PC-24: Inadequate Fuel Calcs in Career

Bug Reporting Hub User Interface & Activities
, , , ,
1

Using the template below will greatly help the team reproduce the issue and ease the process of fixing it. Before posting, search for an existing report. If you are not sure it’s a bug, please first report in User Support Hub.

3 tags are required - add them in the tag section next to the title above:

Feel free to delete this quote section after adding your appropriate tags.

ISSUE DESCRIPTION

Description of the issue: The PC-24 is given an inadequate fuel load for career flights. Probably just 1/4 of what is needed.

FREQUENCY OF ISSUE

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

REPRODUCTION STEPS

Please list clear steps you took in order to help our test team reproduce the same issue:

  1. Select a career mission and use the fuel load generated by the game

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:

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

[PC, MSFS 2020 Only] Are you using DX11 or DX12?

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

[PC Only] What other relevant PC specs can you share?

MEDIA

Please add a screenshot or video of the issue occurring.

2

Are you skipping to taxi maybe ?: PC 24 VIP mission limited fuel when skip to Taxi is used

3

No skipping

4

The game is probably wrong for all aircraft, not just the PC-24. If I set up a flight with the PC-12, this example is from EDLN to EGPE at FL 280. The game gives me 922 lbs whereas SimBrief says 1558 lbs. MSFS doesn’t even have enough for the trip fuel, it says 447 vs 1102.

Screenshot 2026-04-02 at 8.54.39 AM
Screenshot 2026-04-02 at 8.54.39 AM1621×1479 273 KB
5

I’ve seen this myself though in some cases the MS-prescribed amount was totally adequate, either because the aircraft isn’t burning enough fuel, or because SimBrief’s profile for the aircraft is overestimating how much it should burn. Haven’t done enough research yet to decide which one, if either, is “correct” here.

6

Screen from the game

IMG_2739
IMG_27393840×2160 458 KB
7

I assume SimBrief is correct. It’s not a small difference either, it’s over twice the amount. If you try the PC-24 flight you’ll be out of gas about 1/4 the way of your trip. I couldn’t find a PC-24 flight in career right now to compare. I find most flights with any aircraft in career end up with you landing on fumes which isn’t realistic at all.

8

Yeah, I don’t doubt it - I just haven’t done enough testing myself to confidently say one way or another. Thanks for documenting more here!

9

I think part of the issue here is that the PC-24, and many other Career compatible aircraft, lack any meaningful performance data. This is made evident by looking at the performance page of the EFB Planner app, which shows some pretty ridiculous and obviously stock values for things like fuel burn. It’s rather disappointing that robust performance data is not a requirement of being Career compatible.

10

The PC-24 is a 3rd Party aircraft from Carenado. What about the PC-12? That’s a standard aircraft.

11

The language can be a bit confusing but the PC-24 is a first party aircraft developed by Carenado on Microsoft’s behalf - same for the PC-12.

12

It’s bad on the Vision jet too. I even gave myself a few hundred pounds extra and landed with just 20 in the tanks. Ridiculous :open_mouth: