Gungnir

Wow, they looked like that before? I had no idea. Looks incredible.

It's an option in the OIS.

I have one (LICJ), so there's more to this bug than just it being gone.

I can confirm. In general though, the aircraft ranges from "strange" to "unflyably broken" when starting from something else than cold & dark. Spawning in the air is just chaos, as anyone who has tried it will attest to. This is a sim-wide thing though, I'm pretty sure. Doing the landing challenges always felt silly when all the different aircraft basically have to boot up when you spawn.

I found this in the Fenix discord ISSUE: Sounds in FS2024 misbehaving, especially after changing views or pausing FIX: Caused by outdated Chaseplane installation, switch to the latest ‘Preview’ branch for SU7 compatibility. I do use chaseplane. I wonder if @Opelix and @Aaron Anderson and @RYR73MAX8 all were using chaseplane too when they experienced this?

I think you mean roll?

I am pretty sure I have heard them in cockpit videos, but yes, they are probably a bit too loud from the flightdeck currently.

Adding some findings here: The FCOM says that the ALTN field on the FUEL&LOAD page is just the estimated fuel to go from the destination to the alternate. In my current flight, I'm going to ESSA with alternate ESMS (about 300 NM away). The ALTN field is usually 4.5 T or so, which is reasonable, but occasionally it fluctuates to very unreasonable values. Clearly -0.9 T is just bugged and wrong. I think this is connected to the fluctuating values of EFOB @ destination during cruise that was introduced in 1.2.8, which is probably also a bug (you can see my TRIP fuel also fluctuating).

Of course, if someone is in the 7.2 beta we could check instantly

Asobo are not expecting anyone to change, like I posted earlier in the thread But it's not clear to me if the a350 even is affected by this bug. Rich over on the discord said that they had made various tweaks: "1.2.7 actually tweaked the cost index and fuel burn 1.2.8 tweaked the fms estimation logic under certain specific conditions." So they did change the fuel burn in 1.2.7 without mentioning it in the patch notes (which is a strange decision to me). This together with the fact that the reports of high fuel burn started coming after 1.2.7, not a week earlier when SU7.1 was released makes it quite frustrating that there's all this speculation in this thread. Some of us are acutally spending quite a lot of our free time to make the a350 better here. It would be great if the dev team could just say "oh yeah, that's because we increased the fuel burn". Anyway, as my tests show above, P11 is unrealistic (you fall into the sea instead of make it to manila) and the fuel flow / required thrust in cruise is unrealistic compared to actual cockpit footage.

I wrote in the discord thread but I'll post it here too: First evidence that something is wrong: if you try to recreate https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Longest_flights in simbrief with the new profiles at P11, they are all impossible. For example: for new york to manila in the a35k simbrief says I am lacking 17 tons of fuel/range. TEST 1: airspawned a a359 and compared it to this SAS jet in the FR24 youtube video. I refuelled to match the GW at 231 T, matched the temperatures at -1 degree ISA and climbed to the same level and speed. in the sim the FF is 3350 kg/h at around 85% thrust. In the real jet, by looking at several times in the video, it looks very steady at 3050--3100 kg/h at 80--81% thrust. clearly either there's a thrust issue or a drag issue in the sim. TEST 2: If I match the thrust figures instead then? At 81--82% like they have, my FF is even a bit lower than theirs. TEST 3: in this video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jOe9nZ3qYkk, they take off at FLEX +72 and their FF reaches about 8600 kg/h. I spawned an aircraft also at sea level, set the SAT to match. If I go FLEX 72, my thrust goes to 81% (no idea why it's not 65% like theirs actually), but if I set my thrust manually to 65% it matches well. So these findings are consistent with too high drag or too low thrust, since FF seems to be similar at similar thrusts, rather than too high fuel flow at given thrust. I also note that the cruise figures above, 3400 vs 3100 kg/h, is about 10% off, which matches the P11 figure. On a long flight, and if those numbers are representative of the whole cruise (it's just one altitude), I would expect the inibuilds aircraft to require P10 if the real aircraft could use P00 in simbrief.

The underlying performance issue is a simulator bug, it seems. Is someone on the beta branch 1.9.23.0 and can verify that drag/fuel flow is fixed there? Are the dev team confident that is the case @iniKyle ? Actually reading the inibuilds discord threads about the fuel issue is not particularly reassuring.

Which fuel factor (Pxx) in simbrief?

Perhaps this was fixed in 1.2.8, or the new AIRAC cycle fixed it, but I don't seem to be getting NAVAID NOT IN DATABASE for LEMD and EDDL anymore.

Will do, but hopefully the SU7.2 fix will come soon too. Appreciate the patch cadence lately!