Hello Captain's
Here is the first preview of CFM (Concorde Fuel Management) CPS-NG plugin.
Screenshot 2023-08-11 182927.jpg
This plugin will allow you to follow the fuel consumption during the flight in order to check if it is correct...
Stay tuned.
Pierre
wow... mon cerveau va encore chauffer :)
Hello,
What is CFM (Concorde Fuel Management) ?
This is a plugin designed to track fuel consumption during the flight.
In its previous version, the user had to manually enter the 1st waypoint overflown at Mach 2.0, the amount of fuel on board and the time of crossing the waypoint.
CFM, then plotted a 'normal' consumption curve on the graph.
Then, at each waypoint, he had to enter the amount of fuel on board.
A second curve traced the actual consumption, allowing the curves to be compared and the necessary decisions to be made in the event of major differences.
The version under development will be able to retrieve all this information directly from the simulator used.
The user will only have to launch the plugin and the curves will be drawn automatically without his intervention.
It will suffice for this to have installed the well-known FSUIPC or XPUIPC depending on the simulator used.
More details in a future post...
Break the sound barrier
Pierre
Excellent. I patiently await its release. 8)
CFM development update:
I am actually testing the Simulator/CFM data exchange.
The results are very encouraging.
Two screenshots as preview.
Screenshot 2023-08-20 120158.jpg
Screenshot 2023-08-20 121157.jpg
Hello Captain's,
Continuing the development of CFM, it seems that the equivalent of FSUIPC for X-Plane (XPUIPC) has compatibility issues with X-Plane 12.
So while waiting for an update of XPUIPC, it will be necessary to enter the data (FOB and ETA) manually for each waypoint, as in the old version of CFM.
For FSX, P3D, and MSFS2020, the automatism works perfectly.
The detection of the simulator used is automatic.
Pierre
I use XPUIC for hardware communication (yoke and throttle). I was also using it for atc software. XPUIC at home works fine. Then see with your program indeed
Unfortunately, I made tests with XPUIPC, but It freezes both CFM and X-Plane.
Some important data used by CFM cannot be transmitted from X-Plane.
I hope this good utility will be upgraded in the future.
I don't know if this could solve your problem but I saw that there was a workaround. Attached is a txt file that explains this solution. If after reading you think it can be a solution for you, I will give you the download link ;) [url="https://concordeperformancesystem.org/forum/index.php?action=dlattach;attach=265;type=preview;file"]ReadMe.txt[/url]
Thank you Smati, but CFM doesn't use XPWideClient so this workaround cannot work. Sorry.
First test with XP12. (See Concorde heritage topic for details)
Hi Captain's,
Here is the first flight LFPG-KJFK for which the fuel has been monitire by CFM-NG.
As the fuel values are only recorde when the aircraft speed is above Mach 1.72 (Reheats off), the LINND, OWENZ, CAMNR and at gate KJFK have not been recorded. I added them manually.
I will modify CFM so that it will done automatically upon arrival.
[url="https://concordeperformancesystem.org/forum/index.php?action=dlattach;attach=272;type=preview;file"]CFM_02-09-2023_LFPG-KJFK.pdf[/url]
You can see that the Concorde FXP and the Gaston's mod is fuel efficient, compared to the real Concorde.
Pierre
Does this mean i should change fuel consumption? how much up?
May be a little bit.
With Philippe Gleize, in 2010, we made hundreds test flights to adjust the virtual FE behavior and the fuel burn using CFM.
Finally, the curve (red) was very near the black one during the main part of flight. Through the descent and destination subsonic step the red curve passed below the black one then rejoined it at landing with a less than 2000kg difference.
I think the main improvement for Concorde Colimata and Heritage should be that the bird can't reach FL 500 before having a weight of 155t. (ISA 0) and FL 600 only with a weight of 98.6t. (ISA 0) or less.
That means we need to redesign the flightmodel or increase weight or decrease the engine power.
I don't know how are made the X-Plane flight models.
Increasing weight has no sens because this reduce again the ceiling. Same result decreasing engines power
An aircraft has always a max ceiling depending of weight, thrust and of air density, itself depending of pressure and of temperature.
Here is an interesting document on aerodynamics.
Search "ceiling" into
Document (https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Wg9A8Li_hV1osRisYCghkVuX-EXYfYf_/view?usp=drive_link).
Pierre
It is actually impossible to test CFM, as X-Plane real weather doesn't work.
Waiting for fix....
Maybe that's what's causing Xplane to crash then. What Gastonreif thinks
I have decreased dry engine thrust and increased fuel consumption for the first try and got very decent results at MTOW.
Thank you Gaston.
I will test it as soon I will have the next Package. ;)
Here is CFM report from KJFK-LFPG whole flight at FL520 @ M1.96 with experimental flightmodel.
Humm, not so bad...
What fuel bias did you use, 100, 95, else ?
im not sure what you mean, where do i find it? i put 95 tons of fuel at MTOW
CPS-NG has a parameter into control panel named "Fuel Bias".
It is set to 100 by default (Real aircraft).
Try with it set to 94 or 95 and plan the flight.
ok, was set to default
Paris to New York with headwind around 50knots, getting closer to the reference, fuel bias default, FL520 M2.0, same experimental flight model
Great,
The Red line under the black curve at the end of the flight is normal, because at FL520 the fuel burn is greater than at FL 550/570/600.
Next time, try to climb at FL550 after 40° longitude...
Experimental flight model proves that current flight model is overpowered so i reduced engine power a bit which demands higher fuel flow to match black reference line from CFM and also is not easy to climb directly to FL600 but needs to be done by steps along route. See charts for both trips between JFK and CDG. Western route achieved FL600 at around 800nm before JFK and eastern route only upto FL560 to save some fuel which is clearly visible from the graph.
Hi Gaston,
The curve seems perfect.
Flying FL560 does not save fuel if air temperature is ISA minus, only if ISA plus and depends of aircraft weight.
I would prefer talking about weight and temperature instead of distance to locate the FL600.
That reference curve is valid for JFK-CDG route or can be used anywhere?
Yesterday i was reproducing trip of minister Chirac from Lima to Hao in 1987, one of the longest non-stop flight
of Concorde. See official reports from pictures. I landed with only 400kg fuel more than reported 15.400kg.
Same distance, same weights. I will implement that new flightmodel in next Heritage package update.
Seems accurate and without CFM tool i could not make it. Good job Pierre.
Hi Gaston,
Great news.
CFM can be used with any supersonic (only) flight.
Waiting to test the new flight model... ;)
Pierre
Hi Pierre, here is new flight model, place it to the main Concorde folder and overwrite the old one. Get ready for slightly different performance especially at high loads.
forgot to add two files, add them to concorde_fxp/objects
Hi Gaston,
Thanks a lot.
Will test it...
Any feedback? let me know if this performance works for you guys
Hi Gaston,
Sorry for late reply, I'm not in a good shape these few days.
I will test the flight model ASAP.
@gastonreif Around 12t too much = TO not aviable for a lfpg/kjfk/41 people flight. Unable for me to use the software
@smati You are talking about CPS-NG setup? i was asking for test flight breaking mach 1, it has no effect on planning via CPS-NG
@gastonreif Good evening. I just tested with acf and objects files. To get to M01, it's very difficult. But above all, to go above M01, it is impossible because the plane is too heavy. I disengaged Maxclim and used vs. As soon as I reach the good configuration (VS / speed), if I slightly increase VS (for example 500 feet/min), the speed drops and the VS/speed configuration is no longer good. In addition, fuel consumption is enormous. I used half the fuel to get to M 1.10. For the moment I am going back to the original acf file.
Ok Smati Thanks. Stay with the old file. The new flightmodel for some reason works only on my machine and i cant find why.