CF104

Sorry to say but you're wasting your time. I've gone through all of this with the initial release for MSFS 2020. INI is totally silent when presented with factual documented evidence. They even reposted the 'how to prevent fuel venting' video for 2024 which is completely wrong for any T-33 ever built. I used to work on the CT-133 (Canadian version) and they don't seem to appreciate input from users with real world experience. There's also a lot wrong with the engine fuel burn and indications. Here's a link to entertain you regarding the fuel system on the MSFS 2020 version. https://forum.inibuilds.com/topic/23761-quick-question-on-the-fuel-system-coding/ Cheers, John

Hi Eddie, Thanks for the update. I don't plan on joining another forum to report this. I feel it is incumbent on IniBuilds to report this to WT as you have incorporated their product as part of your package. Regards, John

The charts are from a 1962 revision of the RCAF T-33 Mk.3 Aircraft Operating Instruction. I have a 2001 revision but all of the fuel/range performance numbers are in pounds of fuel and not gallons. Yes, the fuel consumption is definitely too high at low power settings and too low at higher settings. This appears to manifest itself in better speed performance at lower power settings along with greater range and less speed performance at high power settings. I was going to post a range performance comparison but all it does is confirm the numbers I posted here and it would probably be much closer once the performance matches these charts. And it's a bit more work as the range charts fuel is in Imperial gallons whereas the sim is in US gallons. Cheers, John

Same test but at S.L. All parameters are the same. Very similar trend in performance. Seem that the drag or thrust curves could use some tweaking. Cheers, John

Hello, I have just charted out the level speed performance at FL300. The chart indicates over-performance at lower power settings and under-performance at higher power settings. I've attached the Level Speed Performance Chart for the CT-133 and have annotated the results on the chart. It would appear to be either an airframe drag or engine power issue. I' will be charting out another one at a lower altitude to see if there's a correlation. Regards, John

Thank you for responding. As someone who takes the time to report bugs, and yes the fuel system is bugged, as well as provide some in depth knowledge and reasoning behind such a report I do find is a bit disingenuous that there is no acknowledgement of the content. A simple thank you for the information and that it's been forwarded to the devs would suffice. I read into the statement "We see it in a stable position at the moment however that does not mean we've abandoned the product.", that INI Builds is stating that the product meets its promises. I highly disagree by quoting the following from your product page. "The in-depth, realistic systems simulations allow you to dive deep into its intricacies, from avionics to engine management.". Both the fuel system and RR engine don't meet the "in-depth and realistic" part of the statement. I've been working on aircraft for 42 years, including the CT-133, and can honestly state that the T-33 is a stupid simple aircraft. It shouldn't be too hard to get it right. I don't mind buying a product in initial release but it feels like this one was rushed. Regards, John

Hello, Just wondering if anybody from INI Builds is monitoring this thread? I added some relevant information regarding the T-33 fuel system but it appears this thread is in radio silence. Cheers, John

Door warnings are a Level 2 warning and will show the door ECAM page prior to the second engine start. The ECAM priority is a bit of a confusing beast considering the amount of system integration going on. I've attached a simplified diagram that shows the 12 flight phases and the ECAM pages that have priority. Within these flight phases there are multitudes of system inhibits and are too numerous to list here. The logic for the ECAM doors page is covered in flight phase 1 and 12. Any door warning within these phases will bring up the DOOR ECAM page with the following exceptions. The APU start and ENGINE start overlap phase 1 and 2. Engine has the top priority during start and the ECAM will not switch over to the DOOR page at this time. The APU has lower priority over the ENGINE page but will inhibit the DOORS page during APU start until the APU RPM is >95% for 15 seconds or the APU Master Switch is selected OFF. Once the second engine is started the DOOR ECAM page is inhibited. If a Level 2 DOOR warning is indicated via the Master Caution and Aural Warning in any other flight phase, the crew will have to manually select the DOOR ECAM page. In Flight Phase 12 the DOOR ECAM page is back to the priority. Cheers, John

Hi, On the G3x with the fuel main page open, go to the Fuel Calc page and then back to the main page. Both the oil pressure and temperature bars lose their color bands. Closing and reopening the fuel page rectifies this. Cheers, John

As the title states, see attached screen shot. Cheers, John

Definitely a rag with grit. When I was working on these, the aircrew would have never taken it like this. Cheers, John

I'm curious as to the information you have regarding this. IRL, if this were to happen, the jet would be grounded to fix the problem. If this is from a civilian operator of a T-33, then their jet needs some work. Cheers, John

No Worries. I just love waking up the old grey matter to remember the CT-133. It's a very simple jet compared to what I have worked on. Cheers, John

Sabre drain venting is more of an airframe issue and not the engine. As a fuel user, the engine doesn't have influence over the fuel vent system. Regardless, fuel venting will require taking a lot of things apart to fix. Cheers, John

Just adding some technical information as the fuel feed system is NOT working as it does in real life. With no mechanical failures, you can have the tip tanks , LE tanks, Wing tanks and fuse tank pumps all on without venting fuel overboard. There are 3 fuel supply float valves in the fuse tank for each wing group. These float valves are placed at different levels in the fuse tank to provide feed priority to the fuse tank as follows; #1 tip tanks, #2 LE tanks, #3 wing tanks. This means that with all pumps on (gang loaded), the tips feed until empty, then the LE tanks will feed until empty followed by the wing tanks until empty. This all happens automatically due to the float valves and there will not be any venting overboard even with all the pumps on. Gang loading the pumps is not a usual procedure but will NOT result in venting. With the 3 float valves working properly there is no way to overfill the fuselage tank and cause venting. The only way to get fuel venting through the sabre drain is if one or more of the 3 float valves in the fuselage tank has failed, a LE tank or wing tank check valve and boost pump is failed or through unusual attitudes. The information on the way it is currently modelled had to come from somewhere but my experience and training on the CT-133 say otherwise.. Cheers, John