PC-24 Fuel Flow Mismatch – Double Consumption Error

ISSUE DESCRIPTION

Description of the issue:
I’ve noticed that the fuel calculation for the remaining flight time is incorrect. It calculates the remaining flight time based on the fuel left in the tank and the fuel flow of just one engine. However, since the tank feeds both engines, the remaining flight time decreases at twice the actual rate.

Initially, the flight time indicated with full tanks aligns with the known performance of the PC-24. This made me wonder if the fuel flow shown on the fuel flow computer is accurate, while the values displayed below each engine might be incorrect or should potentially be half of what they currently indicate.

After doing some online research, I found that fuel consumption varies depending on the chosen cruise speed — approximately 1,079 LB/H for High-Speed Cruise and 869 LB/H for Long-Range Cruise, with these values representing the combined consumption of both engines.

Taking this into consideration, the fuel flow indicated on the fuel flow computer should be correct. However, the fuel consumption per engine should be half the value currently indicated and consumed.

If applicable, which aircraft is experiencing this issue:
PC24

[PC Only] Did you remove all your community mods/add-ons? If yes, are you still experiencing the issue?

FREQUENCY OF ISSUE

How often does this occur for you (Example: Just once, every time on sim load, intermittently)?

  • Every flight, independent of free flight or career.

REPRODUCTION STEPS

  1. Start a flight with PC-24
  2. Stabilize at any cruise altitude.
  3. Note the remaining flight time displayed on the fuel flow computer. Start a timer for 10 minutes and check the remaining flight time once the 10 minutes have passed.
  4. You will notice that 20 minutes of endurance have been deducted, effectively consuming twice the calculated amount of fuel.

YOUR SETTINGS

If the issue still occurs with no mods and add-ons, please continue to report your issue. If not, please move this post to the User Support Hub.

What peripherals are you using, if relevant:

  • Not relevant.

[PC Only] Are you using Developer Mode or have you made any changes to it?

  • No

[PC Only] What GPU (Graphics Card) do you use?

  • Not relevant

MEDIA

Start of timer at stable flight conditions.
Both engines display a fuel flow of approximately 804 lbs/h. However, the fuel flow computer shows the fuel flow of the left engine only, while it should calculate based on the combined flow of both engines. At the start of the timer, the remaining flight time is indicated as 3:15 (H:M).

10 minutes later
Since the flight conditions were stable and unchanged, the remaining flight time should have decreased to 3:05 (H:M). However, this is not the case—the remaining time is 2:55 (H:M). In just 10 minutes of flight, 20 minutes of fuel endurance were consumed.

PC-24 Specifications (Based on Online Sources):

  • Cruise Speed (High-Speed): ~440 KTAS (Knots True Airspeed)
  • Long-Range Cruise Speed: ~360 KTAS
  • Fuel Consumption (High-Speed Cruise): ~1,079 lbs/hour (combined for both engines)
  • Fuel Consumption (Long-Range Cruise): ~869 lbs/hour (combined for both engines)

Source:

[END OF FIRST USER REPORT]


:loudspeaker: For anyone who wants to contribute on this issue, Click on the button below to use this template:

Do you have the same issue if you follow the OP’s steps to reproduce it?

Provide extra information to complete the original description of the issue:

If relevant, provide additional screenshots/video:

4 Likes

Do you have the same issue if you follow the OP’s steps to reproduce it?
• engines consume double amount of fuel

Provide extra information to complete the original description of the issue:

If relevant, provide additional screenshots/video:


Do you have the same issue if you follow the OP’s steps to reproduce it?

Provide extra information to complete the original description of the issue:

If relevant, provide additional screenshots/video:

I experienced this today.

Having the same issue here. According to the real plane’s performance I should have burned 2600lbs of fuel on a flight, meanwhile in the sim I ended up burning 4000lbs. Really looks like the plane is burning double the fuel that it should

1 Like

I’ve done a bit of testing with the latest beta () and it seems like the lower display is only taking in data from the left engine.

1 Like

Came back after 3 month. Still the same bug. Double amount of fuel consumption than it should have.

1 Like

AFAIK It’s a copy paste from the PC12, so yes probably only one engine, that would explain it showing more endurance than it actually has

Something is seriously wrong with fuel constumption and fuel consumption indication.


With only Eng2 running the indicated total fuel consumption is 0, but in reallity it consumes fuel just very slowly.
If both engines are running fuel consumption is way higher than in the real aircraft.

1 Like

Do you have the same issue if you follow the OP’s steps to reproduce it?
• I think yes.

Provide extra information to complete the original description of the issue:
• I don’t know if the fuel consumption is doubled. What I know is the operating range for PC-24 is much shorter than expected. When I take a 2500km VIP mission, it will run out of fuel half way, even if I fill up the fuel tank with 100% and cruise at FL440.

If relevant, provide additional screenshots/video:

1 Like

It is still incorrect in SU2 beta build 1. To me it seems this is a core simulation issue. It is sad that due to this awfull bug reporting site some issues like this will never get enough attention…

Did they state in the release notes that it was fixed?

It’s not, this plane uses more fuel than the Cessna Longitude and has literally no power above 36500… I was being conservative with the throttle, climbing at 70-75% POWER and went 550 or so miles on a half a tank… Should go at least 750-850 even if using high power cruise settings… I thought it said this was fixed as well, but it does not seem to be…

hopefully it’ll be addressed in one of the SU2 beta updates, yea unless distance dictates it I always climb to either FL440 or FL450… what speed are you climbing at? I don’t have a problem in the mid 30’s climbing.

FL440 or FL450? How? Getting to anything above FL400 takes forever…

I’m relatively new to the PC24, but I’m struggling with the fuel consumption. Yesterday I took 50% more than suggested, but had to abort 20 minutes before touchdown because of bingo fuel. (3 hour RL flight…:frowning: )

The “fuel remaining time” would indicate i was (very) safe. Remarkably, the FMS destination ETE remaining fuel indicated a negative number from the start. So the FMS does seem to take whatever is going on into account.

Personally I climb at 240 indicated set manually using FLC. It’ll switch automatically when you reach 0.64M and continue at that up to cruise. I usually cruise at 0.72M using the FMC and Auto Throttle. Takeoff using 15deg flaps, trim at 4deg nose up (disregard the takeoff warnings) rotate at 110, first notch of flaps up at 150, clean by 170.

Yes above FL400 it’s not a fast climb ~600ish fpm but the fuel savings up there are worth it for long trips. I’ve done 1200mi trips with full tanks. But no where near the stated 2000nm range, so there is still a problem. It been an issue with this jet from release, there’s an add fuel command you can bind to a key on your keyboard and add fuel mid flight, not realistic but neither is much on this jet right now. At least it’ll get you to your destination if you encounter a stiff headwind

Why were you climbing at 75% power… That would explain why you had no power in the mid 30’s. Run that thing at MCT

I just have a flight running at FL440 in SU2 beta, and the problem now seems to be reversed: I calculated a fuel flow of about 1200lbs/h running at Mach .7 (fuel went down 300lbs after 15 minutes), while the lower MFD showed rates between 500 and 700 lbs/h, same as each engine. So the consumption seems to be right now and the PFD shows the right rate for each engine, only the MFD is now halved and the remaining flight time (still) double of what it really is.

No, that’s not reversed, it’s exactly like others have reported here.
The lower MFD shows only consumption from 1 engine (the left one) and calculates the remaining flight time based on that (so double of what it should be). The PFD uses the real fuel consumption (so from both engines) for its waypoint fuel remaining calculations etc.

There’s no real consensus on what the actual fuel consumption should be though:

Is the bug purely with the lower MFD? As in, it should measure fuel consumption for both engines (instead of just left) and then all is fixed? Because that would put the plane’s performance noticeably lower than it’s real-world counterpart. (But that could also be explained with inaccurate/worse drag simulation for example…)

Or maybe the fuel consumption of the current simulated left engine should actually be for both engines? And the simulated right engine is erroneously tacked on top of that, increasing the simulated fuel consumption by 50%.

Something is bugged though… that’s for sure.

I think the consensus should be on the side of the handbook values. Pilatus advertises the PC-24 with a range of 3778km (which should be on long- range cruise speed) , with my fuel flow I would get around 3600km on cruising altitude at near max speed. The first reports all are about a doubled consumption compared to the handbook values, but I have only 10% over that. So for me the engine consumption seems to be near identical to the real one, only the MFD still calculates with only one engine.