Jump to content

Take-Off Performance


David Katona

Recommended Posts

David Katona
7 hours ago, Dave Woycek said:

T/O Perf calculation appears to be back to normal :-)

Thank you so much for your continued effort, David, and for providing us your fantastic tool!

Yeah no worries. I spent the weekend shouting with the webservice provider, so I'm off to have a beer :) 

  • Like 4
Link to post
  • Replies 586
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • David Katona

    126

  • Brad Zimmer

    30

  • Riccardo_Parachini

    25

  • Igor Petrov

    21

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

UPDATE: Available at http://wabpro.cz/A320/   Hey everyone, I am planning to publish my take-off performance calculation website in a few days. Figures are based on FCOM performance cha

Hi guys, I have enabled the W & B tab on the website. Right now kilograms only! First select engine type on the Take-Off tab, as different CoG envelopes apply. CONFIG: If you select a co

Just to show you guys what I am working on for the W&B page... This is rather for people who actually care about the balance   It will show the weight and balance positions and the limits. The r

Posted Images

G€offr€y F€rnand€z

@David Katona great !

You should licence it to something like GNU/GPL so that other people could store a copy (duly credited) of your work on their servers, allowing a capability to restore things from another channel. Maybe ;-)

Link to post
Nick Farrington

Hi David thank you for doing this program. Random question do you no why i can not select flap 3 for takeoff as i know some airlines on the A320 do use for for takeoff.

Link to post
Liam Carbin
36 minutes ago, Nick Farrington said:

Hi David thank you for doing this program. Random question do you no why i can not select flap 3 for takeoff as i know some airlines on the A320 do use for for takeoff.

He hasn't set it up for flap 3 yet :)

Link to post
Gerald Gervinet

SKBO (8361ft) at MTOW (77T) give me flex 45 t/o !!

your program take into account the airport elevation? same question with temperature

SKBO 131400Z VRB05KT 9999 SCT020 BKN080 16/11 A3039

 

Link to post
Zsolt Monostori
7 hours ago, Tintamare said:

SKBO (8361ft) at MTOW (77T) give me flex 45 t/o !!

your program take into account the airport elevation? same question with temperature

SKBO 131400Z VRB05KT 9999 SCT020 BKN080 16/11 A3039

 

I am sure this could be asked in a somewhat more polite manner too,

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
David Katona
13 hours ago, Tintamare said:

SKBO (8361ft) at MTOW (77T) give me flex 45 t/o !!

your program take into account the airport elevation? same question with temperature

SKBO 131400Z VRB05KT 9999 SCT020 BKN080 16/11 A3039

 

It does up to 2000 feet. Performance data in the FCOMs are available for 0, 1000 and 2000 feet airport elevations, which covers the majority of the airports.

Link to post
David Katona
5 hours ago, Max Vargas said:

Excellent tool Dave! Thanks.

Could you implement a window to enter the dry operating weight? Just a suggestion.

I am glad you like it. Development at the moment is paused because I simply do not have the time, but it will continue for sure so I am considering all ideas. Please elaborate. How would you change the DOW of this aircraft? And if you change the DOW, how do you know the DOI? For the time being the FSLABS DOWs and DOIs for both types of engines are hard coded.

Link to post
Gerald Gervinet
19 hours ago, David Katona said:

It does up to 2000 feet. Performance data in the FCOMs are available for 0, 1000 and 2000 feet airport elevations, which covers the majority of the airports.

Ok thanks

Link to post
Zachary Kerr

This is awesome.  And it’s the reason we have such an amazing FlightSim community. You built this phenomenal app and you did it because of your dedication and passion to the hobby. For no other reason. And it shows!  It makes our community such a special place. Thank you!  I’ll be sure to drop you a donation thru PayPal.  You deserve it!

  • Like 2
Link to post
Max Vargas
On 5/14/2018 at 2:56 PM, David Katona said:

I am glad you like it. Development at the moment is paused because I simply do not have the time, but it will continue for sure so I am considering all ideas. Please elaborate. How would you change the DOW of this aircraft? And if you change the DOW, how do you know the DOI? For the time being the FSLABS DOWs and DOIs for both types of engines are hard coded.

Unfortunately I don't now the DOW or DOI of this bus. I heard it is modeled against a real bus but not sure which one or registration. I am sure this information could be accessed from the developers. Also the DOW should be modified for pre-flight because it is an operational weight, so it's not the same a holiday configuration or a scheduled flight, in my opinion crew should allow up to 8 (3/5) instead of 6 to have more choices. Catering configurations varies depending on flights, if it is a short haul or a long one. What catering are they using I don't know probably a C. All these elements change the DOW as you know and we should be able to modify them (btw I don't like using the MCDU for all these things).

Regards,

 

Max

Link to post
Norman Blackburn

Max

Most of these options are fixed as you have found.  Another product, aimed at the commercial market will offer such changes however for now we don’t envisage this feature being made available in the current product.

Link to post
  • 2 weeks later...
David Katona

Unfortunately the CFM version of the a319 will not be supported on my website in the near future (due to lack of performance data available), however good news is that the IAE will be added shortly. I have to get myself used to that EPR display, I knew that day would come eventually :) 

  • Thanks 2
Link to post
David Katona
1 hour ago, Kamil Juvat said:

@David Katona I might be able to help you with data for CFM.

I don't seem to have the option to send you a PM, but if you can, please drop me a message. My issue with the CFM is the engine rating simulated (5B7), which is quite rare, so I am unable to find FCOM for it.

Link to post
TH0R5T€N KlRCHH€lM

Anyway, I never have been that creative, but if your short term memory is less perfect (as in my case) - the following scratch sheet can be helpful ...

Hints concerning the use of various  parts of equipment during take off are always welcome (Please with Reference to the relevant sections in the FCOMs, in FCTM or in FISM).

Thanks to David for taking a first glance on it.

A similar scratch sheet for cruise, approach and landing is currently in work.

Have a good day, folks

Guinea

Scratchpad 01.jpg

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
TH0R5T€N KlRCHH€lM

And the same for cruise, approach and landing ... :-) I guess, I will add the thing as a PDF file in the documents section here at this forum in the next few days.

Scratchpad 02.jpg

  • Like 1
Link to post
Ayush Roy

Great work with the new app David! One question though, I don't understand what the small plane logo refers to in the Weight and Balance section.

I get this following message: Use this mode only if you can enter 60/60/60 or 60/66/60 passenger config in the MCDU! No weight compensation will be added to the cargo holds for the extra passengers 

What does this feature exactly do? Is this any special configuration? 

Thanks!

Link to post
David Katona
39 minutes ago, Ayush Roy said:

Great work with the new app David! One question though, I don't understand what the small plane logo refers to in the Weight and Balance section.

I get this following message: Use this mode only if you can enter 60/60/60 or 60/66/60 passenger config in the MCDU! No weight compensation will be added to the cargo holds for the extra passengers 

What does this feature exactly do? Is this any special configuration? 

Thanks!

Long story short: nobody should change their cfg files.. I just wasn't happy with the FSLABS limited passenger config. I don't mind changing the cfg until there is an official option to do so (I am sure that is coming shortly considering the gravity of the product), but as I changed the cfg I made a commitment that I will not report any bugs ever, as it might be because of me changing the cfg. I don't like the workaround of adding cargo weight to holds to compensate for the normal PAX config weights. If you don't click on it, my website support the limited PAX config of FSLABS, if you do click on it, you have to change things in the CFG, but overall more realistic until an update comes along with an option to do this officially.

  • Like 1
Link to post
David Katona

Maybe someone knows this I wonder: I cannot always find the NADP to be used on all the charts (using LIDO). I am not sure if I am not being thorough enough, or for some airports it is really just not there. How does this work in real life? I would think companies have a preference, but it also depends on the airport. I have a list of many European airports and their NADP, whether it should be NADP1 or NADP2. I was thinking to add this, so when you select the airport (or runway) the required NADP would be shown on the website. Do you think it would be useful? 


DUS:
1651071701_ScreenShot2018-06-13at08_16_34.png.fc36e65cc2ed96fc73467fe98ec31697.png

PRG:
1186977682_ScreenShot2018-06-13at08_16_20.png.2ed746f2807dcb769bf6e54c1eee5ab7.png

 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Edward Spence

Hi David, would you mind sharing which part and of which cfg you changed?  I'd love to be able to use this tool with 180pax rather than limiting to 168.  

@Norman Blackburn are there any plans to allow 180 config in the future, or even the 186 config used by EZY and soon BA along with others?

Link to post
David Katona
33 minutes ago, Edward Spence said:

Hi David, would you mind sharing which part and of which cfg you changed?  I'd love to be able to use this tool with 180pax rather than limiting to 168.  

Hi Edward, I cannot possibly do that, surely that would break forum rules, etc.. I think the best way is to wait and see if that feature ever comes along allowing us to change the config.

Link to post
Riccardo_Parachini
Maybe someone knows this I wonder: I cannot always find the NADP to be used on all the charts (using LIDO). I am not sure if I am not being thorough enough, or for some airports it is really just not there. How does this work in real life? I would think companies have a preference, but it also depends on the airport. I have a list of many European airports and their NADP, whether it should be NADP1 or NADP2. I was thinking to add this, so when you select the airport (or runway) the required NADP would be shown on the website. Do you think it would be useful? 

DUS:
1651071701_ScreenShot2018-06-13at08_16_34.png.fc36e65cc2ed96fc73467fe98ec31697.png
PRG:
1186977682_ScreenShot2018-06-13at08_16_20.png.2ed746f2807dcb769bf6e54c1eee5ab7.png
 

I think It’s a very good idea adding NADP. Unfortunately as you say for some airports it is not written there. I know that in some places airlines can “contract “ the use of the NADP, provided they give evidence of respecting the noise profile the airport requests....


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Link to post
David Katona

Added these, I don't have data for other airports (if someone does, just let me know). Some airports are shown under both NADP1 and 2, like ENGM, because both are in use, and depends on the runway selection.

NADP 1:
DTMB,DTTA,DTTJ,EBBR,EBCI,EDDH,EFHK,EFKT,EFRO,EGBB,EGGP,EGPF,EGSS,EICK,ELLX,ENGM,ENZV,EPKK,EPWA,EPWR,EVRA,FALE,FAOR,GCTS,HECA,KORD,KSAN,LDDU,LDSP,LDZA,LEBL,LEMD,LEPA,LFBD,LFBZ,LFKJ,LFLL,LFMN,LFMP,LFPG,LGAV,LGIR,LHBP,LIEA,LIEE,LIEO,LIMC,LIME,LIMF,LIMJ,LIML,LIPE,LIPQ,LIPX,LIPZ,LIRA,LIRF,LIRN,LIRP,LIRQ,LJLJ,LKPR,LLBG,LMML,LOWS,LPAZ,LPFR,LPPD,LPPR,LPPS,LPPT,LSGG,LSZH,LYBE,LYNI,LZIB,OISS,OLBA,OPKC,RJAA,RJCC,RJTT,RKSI,RPLL,SBBR,SBGR,SBKP,UGTB,ULLI,VTBS,VTBU,WSSS,ZBAA,ZSPD,ZUCK

NADP 2:
BGSF,BGTL,BIAR,BIEG,BIKF,BKPR,CYEG,CYHZ,CYUL,CYVR,CYWG,CYYC,CYYR,CYYT,CYYZ,DAAG,DAAT,DNMM,DRRN,EDDB,EDDC,EDDF,EDDK,EDDL,EDDM,EDDN,EDDP,EDDS,EDDT,EDDV,EDDW,EDLW,EDXW,EGCC,EGGW,EGJJ,EGKK,EGLC,EGLL,EGPE,EGPH,EHAM,EHRD,EIDW,EINN,EKCH,ENBR,ENGM,ENTO,EPKT,ESGG,ESGJ,ESNZ,ESOW,ESSA,EYVI,FABL,FACT,FKYS,FOOL,FVHA,FZAA,GBYD,GCFV,GCLA,GCLP,GCRR,GMAD,GMMX,GOOY,GVAC,HEBA,HEGN,HELX,HEMA,HESH,HKJK,HKMO,HLLB,HLLT,HTDA,HTKJ,HTZA,KABQ,KATL,KBOS,KCLT,KCOS,KDEN,KDTW,KEWR,KFLL,KGEG,KIAD,KJFK,KLAS,KLAX,KLGB,KMCO,KMIA,KONT,KPHL,KSEA,KSFO,KSLC,KTPA,LATI,LBBG,LBPD,LBSF,LBWN,LCLK,LEAL,LEBB,LEGE,LEGR,LEIB,LEJR,LEMG,LEMH,LERS,LEST,LEVC,LEVX,LEZL,LFBO,LFKB,LFKC,LFKF,LFML,LFSB,LGKL,LGKO,LGKR,LGMK,LGRP,LGSA,LGSR,LGTS,LGZA,LHSM,LIBD,LIBR,LICA,LICC,LICJ,LIEE,LIPQ,LIRF,LIRP,LOWG,LOWK,LOWL,LOWW,LQSA,LROP,LSME,LSZB,LTAC,LTAI,LTBA,LTBJ,LTBS,LTFE,LWOH,LWSK,OEJN,OEMA,OERK,OIFM,OIIE,OIMM,OITT,OIZH,OJAI,OMAA,OMAL,OMDB,OMSJ,OOMS,OPRN,OSDI,RCTP,RJBB,RKSI,SBCT,SBGL,SBSV,TXKF,UCFM,UDYZ,UHSS,UKBB,UUDD,VABB,VHHH,VIAR,VIDP,VOGO,VRMM,VTSP,VVTS,WIII,WMKJ,WMKK

  • Like 2
Link to post
David Katona

Couple of things I am adding to the weight and balance part as I am adding the A319 to the database.
1. Selectable crew config and MTOW version:
1178024147_ScreenShot2018-06-14at22_10_12.png.8838e63b355316f28323611937be34bc.png

2. Weight and balance will take into account the performance limited RTOW (red dotted line), if RTOW is lower than MTOW:
293488577_ScreenShot2018-06-14at22_12_09.png.2c3b310954010ba4486c2215cdaa7518.png

  • Like 2
Link to post
David Katona
1 minute ago, Riccardo_Parachini said:

David, what about the last minute changes? Are in your list?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yes, indeed. Trying to balance the calculations so it won’t try to LMC half the payload :) but coming along nice. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Stu Antonio

Hi there,

can someone give me a workflow for this cool tool together with simbrief? I can't seem to figure it out....

I used to plan my flights in simbrief, using random pax-loads.

What I get:
- Route
- Total amount of pax
- Total payload weight (luggage)
- ZFW
- Block fuel
- TOW

What I don't get:
- Distribution of pax and deadload
- CG
- Stab trim

So something's always missing,  no matter wich tool I use first.

Simbrief first -> I don't get the needed deadload-distribution for the Perf-Tool, and there's no option to enter ZFW in the tool.

Perf-Tool (weight page) first -> I don't have the Block-Fuel yet. AND there's no option to enter the total payload distribution seperately in simbrief.

How do you guys handle this? 

 

BG

Stu

 

Link to post
David Katona

@Stu Antonio I just usually come up with the load on my website, get the ZFW without fuel (INIT without fuel figures entered). Then I use that ZFW on simbrief to get the flight plan. The whole point of that part of the website is the loadsheet capability, so I don't see the point of adding changeable ZFW on the site, because then all the deadload distribution would be missing. However, as the distribution is not important for the flight plan, I just change the ZFW on SimBrief and I don't care about PAX/Cargo figures seperately on there.

Link to post
Stuart Hay

@Stu Antonio I do almost the same thing except my load figures come from Vezy so I plug those (or hit random load until I get something very close) into the site and then take the ZFW to Simbrief. I then take the fuel figures form the Simbrief plan back into the site to do the final load sheet and take off calculation.

Link to post
David Katona

If any of you know of any good and reliable webhosting solution, please drop me a message. The promised 99.9% uptime with my current provider is rather 99.9% downtime...

Link to post
Till Lukas

David, any plans for adding the 319 CFM? Also there are seat configs with 138 out there (SWR). Could this be added as well to the WB section?

Link to post
David Katona
22 minutes ago, Till Lukas said:

David, any plans for adding the 319 CFM? Also there are seat configs with 138 out there (SWR). Could this be added as well to the WB section?

Hi Till,

Seat config is not an issue, I can most certainly add that.

Adding the CFM was planned, but at that time I did not know that the CFM 5B7 variant is being developed for the upcoming A319 instead of the more common lower rated CFM. I am unable to find FCOM Volume 2 for this aircraft and engine (A319-115). If I ever get one (or if FSL would eventually happen to add the lower rated CFM as an option for the A319) it will certainly be added.

Link to post
Stu Antonio
3 hours ago, David Katona said:

@Stu Antonio I just usually come up with the load on my website, get the ZFW without fuel (INIT without fuel figures entered). Then I use that ZFW on simbrief to get the flight plan. The whole point of that part of the website is the loadsheet capability, so I don't see the point of adding changeable ZFW on the site, because then all the deadload distribution would be missing. However, as the distribution is not important for the flight plan, I just change the ZFW on SimBrief and I don't care about PAX/Cargo figures seperately on there.

This worked quite well, thank you.
I can even put in zfw AND pax in simbrief (it calculates the payload accordingly to match the zfw, which then differs from the one on your website. I guess simbrief calculates the baggage in a different way than you do, but I don't mind).
 

I randomized the loads on your website first, giving me 101 pax and 89 bags. But is it realistic that some payload compartments stay empty? 
(I used to calculate the loads with TOPCAT before, where it distributed the payload across all four compartments quite equally....) 

Stu

 

Link to post

×
×
  • Create New...