DC10F Up Close

Moderator: BKirkham

DC10F Up Close

Postby David Reed » Fri May 03, 2019 10:16 am

Flew the Trip of the Week (Cargo) flight this morning (well, the first leg)

First thing of course is the flight planning. The trip shows a load of 150,000 lbs. So here's my load sheet:
Image

Naturally, my limitation for this 2+41 hr trip is the landing weight. So I'm limited to 78,000 lbs of fuel. FS9 says I'll burn 45,568 lbs of fuel, or 16,877 PPH. From what I've read, this seems pretty accurate for the DC10-30 series. I flew the trip at FL350 and M.80, burning 59,674 pounds of fuel, or 22,101 PPH. This is 31% greater than expected, so some adjustment is needed here. I planned on landing with 1.5 hrs of fuel, but in reality I squeaked in with 49 minutes of fuel.

To adjust this fuel flow problem, I'm going to adjust the fuel flow scalar in the aircraft.cfg file. In the aircraft folder, there is a file called aircraft.cfg. Open it with notepad and scroll down to the engine data. You'll see this:

[GeneralEngineData]
engine_type= 1
Engine.2= 14.00, 29.25, -2.80
Engine.0= 14.00, -29.25, -2.80
Engine.1= -78.50, 0.00, 22.50
min_throttle_limit=-0.369927
fuel_flow_scalar=0.788

If I'm burning 30% too much, then I need to reduce the 0.788 figure by 30%, to 0.520

[GeneralEngineData]
engine_type= 1
Engine.2= 14.00, 29.25, -2.80
Engine.0= 14.00, -29.25, -2.80
Engine.1= -78.50, 0.00, 22.50
min_throttle_limit=-0.369927
fuel_flow_scalar=0.520

On my next leg, Tokyo to Anchorage, I'll see if that had any affect on the fuel burn rates.

Here we are in cruise over the Pacific heading from Manila to Tokyo.
Image

Image
David Reed
Site Admin
 
Posts: 430
Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2013 9:23 am

Re: DC10F Up Close

Postby David Reed » Fri May 03, 2019 5:28 pm

Leg #2: Tokyo to Anchorage

After making the proper adjustment to the fuel flow scalar, we departed Tokyo with 120,000 lbs of fuel.

We climbed to FL350 and set M.80 on the meter. FS9 said we'd take five hours exactly. Actual time was 5+14.

FS9 estimated the fuel burn at 84,604 lbs. That's 16,920 PPH. That's fairly accurate with real life, and the same estimate rate we had on the last trip. Actual fuel burn was 62,302 lbs, or 11,981 PPH. That's roughly half of what it was before. I think if we split the difference on the fuel scalar we should be spot on with the actual burn rates. It was .788. We changed it to .520. I'll change it to .654 and we should be right on.

Image

Just after sunrise over the North Pacific Ocean
Image

Landing in PANC
Image
David Reed
Site Admin
 
Posts: 430
Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2013 9:23 am

Re: DC10F Up Close

Postby EAL0739 » Sat May 04, 2019 9:58 am

Gonna love those precise and accurate fuel analysis reports!!!
Regards,

EAL0739 Aharon Dayan
EAL0739
 
Posts: 77
Joined: Fri Jan 04, 2019 6:03 pm


Return to Screen Shots

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

cron