July Stats

Post by **MALTBY D** » 01 Aug 2006, 00:24

I've also updated the 'Sticky Stats Page' above.
Only posted a new thread so people can see there's some new stats available.

Some new stats have been added to all pages. All useless but fascinating stuff I'm sure.
May 2006 Stats
June 2006 Stats
July 2006 Stats
Stats for all CBFS flights

In summary...
Not as hectic as last month, but still a whopping 358 flights made with 18 pilots.
A very busy month on the Rapide, Viscount & Trident.

Well done to Dave B who's managed a whole month without registering a single rating penalty in 115 flights. Git.

And Dave B's 70 odd hours is all real time flying too.
The same huge amount of DH89 & Dove action from DB but a number of racey Viscount & Vanguard rides pushing his average speed up to a blistering 147kt !

Ben's gone furthest again, although he took it easy with a measly 22000 nm. His move away from the VC10 meant he nearly got pipped with Joe Cusick pushing him close from only a few flights in the 10.

The jets are where it's at for big dosh. Ben tops the list on earnings again, with John Payne following.

Along with the favourite 1-11, I spread my wings wide this month taking up 9 different types.
Particularly enjoyed my two trips in the Argosy after a near crash landing had seriously put me off it last month.

John Payne was Trident obsessed, giving AWZP a damn good thrashing.
And of course Fraser simply adores his Viscounts. AOHT getting a lot of use there with Dave B as well.

Quiet on the 748 this time around. Somehow I managed to be the biggest user with 6. Tony Burns & Tom Moss being the other main users with 4 trips each.

New pilot Tony Dolman sticking with the same trusty F100 for now.

Thought I'd also be the top Argosy user with 2, but Dave Balmer came in with a late dash.
Dave Balmer has kept the DC-3s active and also chipped in to keep the Comet fleet going, but has now sadly decided to call it a day.

Finally, there appears to be some performance issue with the Vanguard.
Dave Booker & Myself are consistently getting about twice the fuel burn as everyone else.
I can only assume that's because we've altered the aircraft.cfg as per Fraser's Manual & others haven't ? (could be wrong)
Anyway, something to check if you have a rating on the Vanguard.

And Fraser's started off August's stats already!
DM

blanston12 · Post by **blanston12** » 01 Aug 2006, 00:50

Lots of interesting stats there, thanks.

Post by **RAF_Quantum** » 01 Aug 2006, 00:51

Hi Dave,

Excellent work with the stats again and a nice 'debrief' of the month's flying. Adding to this, look what DB's picked up this month from FlyNET :-

AND

Well done to everyone.

Rgds

John

Post by **DaveB** » 01 Aug 2006, 00:53

S H I T E!!!

My god DM.. you can do things with a database I can't even begin to imagine

Very impressive resume

I noticed from last months stats our fuelburn on the VC9 seems to be high. More dosh to be had there if we can find the reason why

It might be worth adding at this point that I got the V700srs (2 of em' anyway!) brought back to the UK (the 2 at CDG) and it was found that they're not cost effective. Were it not for the FlyNET x300 multiplyer, the 2 flights made a total of 640v$ from CDG to Northolt so, the decision was made to scrap the lot. This has lost us around v$4m but due to the sterling work you guys are doing.. it was a cost that could be taken

The intention is to replace the 'lost' V700's with V800's at new locations, possibly Jersey, Leeds and East Mids.. all of which should provide us with good revenue

It is possible that the Viking's we intend to purchase may also end up in a similar situation to the V700's (due to the cost of tickets-v-pax-v-fuel cost) but more testing need's to be done in this area.. ongoing at this point.

Another excellent month guy's. A thousand thanks to DM for pulling the wheat from the chaff and to you all for your continued support

ATB

DaveB :tab:

Post by **MALTBY D** » 01 Aug 2006, 10:40

Thanks for that Dave, the Viscount scrap would explain how you flew a Viscount with no registration. My data extract program didn't like that at all!
I must have copied the first flight report before the scrapping & copied the second after it!
One of the flights ended up in the database with reg G-ARIR, the other has blank. Do you know what the reg was?

There are some other weird fuel stats, but not an alarming amount.
You managed to use -212 kg on one DH89 flight.

And Peter Wetton must have ragged the arse off his Rapide to burn 272 kg/h! :shock:

Is our Vanguard performance more realistic than what Ben's getting.
Do you know what the real aircraft's fuel burn figures are?

DM

Post by **RAF_Quantum** » 01 Aug 2006, 10:45

MALTBY D wrote:I must have copied the first flight report before the scrapping & copied the second after it!
One of the flights ended up in the database with reg G-ARIR, the other has blank. Do you know what the reg was?

That would have been G-AODG

Rgds

John

Post by **RAF_Quantum** » 01 Aug 2006, 10:49

MALTBY D wrote:
Is our Vanguard performance more realistic than what Ben's getting.
Do you know what the real aircraft's fuel burn figures are?

DM

Hi Dave,

There's some discussion in this thread about the Vanguard fuel burn and editing the fuel scalar per Fraser's instructions. Scroll down until you get to CT's post.

http://www.cbfsim.org/cb-bb/viewtopic.php?t=5981

Hope this helps.

Rgds

John

Post by **MALTBY D** » 01 Aug 2006, 12:03

G-AODG - thanks John

The Vanguard had me well puzzled, but I know what's gone on there now.
I did do the update as per Fraser's manual and I do indeed have the correct setting in my aircraft.cfg
IT'S JUST THAT IT'S SPELT WRONG!

I'm too lazy to type, so I copied the text from the manual & pasted it over the top of the original. It's missing the two underscore characters - oops.

From t'manual...

In order for the Fuel system to work properly the aircraft.cfg must be adjusted:

Open the Aircraft folder in FS9;
Open the Vickers Vanguard folder within;
Open the Aircraft.cfg file;
Scroll down until reaching the [GeneralEngineData] section;
Find the line which says:
fuel_flow_scalar
Edit this to read:
fuel flow scalar= 0.61

You can see here, FS9 has actually added a default value at the end (=1.000000) because it couldn't find the parameter...
[GeneralEngineData]
engine_type= 5
Engine.0= 0.000, -28.900, 2.000
Engine.1= 0.000, -14.600, 0.200
Engine.2= 0.000, 14.600, 0.200
Engine.3= 0.000, 28.900, 2.000
fuel flow scalar= 0.61
min_throttle_limit=-0.250000
fuel_flow_scalar=1.000000

DB, is this what you also have in your cfg?

The underscores are there in Chris Trott's post. Does this mean I've perhaps got an old version?

DM

Post by **DaveB** » 01 Aug 2006, 12:24

Hi DM,

I've just dragged the aircraft.cfg out for the Vanguard and mine reads 1.167 :shock: :think:

I have a flight booked to Orly so I'll pull the scalar down to .61 and see what pop's out then spend a couple of days tweaking the figures for FSNav

ATB

DaveB :tab:

Post by **Viscount Cornbank** » 01 Aug 2006, 14:05

Oops :redface: :redface:

I'm in the process of changing it anyway, that fuel system is very old. I'll probably make all the panels (VC802/810/953/F27/227/Argosy) available and bang up to date in the not too distant future, so they're all definative FS9 versions. Most are 99% ready. 748 only needs minor adjustments. Lets face it we might all still be flying FS9 this time next year :shock:

Currently using 0.78 scalar on the test panel

Fraser