Classic British Flight Sim

Hi Steve..

Points noted and already considered. I know it's not real but I take a modicum of interest in whatever it is I fly and learn as much as I can as a basis for how I'm going to get from A to B and back. It seems perhaps that I expect too much and will have to lump whatever I find next time I fly :roll: I'm not talking about 'real world' operations here. I'm talking about taking an aircraft and leaving it empty then moving on to something else.

While I don't want to take the fun out of it.. I often wonder why I bother

DaveB :tab:

What I try to do, and do not always succeed, is use the route fuel consumption figures plus the 75 minutes fuel. It doesn't always work but Ihave to use a calculator to work it out.

This is something I've done from the beginning, particularly on Viscounts, which, on the 800 at least, require sufficient fuel on board to enable the normal operating speed limit to be adhered to, this figure progressively reduces as fuel is burnt. As a rule of thumb I carry enough for 75 mins over and above route fuel.

IMHO this is something which should be programmed into Flynet for each aircraft type, a minimum fuel level on completion of each flight. Allowing a "reasonable" margin, below which the pilot would be stung. Considering in reality a pilot could easily find himself in court when landing on fumes, irrespective of aircraft type, it makes a lot more sense than the ridiculous taxy speed penalty or the badly calculated landing lamp conditions required to get penalised. As I think I may have commented before, the lower limit on the landing lights should only apply with the undercarriage extended.

cheers

Fraser

Tks for that Fraser

I wonder if our John could lob this at Konny :think:

ATB

DaveB :tab:

Dave/John

As a reflection on the real world all airlines have a minimum landing
fuel published in their GOM - for instance with AAY the figure is
5000 lbs of fuel - which as Chris said come out to about 1.00 hour
of flying , Now obviously these numbers are for a MD80 but you can
eyeball the per hour fuel burn for any aircraft and thats what you
should have as fuel remaining on landing

My suggestion to Konny et al for the new system is that realistic
fuel loading be added when the revisions are made to the program to
allow for alternate - a sample (obviously FARs not JARS) would be

numbers are dreamt up but it works

Fuel burn to destination (including climb/cruise) 8000 lbs/ 2.00hrs
Alternate fuel 2000 lbs/ 30 mins
Hold Fuel 3000 lbs 45 mins
Fuel required at brake release 13000 lbs 3.15
Taxi Fuel 1000 lbs 15 mins
Fuel required at Gate 14000 lbs 4.00


Assuming you overburn on flight for weather deviation or prehaps
slowing down for ai traffic

You should land with approx 4000# in tanks
If you had to divert figuring on a missed appraoch the number would drop
to 2000#

you can vary the fuel burn to suite the aircraft - frankly Im not really
happy with the numbers that come out of either FSNav or FSBuild for ANY
aircraft - the numbers are NOT accurate

Now the question is this - how much revenue are you losing by landing with that much fuel as Flynet seems to predicate any profit on the absolute
least amount of fuel in the aircraft at shutdown (which as we know in the
real world is totally unrealistic)

Sorry to natter on but a/. this what I do for a living every week and
b/. For our own VA I would also like to have a
more realistic fuel loading simulation in
flynet.

BTW if Konney ever starts loading present real wold prices for JETA
both CBFS and VHA will be out of business

Cheers

Leif (Yes its 113.65 a barrel and only two airlines in the US are making
a profit - and I work for one (It is also number 1 in RPMs for
domestic traffic in the US for the first quarter 2008)Source ATM


Justifiably proud

Hi all,

I've been watching this thread to see what comments it brings forth. Some of our newer pilots may not have picked up on this issue and may be unaware of the problems it causes. Given the choice of aircraft with differing amounts of fuel, most pilots will plump for the one with the most. How many of those pilots though, have previously left aircraft behind with a low fuel low and taken another with a higher amount of fuel?

To try and summarise for pilots, both old and new, here is our position regarding fuel as I see it :-

Operations

• When we take delivery of new aircraft for the VA, unless it's been previously owned by another VA it will have empty fuel tanks. The first pilot to fly it has to take the financial 'hit' to load reserves plus his estimated block fuel for his trip.

• Once the reserves have been added, they shouldn't need to be eaten into (how often do you hold or divert?) and each subsequent flight should only need to refuel the estimated block fuel as the 'reserves' should still be there.

• Pilots should establish their own reserve fuel which should be at least enough for one hour – I personally like a bit more! Leif has given a good example of real life operations which can be applied equally as well in FS.

• Consider the unexpected. If you are flying real weather do you really know what headwinds you may encounter on your flight? You may wish to add a bit extra ‘in case’.


Economics (fuel prices and ‘tankering’)

• Look ahead at your destination airports and check fuel prices. Work out before-hand where it is advantageous to take extra fuel onboard to minimise fuel uplift at the dearer airports.

• If it is going to be your last flight on that aircraft and you are going to leave it for someone else to fly, still consider the fuel price of the airport where you are going to leave the aircraft. If your departure airport has cheaper fuel than where you will be leaving it, some extra fuel above reserves for the next pilot would be a nice ‘gift’ to leave them. Who knows, you may well be that next pilot a few weeks down the road.

+++++++++++++

It is always nice and satisfying when you turn in a decent profit on a flight and you get paid accordingly. It may be tempting, or indeed ‘standard practise’, for some to do that last flight without having to pay for a large fuel bill. The fact that they leave an aircraft nearly empty with ‘begger the consequences’ for the next pilot that has to pay for his reserves again, not entering their heads. I would like all pilots to review their fuel planning and put into practise the above ‘guidelines’ with immediate effect.

Regards

John

It seems to me from my time spent on this forum that almost all of us have no problem speaking our minds.

If I was guilty of doing this I would not mind in the least bit being told and yes I don't mind being named on the forum as the pilot responsible. I do my best to fuel plan but sometimes it just doesn't work out, if I knew I had landed the next pilot in it by leaving the aircraft empty I would be only too happy to take a loss and fill it up.

Why dont we just do it that way? Either by PM or a dedicated forum thread because lets be honest this kind of thing is not done on purpose but the pilot responsible needs to know then they can plan better and by doing so make their own experience more enjoyable. If it offends anyones sensibilities then perhaps they should not be using FlyNet.

Johnny

Hi Guys,

I don't often pipe up, but I don't see an aircraft without fuel as being the end of the world. In the end all of this, the forum, flynet, even the aircraft are free. The money isn't real.

What I would say, is if there are persistant offenders, then fair enough, they are taking the proverbial wee and should be delt with in some maner. I've noticed lately a lot of Aircraft lying arround with a fair bit of fuel at their home base (namely Heathrow.) I've done it before myself on long multi sector trips to try to avoid having to buy fuel at an expensive location, I'll fill up more at a less expensive one.

I think we all need to behave like Gentlemen again, a little give and take.

And as one of my fellow Admins will always quote... "Its NOT real"

A measured reply John and Ben.
I feel the pilots using this VA are getting a bit of a slap from the management.
As the management fly with us mere pilots perhaps the rules should made
a little clearer.

Steve

Hi Steve,

I think the thing we're trying to avoid is becoming overly prescriptive. Its a real bugger to get right at times and the temptaion is to go rule daft, but we'd really rather not.