from: Maurice on January 06, 2013, 05:23:37 PM
And just after landing in San Diego, I lost all video and the PC froze as well. One of these days...one of these days POW!!! right in the kisser of that damn FSX PC. Who knows what's wrong with it now after replacing one SSD drive, 1 CPU, 2 motherboards and one video card? This damn thing is cursed & I should really put it out of its misery forever. >:(
That just leaves the power supply Maurice. Go on, just one more wafer thin component :)
Ken.
Quote from: Kennair on January 08, 2013, 08:13:54 AM
That just leaves the power supply Maurice. Go on, just one more wafer thin component :)
Ken.
Yep, a wafer thing 1200W supply :). I really wish it was as simple as that but all was working again yesterday and no more 'glitches'.
But I confess that this may have been the result of my experimenting with different programs as I discovered it was fun adding objects to airports with Airport Design Editor (no thanks to John for that :) . I do think my FSX PC is due for a major software re-build to clean up a lot of junk I have added in the last 2 years and being a Microsoft product, a clean re-install of everything is always a good idea from time to time.
But I won't do this until after my next crash or maybe the one after that :)
Maurice
Hi Maurice,
Lol, you said fix your Airport, not redesign it or go crazy; although, I would do the same thing as you...being the tinkering type you know.
John
Quote from: Maurice on January 04, 2013, 07:25:25 AM
Quote from: sagrada737 on January 04, 2013, 07:00:39 AM
Mountains :-)
Not a problem with mountains. If you disable crash detection, you go right through any moutains that are on the way. ;D
All joking aside, there is a serious side to my question. I have a feeling that the default 737-800 is able to climb much too fast so I would like to know what would be a 'normal' rate of climb with a 'normal' passenger & fuel load for a short flight (1-2 hours) once you pass the 10,000' height.
There is a setting in the aircraft.cfg named "thrust_scalar=1.000" and I think some people have changed this to 0.95 instead of 1 but I don't want to do this unless I'm sure the default 800 does climb much faster than normal. So I need an input from a real 737 pilot, thus the post being addressed to Mike L. who is probably flying right now. Lucky dog! :)
Maurice
Maurice, why don't you use the Revolution Jetstream 737 model? That's the default 737 with all the flight dynamics tweaked to perfection on the 737-800. They have even removed the VC etc? I have used it and its bang on!
Quote from: rhysb on January 10, 2013, 01:49:40 PM
Maurice, why don't you use the Revolution Jetstream 737 model? That's the default 737 with all the flight dynamics tweaked to perfection on the 737-800. They have even removed the VC etc? I have used it and its bang on!
Never heard of it and would like to try it but I wonder if it is compatible with SimAvionics. I guess I'll take a chance anyway based on your seal of approval. :)
Thanks,
Maurice
Just read through the PDF. Sounds like a great product, Not compatible with any program other than prosim737.
Gary
Quote from: Garys on January 10, 2013, 02:27:03 PM
Just read through the PDF. Sounds like a great product, Not compatible with any program other than prosim737.
Gary
I just read that too but I wonder if they are saying that because they want to sell Prosim as well. It just sounds like too much denial on their part by saying that trying it is futile. I think most of their changes would have been done in the air file and aircraft.cfg file, so why would it not work with PM or SimA as well? I wonder if it's not worth a try anyway.
Maurice
Mau Let me know if it is compatible with Sim-A because I seriously need a better flying model too.
Mau,
I can't see why it would only work with prosim??? It's just a version of the default aircraft it just drops into the sim objects folder like any other plane!
I just tried it with Project magenta as don't have simA and it works with PM
Quote from: rhysb on January 11, 2013, 05:03:07 AM
Mau,
I can't see why it would only work with prosim??? It's just a version of the default aircraft it just drops into the sim objects folder like any other plane!
I just tried it with Project magenta as don't have simA and it works with PM
That's what I thought too. I will definitely try it with SimA.
Thanks,
Maurice
This is really annoying. I ordered the product and paid for it but I never received a link for the download. So I filled a form on their website addressed to customer support but I get an error & the form does not get submitted.
So for anybody who ordered the Jetstream 737 model, how long did you have to wait before getting the download link?
Thanks,
Maurice
Mau,
Log in to your prosim store account. One the left side you will see a link to your downloadable products. Click it and you will get to the page with the download link
Quote from: fsaviator on January 11, 2013, 02:37:37 PM
Mau,
Log in to your prosim store account. One the left side you will see a link to your downloadable products. Click it and you will get to the page with the download link
I did and there is no link that I can see :(
Maurice
Their website can be confusing. Log in here:
http://www.prosim737.com/shop/customer/account/login/ (http://www.prosim737.com/shop/customer/account/login/)
First make sure that you can see your order in the "lastest orders" area, and that you have a link to "My Downloadable Products"
(https://www.cockpitbuilders.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi274.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fjj267%2Fwsoeldner%2FForums%2520and%2520Posts%2FCapture1_zps9e7b7b3f.jpg&hash=a5b465c48e2cca41853b62efbf6cdd7aafa0a082)
Click on "My Downloadable Products" and you get to this screen:
(https://www.cockpitbuilders.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi274.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fjj267%2Fwsoeldner%2FForums%2520and%2520Posts%2FCapture2_zps37695e0c.jpg&hash=af7642e31876728c03758f354139115ebb8b41ab)
Click on "Jetstream..."
Hope this helps. If not, your best best is to head over to their forum.
http://prosim737.com/support/support-forum/ (http://prosim737.com/support/support-forum/)
Thanks Warren but I received an email with the link this morning so everything is cool.
Thanks,
Maurice
Well I finally got to try the Jetstream model with Sim-Avionics and this is what I found out so far. The takeoff & climb to cruise altitude was much more reasonable than with FSX, meaning the climb rate was lower & closer to Mike's figures.
However, once established on cruise & on VNAV, although the speed bug was set to 0.80 Mach & N1 @ 85%, the indicated airspeed kept decreasing and stabilized at 250 knots with a ground speed of only 420 knots with no wind at all. I don't think this is right so I will have to look into the SimA aircraft.cfg file and try to figure out if there is anything I can do there.
But since I don't really know what I am doing, I may have to go back to the default 800 as I prefer a fast climb and fast cruise than a normal climb & slow cruise.
Anyway, more experimenting to do especially with manual flight as I have not tried that yet.
Maurice
Maurice,
Just remember indicated airspeed decreases as you gain altitude. 250 indicated at high altitude cruise at .80 could be considered normal.
Normal climb for us is about 280-300 indicated transitioning to .74 or so until cruise altitude is obtained. When you transition to Mach the indicated airspeed continually drops the higher you go.
Mike L
Quote from: MLeavy737 on January 15, 2013, 05:28:11 PM
Maurice,
Just remember indicated airspeed decreases as you gain altitude. 250 indicated at high altitude cruise at .80 could be considered normal.
Normal climb for us is about 280-300 indicated transitioning to .74 or so until cruise altitude is obtained. When you transition to Mach the indicated airspeed continually drops the higher you go.
Mike L
I get what you are saying Mike but is 420 or so knots a correct ground speed assuming no wind at at all? This seems rather low to me but I hope I'm wrong.
Thanks,
Maurice
Oh I see what u mean. Not sure exactly. Can't remember the last time I saw no wind at altitude :) I'm sure there's a performance chart I can look into or test on next flight. I'll let ya know.
Mike L
Quote from: MLeavy737 on January 15, 2013, 05:56:48 PM
Oh I see what u mean. Not sure exactly. Can't remember the last time I saw no wind at altitude :) I'm sure there's a performance chart I can look into or test on next flight. I'll let ya know.
Mike L
I have never seen no wind at altitude in FSX either. So I'm wondering now whether it wasn't showing in the ND but was there anyway. I have to do another flight with ActiveSky this time and confirm the winds and ground speed again.
Thanks,
Maurice
Maurice,
That's sounds not far away from reality, I don't have 737 experience like Mike but the 757 is only about 20 knots higher than that under your circumstance and that is a much more powerful airplane.
Maybe your just used to microsofts incorrect performance?
Rhys b
Quote from: rhysb on January 15, 2013, 11:07:53 PM
Maybe your just used to microsofts incorrect performance?
Rhys b
Aren't we all?
Just saying.......
Quote from: rhysb on January 15, 2013, 11:07:53 PM
Maurice,
That's sounds not far away from reality, I don't have 737 experience like Mike but the 757 is only about 20 knots higher than that under your circumstance and that is a much more powerful airplane.
Maybe your just used to microsofts incorrect performance?
Rhys b
Very interesting! Since I do not know how a real 737 flies, the fact that the MS version flies faster is pretty much inconsequential and in fact welcomed, but I did discover something I really loved in the Jetstream model and that is how the airplane behaves when the speed brakes are extended while on autopilot.
In FSX, FS9 and likely earlier versions as well, whenever I extended the speed brakes while on VNAV, the plane always slowed its rate of descent as well by raising the nose which meant it then had to dive to regain the correct flight path which also meant it went too fast again.
So it never reached the next waypoint at the correct altitude seen on the FMS especially if that altitude was not predicted but mandatory. Yesterday, when I extended the speed brakes, the plane just slowed down and maintained the exact same rate of descent which was exactly what I wanted and what I experienced in real planes when the pilot extended the air brakes.
That to me is the biggest improvement so far and enough to stay with this flight model. As I said earlier, I need to do more testing especially with manual flight in case something does not work right with SimA or my hardware, but it is looking very good right now.
Thanks,
Maurice
Unfortunately, I have to abandon the Jetstream model for several reasons. I'm sure it could be made to work with SimA by tweaking some of SimA settings but I don't want to mess with them since I don't really know what they do.
The good news though is that SimA has their own version of the 737-800 and after trying it, it seems to work like the Jetstream model performance wise but without the issues I experienced with Jetstream. So I will be testing the SimA model more thoroughly and hopefully it will meet all my needs.
Thank you all for your inputs,
Maurice
Quote from: Maurice on January 15, 2013, 02:59:16 PM
However, once established on cruise & on VNAV, although the speed bug was set to 0.80 Mach & N1 @ 85%, the indicated airspeed kept decreasing and stabilized at 250 knots with a ground speed of only 420 knots with no wind at all. I don't think this is right so I will have to look into the SimA aircraft.cfg file and try to figure out if there is anything I can do there.
In case anyone is interested, Mark from SimA told me how to change the Airline Policy in the CDU. The % N1 decrease at cruise was set too high (12%) and reducing it to 3% allowed N1 to increase above 85% and stabilize at about 86.5%. With that setting, the airplane was able to maintain Mach 0.8 once I was at cruise altitude, so all is well now.
Maurice