I know that the next patch is due in 2 days (Dec 22), but I just got fed up with this issue (and not being able to climb out of Paro and other high altitude airports safely), and there is no guarantee that Asobo fix the issue in the next patch. So I simply changed the thrust_scalar setting back to its original value of 1 (had been changed to 0.82 in last patch) in the engine.cfg file.
OK, the plane is a little overpowered now - I’ll play with values between 0.82 and 1 until I find the closest match, but it is flyable at altitude again now.
Any recent observations on this from today’s patch? I gave up after the last batch that broke the A/P, gave it a whirl again today now that it can actually follow a flight plan.
Just on default load settings, seemed to struggle to get above FL300.
Since the last patch, everything seems to be working perfectly. Thrust is good to climb, banking is a little extreme but ok and the AP follows the flight path perfectly. Well done Asobo.
The only thing left to resolve is the constant overspeed warning above 220 kts, even when above 10,000 ft
For most flights, I have to keep below 220 kts until I reach ~ 15,000 ft before I can increase speed. Otherwise I get the overspeed warning. If I ignore it, the aircraft will crash (ie over-stressed)
Nijntje91 would like to see you perform same flight again as above given the December patch. On a test flight yesterday I was able to adhere to the profiles in the Eurocontrol db…but would be great if you could take a look again with another flight on the default A320
I’ve been searching all over the forums for this topic. Finally, some others who seem to be experiencing the same issue as me. For me, I haven’t completed a full flight since November before the USA update. That update broke both the AP and my climb performance was noticeably worse too. I was very pleased to see the AP fixed in the recent December 22 update, but the poor climb performance bug is still present for me which is really frustrating. The default A320 feels so underpowered since then and it takes me around 30-40 minutes to reach cruise and most of the time it’s impossible to fly any higher than FL300 and FL350. This is even with low payload and max thrust (obviously not realistic for engine performance).
So it looks like I’ll continue to wait for a fix, but I’m getting very impatient and frustrated because I really miss flying. I’ve tried the FBW mod also, but it causes FPS issues on my PC whereas the default runs super smooth. Looks like I’ll continue to wait to hear about a fix on here. It’s a real shame since they fixed half of the default A320. The default A320 used to fly nicely for me and it only took me between 15-20 minutes from takeoff to cruise, which comparing to FlightRadar24 real world flight tracking, seemed very normal, not 30-40 minutes.
There are, of course, a number of differences between the FBW mod and the default airplane that give the FBW mod the correct climb performance. However, you can probably go at least partway there with one simple change in the engines.cfg file of the default airplane. Hopefully, you know how to find that file. Open the file in any text editor, scroll down to the bottom and find the variable ‘thrust scalar’ in the [JET ENGINE] section. Change the value from 0.82 to 0.88.
That won’t get you all the way there because the vanilla airplane also has too much drag and too little lift, but it should help quite a bit. If climb performance is still inadequate, you can try upping this scalar even more.
Be sure to either save a backup of this file or remember how to change it back if you don’t like it. And if Asobo updates the engines.cfg file it will write over any changes you make.
I’m sorry the FBW mod doesn’t play well on your system. Your missing out on a lot!
Sorry for the late response, I tested the default A320 again using 52t, came to the exact same conclusion. When climbing with 290 kts and then transition to Mach 0.78 it reaches service ceiling around FL370, its not fixed yet. Maybe the next update contains aerodynamic improvements?
Edit: I left the sim running for some time, seeing if it ever reaches FL390. I found it 30 min later below the level I left it at with a lower airspeed and a pulsating vertical flight director bar cycling up and down. No idea what happend in the meanwhile there…
Edit 2: A few moments later (on Autopilot): In a constant 60 degree bank, descending spiral. Under control I have to give him that .
What I did as a workaround to keep flying the A320: 1. Lower the cruise altitude in the navigation tab on the worldmap to FL300 - FL340 2. Reduce payload to 10-30% 3. After takeoff and initial climb to ~FL130 disable Autothrust and set throttle to TOGA to get 99% thrust. 4. Reduce the climb speed to 300, after getting close to FL300 reduce it further to 285 5. After reaching CRZ put the engines back in CL and re-enable Autothrust and set the speed to managed mode again.
This method allows for a VS of 2000-1000 until around FL290 and above that of 1000-500. So the plane reaches its cruise altitude in a reasonable amount of time.
Additional thoughts:
The default climb speed set in the computer of 320 seems a bit high to me, but I’m not a pilot. This speed is part of the reason the plane struggles with climbing, because it tries to maintain this high speed during climb.
The fuel consumption seems to stay the same when flying like this (around 10-15% consumption during a 1hr flight)
The engines always get 88% thrust while in Autothrust, regardless if the thrust is set to CL, FLX or TOGA. I’m not a pilot so I don’t know if that is normal or part of the problem.
The plane seems to require more thrust to start moving on the ground than before the update
Been having the exact same issue. Depending on payload, the plane starts to osciillate above FL300 without being able to mantain a sustained climb up to cruise altitude.
I thought of a different way of handling this to give the plane back its power. According to CFM, the Leap 1A can do 35,000 pounds of thrust. the engines in the game is rated at 26550. So, I decided to give it its on paper power and went into engine.cfg and gave it 35K thrust. It does get to altitude much much more quickly but that is the on paper thrust rating so maybe it really is just that capable.
I’m still testing the effect of the change on range and fuel flow. The range is given as 3400nm at 629 mph or 546.586 knots, Mach .82. a flight time of about 373 minutes, 6.22 hours. I’m trying to figure out how that works into the Fuel flow scalar and fuel flow gain in the engine.cfg. Changing nothing, it’s 22KG/min at mach .82. It should be more like maybe 57KG/min total. If someone knows how to put that into the fuel flow calculations, it would make it more realistic, I think. Otherwise it can fly for like 16 hours, which is nuts. I’ll play with it more myself.
ok. So I increased the fuel flow scalar to 1.55, up from 0.6 and that gave me the 57 KG/min and a flight time of 6.22 hours at 35,000 feet at mach .82. That seems like the on paper performance for the plane. What do you guys think of that?
.