might be related - I need to go back and do some math to what was actually incorrect. Regardless - my report wasn’t the 172 - so might be a wider issue. The one I saw did occur several releases back but not in current retail afaik or the one before.
To clarify - on the splash screen when you select the mission (briefing screen) it gives miles and fuel on the right of the screen. that was incorrect and also the aircraft even fully fueled was not capable of completing the mission.
This may be more closely tied with older and I thought resolved issues where missions were assigned altitudes above the service ceiling of the aircraft and such. Larger issue is that missions are offered that are not possible to complete with the assigned aircraft.
I am seeing 2 issues:
If you are able to reproduce, make sure to capture a screenshot and create a separate bug report (if no existing one) with detailed information about those incorrect distance & fuel figures
Maybe this issue is linked to the previous one: if distance is incorrectly calculated then the proposed aircraft list may also be incorrect since it should include aircraft (my assumption, not sure about the logic) having a range to cover that distance
I think the miles were correct but not the estimated fuel required.
Will attempt to reproduce when able.
Okay - so found an example (not easy given the lack of sort or filter on things like distance/time - but I digress)…
Found a missing (employee mode) in a king air (screen shot attached) that exceeds the aircraft actual capability (albeit things look okay in the flight planner given the estimated fuel burn (probably incorrect).
I put the same route and aircraft into simbrief and received “Warning: Flight exceeds aircraft range).
I did adjust simbrief (attached) to match the altitude suggested in msfs 2024 (FL350). Auto step climb was used and still 447 KG short.
Well the king Air 350i is stated to have a range of 1800nm which would work for that distance not counting for wind or alternate fuel. But Simbrief can be wrong in it’s fuel burn.
I did a flight last night from KTEB to KTYQ in the turbine Duke. Simbrief said I’d be short 140lbs of fuel but landed with 100gal on board after having a headwind the whole flight. But I think it had my alternate up near Chicago so if I picked a closer alternate it might have been fine. But the flight was completed just fine
okay - can you try with a skip to decent? Maybe that is what burned the fuel.
I’ve never used skip to descent so I can’t comment on that right now. I’ve seen too many people having issues with it to try it and risk totaling an airplane
fwiw if you ctrl-f4 quickly enough you can avoid negative impact (and also it’s the beta so doesn’t carry back to retail).
This issue is a regression in the beta - doesn’t occur in retail.
I’ve noticed than your plane keaps the fuel remaining of the last flight.
If this can help…
Ok I didn’t see anywhere in this thread that mentioned the beta… The other thread linked above stated something similar and I had the issue of career dispatching fights that the aircraft couldn’t complete non stop. I had this issue the C208 early on but since then I’ve never trusted the stated fuel, I always use Simbrief and go off their estimates. If it exceeds a parameter I don’t accept the flight
I think part of this is Asobo has incorrect flight data for many aircraft.
As regards the Cessna 172 G1000 Cargo, this is from the EFB Aircraft Information:
The fuel flow is way off. If you average the values in the POH Performance section, you get more like 9 gal/h. And 8-10 gal/h is what a lot of flight planning websites and apps use. In fact, I often use a figure of 12 gal/h in order to err on the side of caution. This is where I think the Career missions really miss the mark and are causing all this “fuel low” frustration. They expect a loaded plane to maintain a fuel burn well below what it can actually make so it’s underestimating what you should have on board.
6 gal/hr for this plane is almost a hypothetical ideal for newer models under very specific circumstances. I have no idea if Asobo is accounting for “Time, Fuel, and Distance to Climb” figures in addition to cruise fuel burn because I haven’t gotten that far, but I think the fuel flow is a bigger factor anyway.
If the game’s fuel estimations are off by a significant amount, it’s no surprise folks are taking off on missions where the fuel “ring” at mission configuration is green, but they are crashing or landing with low fuel warnings.
Best workaround for now is to always add fuel before starting a mission. How much? Before clicking Fly, click on Manage Aircraft and fuel up to at least 30% more fuel than what the little gas tank icon indicates is a safe amount.
There may be a separate bug here, too, because I’ve used the pre-mission plane Management to add fuel, but when I’ve taken off, I still have the amount I had before trying to add some. For example, I had half of total fuel, used “Manage Fuel” to add so I should have 2/3 of the max, but when I’ve gotten in the plane I still showed fuel at half. Unfortunately, I had to resort to setting a key bind for “Add Fuel Quantity” and “cheat” my way to safety.
The lack of performance data from in-game EFB and online flight planner is a problem.
WorkingTitle said they did their part and It’s up to each plane developer to fill these infos.
For exemple I made my own basic A320 performance file, it took me 30min (gathering the plane info, wich is not always easy, and fill it up to the flight planner) and I have less than 5-10% difference with simbrief data when I generate a flight plan.
Devs doesn’t have 1 or 2h for fill up these data ? It would solve a lot of secondary issues especially in career mode.
If you are talking about freelancer, there is another issue I detailed in Career Mode - C208 not selectable for cargo medium missions - Bug Reporting Hub / User Interface & Activities - Microsoft Flight Simulator Forums which has the screenshots that I think substantiate this.
I suspect the career mission generator uses details from a plane available to you (based on your subscription - so for Medium Cargo I have C208 C408 C404 PC12 PC24), when it generates the mission (even though you are using your own) - I think it would be exactly the same under the hood as what generates employee missions.
Even though you don’t use it it still uses this figure to populate that element on the screen AND determine what plane you can select for the mission. It exists in all career types but manifests in Medium Cargo a lot because of the massive difference between say the C208 and C408 or PC24 fuel burns. Without these aircraft available it’s way less frequent as the C208 and PC12 aren’t so different.
In Settings you can program a key or button to just fill the tank completely and I’ve found that always works even in Career mode.
This is the way. Thank you so much <3
