Max Take Off Weight to Max Ramp Weight //250kts Conc
Moderator: FSAirlines Staff
-
- Ticket Agent
- Posts: 5
- Joined: Fri Oct 19, 2007 12:02 am
- Location: 3dme North of LGAV
- Contact:
Max Take Off Weight to Max Ramp Weight //250kts Conc
Dear all,
If you want to fly your aircraft to its limits FSAIRLINES dont let you do it because the extra fuel you need is been cut off from the restriction of the MTOW. I got this problem when you fly Concorde, which has the biggest difference of Max Take off and Max Taxi. That is because it needs 1Ton of Fuel or more Just for Taxi. Concorde is one of those planes that every drop of fuel counts.
By changing the restriction from MTOW to MAx Ramp weight we can utilize all aircraft to its max and furthermore is more realistic because you dont strart a flight from the Runway but at the Gate. And it is a real life restriction after all.
Thnk you
ps. Something Else. Restriction of the 250kts for Concorde its unreal since in heavy weights it needs more that 250kts to sustain flight efficiently.
If you want to fly your aircraft to its limits FSAIRLINES dont let you do it because the extra fuel you need is been cut off from the restriction of the MTOW. I got this problem when you fly Concorde, which has the biggest difference of Max Take off and Max Taxi. That is because it needs 1Ton of Fuel or more Just for Taxi. Concorde is one of those planes that every drop of fuel counts.
By changing the restriction from MTOW to MAx Ramp weight we can utilize all aircraft to its max and furthermore is more realistic because you dont strart a flight from the Runway but at the Gate. And it is a real life restriction after all.
Thnk you
ps. Something Else. Restriction of the 250kts for Concorde its unreal since in heavy weights it needs more that 250kts to sustain flight efficiently.
Terry
- CAPFlyer
- Chief Pilot
- Posts: 3045
- Joined: Mon Nov 07, 2005 2:49 am
- Location: Lancaster, Texas, USA
- Contact:
Re: Max Take Off Weight to Max Ramp Weight //250kts Conc
1) MTOW is a major limiting factor on ALL aircraft. It will not be removed or modified. Everyone is operating with it and has no problem. There will be modifications made to the client in the future that may allow for taxi fuel to be calculated, but as we are trying to keep the client as simple as possible, there are no guarantees. In addition, some users DO start their flights from or very near the runway. If you choose to start from the gate, EXCELLENT, and many do (including me), but it's not required and there is no way to require it. As such, MTOW is the most relevant weight.
2) Max Taxi Weight is questionable on many aircraft (for many aircraft it's not specifically certificated, only a recommendation) and the availability of such data is very limited. In addition, in many cases this weight is a "plane-by-plane" weight that can vary by several hundred kilos just by changing one item (like the tires) on the airplane.
3) The 250 knot rule is there and will remain. If you must exceed it for safety - exceed it. Otherwise, accept the penalty for staying slow - they did in the real aircraft if it was safe to do so. Also, Concorde is not unique in the need to exceed 250 knots when very heavy. The 777, 747, 767, 757, DC-10, MD-11, and several other long-range aircraft have a "clean" climb speed over 250 knots when heavily loaded with fuel and payload for long-range flights.
2) Max Taxi Weight is questionable on many aircraft (for many aircraft it's not specifically certificated, only a recommendation) and the availability of such data is very limited. In addition, in many cases this weight is a "plane-by-plane" weight that can vary by several hundred kilos just by changing one item (like the tires) on the airplane.
3) The 250 knot rule is there and will remain. If you must exceed it for safety - exceed it. Otherwise, accept the penalty for staying slow - they did in the real aircraft if it was safe to do so. Also, Concorde is not unique in the need to exceed 250 knots when very heavy. The 777, 747, 767, 757, DC-10, MD-11, and several other long-range aircraft have a "clean" climb speed over 250 knots when heavily loaded with fuel and payload for long-range flights.
-
- FSAirlines Developer
- Posts: 1564
- Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2005 10:40 am
- Location: Munich, Germany
- Contact:
Re: Max Take Off Weight to Max Ramp Weight //250kts Conc
Regards 3)
I will try to add a possiblity to fly 'overspeed' below FL100 in the Client. A button (key) you can push and then you can faster...
I will try to add a possiblity to fly 'overspeed' below FL100 in the Client. A button (key) you can push and then you can faster...
Konrad - FSAirlines Developer
Re: Max Take Off Weight to Max Ramp Weight //250kts Conc
That would be excellent Konny. I'm sure it would help people out with the larger aircraft and also with the odd ATC requirement.
James
James
Re: Max Take Off Weight to Max Ramp Weight //250kts Conc
Hi Konny,
Regards that proposed button, I hope that it will be restricted to certain 'approved' (heavy/SST) types as Cap mentioned, otherwise everyone will be pushing the button to become a hot-rod.
Regards
John
Regards that proposed button, I hope that it will be restricted to certain 'approved' (heavy/SST) types as Cap mentioned, otherwise everyone will be pushing the button to become a hot-rod.
Regards
John
CEO - Classic British Flight Services
Classic aircraft on Classic routes
Classic aircraft on Classic routes
- Brian Peace
- Chief Pilot
- Posts: 685
- Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2008 3:24 pm
- Location: Cardston, Alberta
- Contact:
Re: Max Take Off Weight to Max Ramp Weight //250kts Conc
In regards to realictic operations (gate to gate) and the client: here's what I do. Load the fuel required for taxi and the flight, then taxi to hold short point, then start client, and then rock and roll. If your not at MTOW at the hold short point of your departing runway, you should be
-
- Ticket Agent
- Posts: 5
- Joined: Fri Oct 19, 2007 12:02 am
- Location: 3dme North of LGAV
- Contact:
Re: Max Take Off Weight to Max Ramp Weight //250kts Conc
capflyer.
Max taxi weight IS a limitation that cant be broken and not recomendation. 250kts under 10000 is an Atc limitation and not an aircraft since it can be broken. 250kts under 10k exists for noise polution and a speed that atc are capable of vectoring aircraft. Some areas have even more restrictive speeds and different altitudes. Go to LGAV 240kts under FL220.
I wasnt trying to be smart with u or trying to cheat, but be realistic!!! I dont know any ATC That a pilot will request nospeed on departure and will not give it. In addition All those planes you mentioned they have flaps and slats and can fly even slower of 250kts CONCORDE dont have flaps so dont compare them with it.
Of course i want the mtow limitation, but i dont want the max take off to be equal with the max taxi.
Anyway... Am not on my pc so i will write so more when i will be back home.
I didnt know that u will improvise for taxi fuel, which basically what i meant just
with other words.
Limitation
Max taxi weight IS a limitation that cant be broken and not recomendation. 250kts under 10000 is an Atc limitation and not an aircraft since it can be broken. 250kts under 10k exists for noise polution and a speed that atc are capable of vectoring aircraft. Some areas have even more restrictive speeds and different altitudes. Go to LGAV 240kts under FL220.
I wasnt trying to be smart with u or trying to cheat, but be realistic!!! I dont know any ATC That a pilot will request nospeed on departure and will not give it. In addition All those planes you mentioned they have flaps and slats and can fly even slower of 250kts CONCORDE dont have flaps so dont compare them with it.
Of course i want the mtow limitation, but i dont want the max take off to be equal with the max taxi.
Anyway... Am not on my pc so i will write so more when i will be back home.
I didnt know that u will improvise for taxi fuel, which basically what i meant just
with other words.
Limitation
Terry
- CAPFlyer
- Chief Pilot
- Posts: 3045
- Joined: Mon Nov 07, 2005 2:49 am
- Location: Lancaster, Texas, USA
- Contact:
Re: Max Take Off Weight to Max Ramp Weight //250kts Conc
Terry, go look at the Type Certificates from the FAA - http://www.airweb.faa.gov/Regulatory_an ... enFrameSet
You will note that on most aircraft, "Maximum Taxi Weight" is not included as a limitation. If it's not on the Type Certificate, then it's not a limitation. That is how the certification process is setup. There is only a "Maximum Takeoff Weight". Occasionally, they will have a "Maximum Ramp Weight", but again, it is not always certificated. As such, unless it is certificated, then the only official weight is the Maximum Takeoff Weight even though the FAA allows for manufacturers to give up to a 20% overload of that weight for various uses. The JAA is even more restrictive on what it does and doesn't allow.
As for the speed - I'll garuntee you that every single Radar Controller in the United States and Canada will deny speeds exceeding 250 knots unless it is required for safety of flight or they're just really slow. They're usually pretty good at recognizing what aircraft might need it and which ones might not (a Lear 35 has no reason to exceed 250 below 10K for example) and strictly enforcing the rules.
As for Concorde, you will not fall out of the sky if you maintain 250 knots on departure. I have the procedures printed out for Concorde and none of them mention having to exceed 250 knots for safety reasons. They only do it to put the aircraft at a more efficient angle of attack so it won't burn quite as much fuel. Again, it's not a safety issue, so it's not mandatory to exceed the speed.
You will note that on most aircraft, "Maximum Taxi Weight" is not included as a limitation. If it's not on the Type Certificate, then it's not a limitation. That is how the certification process is setup. There is only a "Maximum Takeoff Weight". Occasionally, they will have a "Maximum Ramp Weight", but again, it is not always certificated. As such, unless it is certificated, then the only official weight is the Maximum Takeoff Weight even though the FAA allows for manufacturers to give up to a 20% overload of that weight for various uses. The JAA is even more restrictive on what it does and doesn't allow.
As for the speed - I'll garuntee you that every single Radar Controller in the United States and Canada will deny speeds exceeding 250 knots unless it is required for safety of flight or they're just really slow. They're usually pretty good at recognizing what aircraft might need it and which ones might not (a Lear 35 has no reason to exceed 250 below 10K for example) and strictly enforcing the rules.
As for Concorde, you will not fall out of the sky if you maintain 250 knots on departure. I have the procedures printed out for Concorde and none of them mention having to exceed 250 knots for safety reasons. They only do it to put the aircraft at a more efficient angle of attack so it won't burn quite as much fuel. Again, it's not a safety issue, so it's not mandatory to exceed the speed.
-
- Captain
- Posts: 214
- Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2007 11:32 am
- Location: Sao Paulo, Brasil
Re: Max Take Off Weight to Max Ramp Weight //250kts Conc
Actually Terry, in some cases 250kts IS an aircraft limit.
The Embraer Legacy has a structural limit of 250kts below 10,000' (8,000' under Pt 25 ??) and I would think this applies to the entire 135/145 family although I don't have the data with me right now.
TTFN
The Embraer Legacy has a structural limit of 250kts below 10,000' (8,000' under Pt 25 ??) and I would think this applies to the entire 135/145 family although I don't have the data with me right now.
TTFN
-
- Ticket Agent
- Posts: 5
- Joined: Fri Oct 19, 2007 12:02 am
- Location: 3dme North of LGAV
- Contact:
Re: Max Take Off Weight to Max Ramp Weight //250kts Conc
Capflyer, when you open your airplane manual under "Limitations" you will find MAX TAXI or MAX RAMP or whatever you want to call it. So if its in the manual under Limitations then it is a Limitation and not recomendation for the pilot. You can start with the manuals of all the Airliners first under LIMITATIONS you can find the relevants weights. I think a good website to start is www.airliners.net. I sugest you start with Boeing as they are on the other side of atlantic.
As somebody said its better cheating the system instead of making it better. Next time i will start fsairlines at the holding point and then end it on vacating.
The 250 rule, am sorry that i am repeating my self: Personally I never refused a no speed limitation on departure or arrival (on request) and in (EUROPE). Again 250 in general is an ATC limitation. (TTFN i dont know about ERJ but i do know Avro RJ series have 250 under 8000agl as A/C Limitation)
Now we are coming to Concorde, I guess its not an FSairlines friendly airplane at the moment. 250 just burns more fuel because its not efficient at that speed as u said and i agree. I dont want to go to L/D ratio on different speeds but i know you got the point. I guess all the Concordes in real life climbed 250 until 10000 and reduce their range by couple tons of fuel.
Again to the point which i will never come back again on this issue. Konny got the point, an aircraft specific button for the 250 would be an excelent idea. Keep the motivation going.
Cap and Konny you have my IMs for further if you have any questions.
Terry
As somebody said its better cheating the system instead of making it better. Next time i will start fsairlines at the holding point and then end it on vacating.
The 250 rule, am sorry that i am repeating my self: Personally I never refused a no speed limitation on departure or arrival (on request) and in (EUROPE). Again 250 in general is an ATC limitation. (TTFN i dont know about ERJ but i do know Avro RJ series have 250 under 8000agl as A/C Limitation)
Now we are coming to Concorde, I guess its not an FSairlines friendly airplane at the moment. 250 just burns more fuel because its not efficient at that speed as u said and i agree. I dont want to go to L/D ratio on different speeds but i know you got the point. I guess all the Concordes in real life climbed 250 until 10000 and reduce their range by couple tons of fuel.
Again to the point which i will never come back again on this issue. Konny got the point, an aircraft specific button for the 250 would be an excelent idea. Keep the motivation going.
Cap and Konny you have my IMs for further if you have any questions.
Terry
Terry
Re: Max Take Off Weight to Max Ramp Weight //250kts Conc
Hello,
As some people have stated, some larger aircraft, especially on departure, will have their 'clean' speed above 250 knots and it is not good practise to keep the flap in until passing FL100.
In some places, ATC can and do lift the 250kt restriction under FL100, although again mainly during the initial climb, allowing an aircraft to increase to its optimum climb speed. Another situation could be that you have an un-planned 'level by' instruction imposed by ATC during the descent, say FL90 level by ABC. It could be the case that you cannot make the restriction by ABC if you were to also reduce to 250kt by FL100, so the sensible thing would be to leave the speed reduction until level at FL90, or reduce as much as you can while still being able to make the restriction.
The problem I see with the FSairlines client is that simple situations like this become more complicated because people are trying to avoid a 5% flight rating penalty. While the 250kt restriction is there, certain situations like the ones I have explained above would not get a pilot sacked (unless it was strict OSP), would not make the operation of the flight any less 'professional' and the passengers would not notice a slight bit of difference.
I would like to make it clear that I am not complaining about the way FSairlines currently handles it, but simply saying that certain situations do make the 250kt 'limit' viable to exceed and perhaps people on here care too much about it as if it is a 'do or die' thing.
James
As some people have stated, some larger aircraft, especially on departure, will have their 'clean' speed above 250 knots and it is not good practise to keep the flap in until passing FL100.
In some places, ATC can and do lift the 250kt restriction under FL100, although again mainly during the initial climb, allowing an aircraft to increase to its optimum climb speed. Another situation could be that you have an un-planned 'level by' instruction imposed by ATC during the descent, say FL90 level by ABC. It could be the case that you cannot make the restriction by ABC if you were to also reduce to 250kt by FL100, so the sensible thing would be to leave the speed reduction until level at FL90, or reduce as much as you can while still being able to make the restriction.
The problem I see with the FSairlines client is that simple situations like this become more complicated because people are trying to avoid a 5% flight rating penalty. While the 250kt restriction is there, certain situations like the ones I have explained above would not get a pilot sacked (unless it was strict OSP), would not make the operation of the flight any less 'professional' and the passengers would not notice a slight bit of difference.
I would like to make it clear that I am not complaining about the way FSairlines currently handles it, but simply saying that certain situations do make the 250kt 'limit' viable to exceed and perhaps people on here care too much about it as if it is a 'do or die' thing.
James