Simbrief profile

[danhenri]

Here is my Simbrief profile for the Moo. The profile is based from the Kingair BE20. The weights are accurate. Nevertheless, the fuel calculation is necessarily approximate, because you cannot create a profile from scratch in Siembrief. The fuel consumption should be less than 250 pounds per engine and per hour, so around 450-500 pounds per hour. Of course without reserve, alternate and winds calculations. I will check this on my next flights and maybe update the profile using the P000 option.

Payload : 9 passengers, 85kg each (187 pounds), 55 pounds for the luggage.

The equipments of the aircraft are very basic. I use the model with GPS. I did not fill the PBN field (the Kingair BE20 has not).

https://www.simbrief.com/system/dispatch.php?sharefleet=30045_1658249223478

All suggestions welcome in this topic

Edited July 19, 2022 by danhenri

[ddunwoody]

A "close enough" PBN for the GNS GPS variant would be something like: A1B2C2D1L1O2S1.  I'm using ICAO equipment code DFGRSY. 

[manguras]

Hello friends.

Any CSL model for online flight?

[danhenri]

Edit : to get a more accurate fuel consumption planning, I suggest to set the fuel factor to P30 in Siembrief (this modification has to be done by users for each flight unfortunately).

For example, for a flight from LGSR (Santorini) to LGSK (Skiathos), Siembrief calculates : taxi + trip = 1h 10 mn and 691 lbs (with a fuel factor of P30). My effective duration flight (taxi included) was 1 hr 7 mn with a fuel consumption of 653 lbs.

The TOGAMSIM aircraft has perfomances pretty close to those I could get from the POH. For example, at 18 000 ft with an average ISA+12° (calculated by Siembrief for this trip, coherent with the outside air tempetarure of about -10° observed in the plane at this altitude : I'm using FS Global Weather), I got :

Torque : 70 ; Fuel flow per engine : 255 ; CAS : 205 ; Ground speed : 270 (with an average headwind of 7 kts).

From the POH tables, at ISA+10° and for a total weight of 10 500 lbs, the figures are :

Torque : 76 ; FF/E : 288 ; CAS : 212 ; TAS : 282

Curiously, the POH indicates an IOAT of -3° at 18 000 ft (instead of -10). I know that the temperature is decreasing by 2°/1000 ft only below 10 000 ft, but it cannot explain such a difference. The calibration gauge maybe, different in the real aircraft ?

A part of the differences may also comes from the RPM settings: I flew at 98 RPM (as far as we may catch it from the gauge), as the POH recommends a 96 RPM.

I also noticed that in hot weather conditions (as those that we have in Europe at this moment), is's not interesting to fly above 19000 ft (on high routes) for 1 or 2 hours trips: the climb performances  are poorer and the time of climb is much too high, without much gain in terms of speed or fuel consumption.

Edited August 14, 2022 by danhenri

[CaptCrash]

Just and update regarding simbrief. I did submit a request for an MU2 profile based on the POH and AFM. They said they'll add it but no idea on time frame

 

[CaptCrash]

Quote

Curiously, the POH indicates an IOAT of -3° at 18 000 ft (instead of -10). I know that the temperature is decreasing by 2°/1000 ft only below 10 000 ft, but it cannot explain such a difference. The calibration gauge maybe, different in the real aircraft ?

@danhenri The discrepancy you note is due to compression heating and the limited recovery coefficient of the temperature probe on the actual MU2. Based on the POH values I have identified the recovery coefficient of the temperature probe to be about 0.6. This is important for the following equation:
T_static = T_total * (1 + 1 / (0.2 * C_recovery * Mach^2))
Where T_static is the static outside air temp, T_Total is the indicated outside air temperature, C_recovery is the energy recovery coefficient of the probe. Modern probes are 1 but those are aspirated types on jets, on stuff like the MU it would be between 0.6 or 0.8 depending on type.

Regarding your performance issues, you may want to try out my FM modification, it gets the plane to within 1% of cruise POH values. I haven't evaluated takeoff or landing distances yet.

[danhenri]

Thanks CaptCrash for this much interesting precisions and for your Siembrief submission.