FSAirlines

I just did a flight sydney-brisbane on my ERJ-145ER. The fuel consumption was almost a full double than what it was supposed to be - it showed a fuel cons. of 2000 pph for instance, but did 3850ish in 1 hour. Should I blame this on the airplane model, on Microsoft, or on the Beta?
And is there anything to correct it other than removing that model from FS?

BigQ wrote:I just did a flight sydney-brisbane on my ERJ-145ER. The fuel consumption was almost a full double than what it was supposed to be - it showed a fuel cons. of 2000 pph for instance, but did 3850ish in 1 hour. Should I blame this on the airplane model, on Microsoft, or on the Beta?
And is there anything to correct it other than removing that model from FS?

If you have FSedit, Availible Here you can change the fuel consumption rate of your engines to the appropriate value. For example, I wanted to have an Il-86, with CFM Engines, so I loaded FSedit, changed all the values in the engine section to reflect a CFM engine choice, and saved it. This made the aircraft actually able to fly more than 1000miles!

Short answer to your question, it's the models fault. Change it with FSedit.

gotcha. well, againg i'm unsure of the result as i use windows 2000 and FS2002, but i'll try and tell you if it works

Thanks!

No problem, hope it helped.

You could cheat throught that!

I bet when this goes Public, people will be doing that!

tsb wrote:You could cheat throught that!

I bet when this goes Public, people will be doing that!

We just have to trust in the honesty of people on the internet...

Yeah, it could be used for cheating, but really, some people will use FLYNet for statistics, others want to be on the leader board, and still others will probably just like the fact it logs your hours and miles (like me!)

But really, some models have to be edited, because the data in them is so messed up (anybody ever flown the A380 with Vertical acceleration performance?) that the reality of FS is suspended.

I always try to get my own aircraft up to high altitudes, because the fuel burn is so much less. And it's a big thing because my 777-300ER's GE90s burn about 10000 lbs of fuel every hour, each. SO 20 000lbs an hour burn, if I can minimize that, well, it certainly helps, but I wouldnt do it with FSEDIT.

BTW, I like GE90s... 115B= 125000lbs of Thrust! Each!

well, i did it because the model had a problem... it said it had a fuel flow of 2000 lbs, but taking in 4000. What am i supposed to do with this? I changed the value to what it should be, and that's that. Now my aircraft is what it should be.

And thus, order was restored to the universe...

Oh I wish I could go back to the days when Wardair had engines that only asked for 2000lbs an hour.

Sadly:

Ge90115b 10 0000

CF6 6000

RB211 4000

TAY 650 2000 <--I think, might be less, not sure now...

DO NOT USE FSEDIT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I can't say it any more strongly, but FSEdit is the worst piece of software released for FS ever. 90% of models you use it on will not work properly afterwards, especially if they're addon models.

So, before you go editing fuel consumption, let's ask some basic questions that people miss.

1) What model?
2) Takeoff Weight
3) Cruise settings (N1, Speed, Altitude, etc)
4) Fuel Flow at Cruise
5) Weather

5 is very important because it can account for very large changes in fuel consumption and times.

But more importantly, one must eliminate pilot mishandling of the aircraft prior to blaming the Flight Dynamics. The only reason I say this is because in the 10 years since I started using FS, 95% of the "problems" reported by users have been the fault of the user and not the flight dynamics.

I checked all of those... I had a 20 kts surface tailwind - and not going against the jet stream -

It's just wierd that an aircraft supposed to give me 2000 nm range gave me 1200nm, so I just changed it... flew it a couple of times since and no problems, so should be okay...

I usually take a published range and just subtract about 200nm from it. That gives a pretty good accuracy, provided you fly it right.

Yet, it still has to do with the model. The default 747 has a significant longer range than the POSKY for example although POSKY is much more closer to the real life bird.
I agree about FSEDIT. I don't like it too. If I had to fix something I would prefer manually adjusting of FDEs.