Hello everyone,

I'm looking for the above information. I can't seem to locate it in the manuals available at CS. Have I overlooked the obvious?

I tested the C-130E with full tanks (external tanks included), namely +/- 65'000 lbs and 26'455 lbs payload, close to MTOW but not quite there.

Cruise level was FL260 westbound over the Atlantic. Cruise fuel consumption all-in-all about 8000 lbs/hour.

I left the plane on autopilot and went off to attend to other duties. I came back a little too late and found my plane in the drink, roughly 2'500 nm from my point of origin.

It seems pretty consistent with information I found on internet but I was curious to check it against actual range charts, if available.

Any ideas?

Thanks in advance

regards,

Kevin 

Hi Kevin,

A while ago I found and downloaded the flight manual for the EC-130G which is the US Navy variant using virtually identical engines. A manual for the -E and/or -H models has so far eluded capture.

This AFM has a full performance section and is available from Avialogs.

There are pages and pages of graphs for specific fuel consumption, range prediction etc which should answer all your questions, and I have used the info to produce a table for PFPX which I am adding to slowly. So far it has Max Climb, Long Range Cruise, 290kt Cruise, and Max Cruise at limiting speeds for three AUW regimes, descent and holding.

Apart from climb speeds to 20,000 ft, none of the documentation that CS had available for download gives any clue about power settings, fuel flows etc. I'm working on a performance guide based on the AFM data, that will contain climb speeds and fuel flow settings Vs altitude, and for the various cruise profiles provided for in the AFM. Once that's done I'll make it available as a pdf for folk to use.

Also, the CS aeroplane fuel flows are about 17% higher than the real aircraft. I have edited the [turboprop_engine]section of the aircraft.cfg to read: powerspecificfuelconsumption=0.846888 instead of 1.0000 which is too high.

I have tested it at high weights and at a variety of flight levels and it works pretty well. I would suggest this to the people at CS but I haven't been around for long enough to be allowed to post anything other than replies.

In the real aeroplane, power is set either using TIT or fuel flow. TIT will not work on the CS plane for setting power, but fuel flow works a treat. While testing I set the wind to 0 and then used the GPS groundspeed to determine the actual TAS.

Specifically relating to your post, at 26000 ft at maximum cruise limited by 1010 degrees TIT at 150,000 lb AUW, you should have a TAS of 316 kts and total fuel flow of 4928 lb/hr which is 1232 per engine. The CS plane will let you set much more than that and you'd think nothing of it. 8000pph is more like climb power at around 2-3000ft.

If you're interested in this stuff let me know and maybe we can communicate more on the subject.

Cheers,

Chris

Hi there XPilot

There is an organisation called Avialogs who maintain an extensive on-line library of aeroplane manuals of all kinds from all over the world. For a modest fee you can join for 6 months and download what ever you want. Forum rules prevent me from including the link here but it is a standard web address using their name ...avialogs dot com...

I downloaded the flight manual for the EC-130G which is the Navy variant, and has -423 engines which as far as I can make out have roughly the same performance as the -15 engines. I think as far as we're concerned, the main difference is the designation.

From this book I have learned that the primary methods of setting power in this airplane is by TIT or torque, and in some instances by setting fuel flow. TIT is not modelled accurately enough to work in this simulation, and the INDICATED torque seems wildly off the mark too. But I've been working through the graphs and tables to find out what the fuel flow should be at the power setting required to maintain a particular airspeed at a certain weight and altitude. After trying a whole bunch of weights and speeds at various altitudes, I found that by setting the flight manual fuel flow, the speed acieved was up to 30 KTAS too slow, and flying at the correct speed required around 15 - 16% higher fuel flows. Hence the proposed correction to the specific fuel consumption. All that really does is change the indicated fuel flow back to something closer to the book figures. It's not 100% accurate over the whole flight envelope, but it's not bad.

Using the flight manual data, I've made a text file for Professional Flight Planner X which seems to work ok, and I will slowly add more tables to it as time permits. Bear in mind these are the book figures, so if you don't "correct" the sfc in the aircraft.cfg file, you will need to tell the flight planner to add about 15.7% to the planned burns.

Using these tables from the PFPX file, I'm working on producing a set of tables that can be used in the "cockpit" as power setting tables.  Feel free to contact me if you want some more info or the files.

Cheers,

Chris

Hi Xpilot,

Sorry, I have been away from the forum for a while. I tried to message you but I am not allowed to until I have ten posts on this forum. Must be getting close!

I'm a bit busy over the next few days but I will start working on these tables again soon.

Meanwhile, the file for PFPX is available for anyone who wants it. It is not completely finished yet but has climb and descent tables, and tables for cruise at LRC, 290 kts, and 3 different MCR tables depending on weight. These all use data straight from a real world flight manual.

Regards,

Chris
a l i e n 5 0 0 0 @ y a h o o . c o m

X24 wrote on Jul 16^th, 2014 at 5:10pm:

I've also discovered this entry in the aircraft.cfg. BUT, the LC-130 doesn't have this entry, why? The enginedata and the rest is identically with the other models. So I decided to delete this entry at the other models. I think without this entry the range is more accurate 

Right. And when you check the other models - there is this entry. The question is now, why only have the LC-130 not have this entry?

The next point is this ";H:maximum_torque(23030)" entry. The H-models have also the standard-value of 19600 - should the user change it? And why? What is the difference?

Hi X24 !
Can you send me the template of the CS C130 ?
Thank you