Anyone else finding that the A330 fuel prediction can be way off? I was on a flight from KDFW to EDDF on an A330-300P2F yesterday. The original fuel estimate at the gate was predicting that I would be 8,000 lbs short for FOB at the destination so I was forced to fuel it up to 100%. But as I was flying and getting closer to EDDF, the FOB prediction gradually creeps up to over 30,000 lbs FOB at EDDF. This makes it difficult to determine how much fuel I should carry.
Did you have any step climbs in the flight plan calculated by Simbrief? If so, did you enter them into MCDU?
There was no step climb for that particular flight but even if it does have one, it doesnāt explain why I would end up with so much more FOB at the destination than whatās been calculated at the start. Iād think that missing step climbs would only make the FOB smaller at the destination, as flying at lower cruising altitudes would be less efficient.
From experiences I see online, as I understand, this is accurate. The real airplane also doesnāt correctly estimate FOB at the destination. Once you reach cruise altitude the estimation should considerably improve.
My suggestion is when in doubt consult SimBrief (they have specific models for the different a330 configs), Iāve done some flights 2-4 hours long and the estimation there is quite accurate!
In any case, the estimation, as I see it is always under the actual usage. So, worst case scenario, you will carry more fuel than required. Not much harm done unless youāre pushing the limits of flight time, in which case, I would be using a more accurate method anyway
Hi all!
Iāve experienced this issue in Sim Update 1 Beta and didnāt test in the release version. If some one using the release version could also check it would be great!
Either way go give it an upvote so it get some notice! Thanks!
iniBuilds A330-xxx probe/window heat having to be manually turned on
Fixed on A332 only to be bugged on A333 its still on SU1 beta patch 3 as of now.
1 Like
Nearing 3 months away. Lots of stuff ini has to fix and not sure if a working build has been submitted to asobo but on discord they claim they did. So it seems Asobo is too busy fixing core sim issues to even incorporate them on SU1 beta.
- Right wingflex rigid(temporary fix is on flightsim.to)
- Flap 1+f flap trailing is too little(Also prevelant on the A321LR)
- Auto Probe heat not working
- Livery bug on selection page(constantly need to select back livery 0) especially conflicting streaming livery.
- Custom registration font cant change color(Again streaming issue awaiting for full file install)
- WASM freeze when certain STAR selection on MCDU
- Extremely weak engine sounds even when viewed outdoors or in drone mode.
- GSX issues with custom profile cant differentiate between 200 to 300 series(Pointed towards again streaming issue with no aircraft files installed)
1 Like
I encountered this on the public build a while before the beta started. Flew into clouds in icing conditions with yellow on my weather radar and indicated airspeed became unresponsive
1 Like
This is not new, we already have āthis problemā on 2020. Partners fix bugs but Asobo becomes a bottleneck and cannot handle the updates and release.
I spected they learned from this issue from 2020 and allowed dev partners to handle updates directly, like addons, but looks like we are stuck to the old ways.
2 Likes
Yes, this is a good point, just to add that night time they also darken the cabin lowering lighting level.
However, Iād like such an option to be optional:) - as now-days there are some developments to closing shades on take-off landing rule - on some airlines, like āSouthwestā this already is not required.
At the same time, some airlines on some airplane models, like Royal Jordanian on Embraer 195 (or 190, I do not remember exactly on which of them I experienced this) demand to close all of the shades during cruise phase daytime.
I am deeply tormented by the sound of the engine developed by inibuild for the Airbus fleet. It seems there is no way out but to endure it, as there is neither a sound pack available nor am I optimistic that inibuild will make any significant changes anytime soon. The noise resembling a vacuum cleaner coming from the engine is truly unbearable.
3 Likes
Thank you for pointing out the exact issues that I and many others are facing. Honestly, Iām not dissatisfied with all aspects of the inibuildās aircraft, but they certainly did not go above and beyond for their Airbus fleet. The engine sound is a disaster, and I am astonished how they managed to let this sound pass through the quality control team. I am extremely dissatisfied with the audio quality and believe that the inibuild sound devs team deserves serious criticism.
2 Likes
The auto cruise / time acceleration system on the INI A350 is well done and really needs to be added to the A330 family (and A321N).
3 Likes
Along with that the difference in the audio quality and sound recordings between the A330 and A350 is staggering!!
4 Likes
If you enter an arrival early on in the flight but that changes as you get closer, you can change the runway and VIA but the STAR page gets stuck and doesnāt show all of the options
Type rated A330 pilot here. I just completed a long haul and was pleasantly surprised with this default aircraft. Overall Iād say its about 90% of where it should be, with the main flaws that I found being primarily within the FMGC. Here are the issues I noticed (300RR model) :
- On preflight, I was not able to load company enroute winds. This causes inaccurate fuel over destination predictions. (Was showing I would be short 14,000 lbs from planned)
- Also could not enter planned step climbs, thus also contributing to the EFOB prediction discrepancy. (EDIT). I guess the way to enter step climbs is to enter it like this āTUDEP/380ā and then hit 1L. You should be able to type TUDEP in 1L and 380 in 1R. When I tried the latter I was getting āFormat Errorā.
- Ground friction is excessive. After you get it it moving, the aircraft should slowly accelerate at idle thrust on a flat surface. I found that I needed to keep adding power to keep a good 15kt taxi speed going, else it would roll to a stop.
- I was surprised to see derated climb thrust functioning. Kudos to that.
- ETP calculation page and constant mach functions are absent. These are crucial when it comes to oceanic crossings.
- Low autobrake setting with full reverse seems overexaggerated. I was able to get it stopped very quickly without touching the brake pedals. IRL low autobrakes do eat up some runway and it usually needs a bit of help with the manual pedals to make typical everyday runway turnoffs. This may be related to the excessive ground friction issue I found while taxiing.
There are probably more but those are the glaringly obvious ones that I found. The aircraft was able to fly a full procedure RNP approach beautifully, again a pleasant surprise. Flight dynamics felt pretty accurate. Hoping to see some minor fixes is the next update!
19 Likes
I found you can import enroute winds (or manualy insert) after you entered ZFW/ZFWCG (From your comments I assume that this would not be the expected behavior).
And a quick question if you donāt mind:
Since you are a RL A330 pilot, what do you think about the sounds? some people say they are really accurated to a A330, other say the sound pack is terrible and need to be redone.
Nice to have real world input on this aircraft. I absolutely love it and am really enjoying flying it having spent lots of time flying the A300 on 2020
Iāve mostly been flying the 300GE model as it has the liveries included with it however I have found that with both engines running on a flat surface it will easily get up to 30kts if you let it and youāre relatively light. Fully loaded for a long flight perhaps not but Iāve done one such flight and feel like I would have noticed if I had had to add power to taxi. So it could be an issue with the RR version
I have a question on landing. I flare at 40ft and that feels good. You then hear the real wheel rolling and give it a little more flare to land the main gear fully. But what Iām struggling with is flying the nose gear down nicely to the ground, perhaps because of the over-zealous low Autobrake. Would you almost look to release the back pressure once the nose gear is down and then reapply and increase as the nose falls or am I right to be maintaining the back pressure before increasing? Just feels like I maintain it and increase it as the speed comes down but canāt get a nice smooth nosewheel touchdown. Thanks
I tried the āCompany Requestā winds with a simbrief plan loaded and it only loaded winds for the first two or three fixes. I manually added a few down the line and it didnāt seem to make any effect on the EFOB during preflight, but Iāll play around with again to confirm.
The sounds wereā¦just OK. I wasnāt super concerned with them because IRL you really only hear the engines during startup and takeoff (buzzsaw) and initial thrust reduction. Once you get up to 250kts or so and the rest of the flight all you hear is wind noise. Maybe some low bass rumble as the engines come to idle at TOD. A Boris sounds rework would certainly be a welcome addition.
4 Likes