[quote=“SteveKane, post:2196, topic:548884”]
Note that I I sometimes see inaccurate information in the KNS-80, i.e. the calculated airspeed is half or 25% of what it should be.
[/quote
I guess it s issues we will have to deal with, I hope 2024 will improve all those glitch … maybe it’s due to all recent avionics changes, and WT gns530, I m wondering if it could be worth give a try with the older gns 530 version (non WTT)
Sim speed appears to be independent of KNS-80 data, but yes, good memory.
Oh well, if everything worked 100%, flying these planes would get boring. It’s a good test of piloting skills.
Case in point…I was in the middle of a 300 mile flight a couple of days ago, and noticed that my KIAS was pretty low. I was at 25,000 feet, so thought it was just thin air, and cruised along for a while. But then realized that the right engine wasn’t even running! Easy enough to start it back up, but no idea why it died on me. Then had to adjust the aileron trim because I had a large fuel imbalance, so must’ve been flying like that for a while. (Tank cross-feed engaged, but that takes a while)
Yeah, need to scan the instruments a bit more often.
I just got this plane and it puzzles me why my engines are wearing at an incredible rate.
I have set my failure rate to the most realistic setting, but after like 3 startups my engine wear is at about 40 percent.
When I watch closely to my itt gauge at the startup the itt goes way beyond the “start” mark?
Why is this happening as I introduce my fuel when the NG passes 12% at minimum?
I guess even with faillure rate x1 it will kill the engine thought
imo it s to reflect a IRL tendancy, I m pretty sure it can be a fatal error, like for some piston aircraft instantly braking with an inadvertant propeller management
edit : personally I like the fact I can be instantly punished if I m careless or doing things too fast and not by the books …
Yeah, can confirm that high OAT is a factor. Before I learned this a few weeks ago in this thread, I was trying to start my engines in Tucson Arizona, at 110 degrees F, and kept frying them. Waiting until 20% RPM was the solution.
I see you are also a pro.
I am retired, but last week a new hire at our airline made an extremely hard landing at KIAH and wrinkled the fuselage. The 767 will very likely be scrapped.
Thanks again for your help! I will buy the book.
I have a question about the DESC mode on the A/P. According to the manual, when in DESC mode the aircraft is supposed to descend at 10kts below the barber pole. When I use it, my speed never comes close to 10 kts below the barber pole, depending on height/power settings it can be 20, 30, 40+kts below the barber pole. I have tried different prop pitch settings, power on, idle power and power set to a particular rate of descent but it never even approaches 10kts below the barber pole. Am I missing something here or are others seeing this too?
I confirm, in past it was more aggressive (if looking at the speed), I did a brief shot this morning to see how it act and I also noticed a descend limited to 3000 / 4000 ft min with engine at 0% and speed not getting that close to the barber pole as it did in past speed was more sitting around the 220 200 knots. I don’t know if that s due to all change made on the AP side or maybe on the flight model
did you tried using the VS up / down it will switch the AP to ias mode then if you really want to be closer to the barber pole it may be the easiest way ? ( it s just a suggest, I m not use to this mode as I m more using the simple vs mode)
That’s exactly what I’m seeing too. I’m asking not because I can’t live without DESC mode but just because I remember that it used to follow the barber pole.
Anyone know why this might be happening. Fuel flow guages clearly set to 300 pph / engine but the GTN 750 showing a bit over 10% higher than that (sometimes higher). I don’t think that it’s the GTN750 with the error here. Fuel burns at the end of the flight as per the weight and balance window agree with the GTN750. I’m curious as I’m trying to refine the Fuel Factor in the profile I’ve created in Simbrief. Any tried and trusted Simbrief Fuel Factor rates would be welcomed.
imo gps give a estimated / average ff from the start, while gauge show an instant t FF more accurate
I guess just after take off, once on cruise the difference will be high since you have been using lot of fuel for the take off & climb
@roughapproach did you tried with this simbrief profile ?
