The A340 is overpowered

[Beurreesale]

Hello,

I would like to thank you again for providing to the community this beautiful airplane.

I observed than the initial ROC is too much. Between 2000 and 2500ft/min or more at heavy weight which is way too much and even at light weight T/O and It doesn’t give the feeling that the aircraft is struggling to climb. Looking over-powered. In reality the A343 just after lift off has a ROC very very low. Around 1600 1700ft/min and sometimes even less ! As you can see here as an example of a real A343 Take Off: To defend my opinion, this only one of the many videos we can find on the internet (low climb, nearly hitting the tail, more recently descending just after lift off or pilots feedbacks). Even at low weight the A340 is used by major airlines in the summer for short haul flights, we can observed a terrible weak ROC.

Even at low weight the A343 got a very weak Rate of Climb and not 3000ft/min or more on the addon and I hope this will be improve later. This Topic following my previous one that which I can’t find anymore where I suggested engines and spool-up behaviour (the initial spool-up is too fast and from 50% N1 to Flex THR, It’s too slow). It should be the opposite. 

My biggest matter is the Rate of Climb which needs to be review in the next update because it’s the identity of the a340 at any weight and I think it’s a shame if we don’t see that in the futur considering the beautiful addon It is already.
 

Once again, Thank you so much for this addon that a lot of people were waiting for so many years and the quality of It. Looking forward for futurs updates !

Best regards.

[iniSteven]

Our performance numbers come straight from aircraft manuals and have been verified by multiple pilot advisors. If you can provide data to support inaccuracies in specific conditions, we are happy to make adjustments. But a youtube video with unknown weight and thrust settings in unknown weather conditions is definitely not an authoritative source upon which we can base wholesale changes to the flight model.

Keep in mind that our takeoff calculator uses the Airbus numbers - Individual airline operators may have different performance calculations better suited to their specific needs, including more aggressive engine de-rates on takeoff than the baseline numbers.

While it's true that the A340 does not have the same rocket capabilities on takeoff of a 757, it does have certain performance advantages - for example, Air France enjoyed operating them to SXM because the engine-out climb performance meant it could make a non-stop return to Paris, whereas the twin-engined A330s either required severe load limitations or a tech stop in Curacao to make the crossing 🙂

[Wothan1967]

I think in one of A330 Drivers YT Videos is told that the EFB calculated Flex temp seeme lower that what he would have expected, thus giving the engines more power.

That seems to be in line with what iniSteven tell in the post above.

[Donald Douglas]

I just left Riyadh (2000 msl) at 36C and only about 195T-- Flap 3 Flex 53-- no issue getting off the runway and initial climb was fine, but I definitely barely made the above FL230 SID restriction almost 60 track miles away, and this was with no intermediate level segments, and I was speed restricted to 250 until around 13k feet.  So I think, yes, it might be pushing harder on takeoff than some airlines did irl, but overall it's climb performance is still pretty realistic.

[sdlc]

Hi Inisteven,

I agree with you YT videos are not sufficient particulary in this example with significant turbulence and some parameters unknowns

However i think there is a problem with N1/thrust between CLB and TOGA

For TOGA and climb we have the accurate level of thrust .

I don't know how gauges and flight parameters are coded in the A340 but if i take this example below :

aircraft on ground N1 CLB thrust, N2 MCT, 3  and 4TOGA

You can see a big FF difference between 1 and 2 for only for 0.9% N1 delta . I know Fuel flow is not linear with N1 but in this case it's not consistent with MCT to TOGA.

That's remember me my long hours to customize .air files on previous fs versions with AirEd and the table 1506 and 1507....

Br

Stéphane

 

[angie23]

If YT videos are not enough, why not simple load the Inibuilds A340 to MTOW, in summer conditions and replicate a real world takeoff which some pilots have uploaded to YT and see that the A340 in the real world, despite being lighter or at the very most, at MTOW, climbs out far less than what we are experiencing in the sim. That to me is pretty simple logic. Many are noticing this so wouldn't the proper solution be to investigate and sort it out instead of asking simmers to do your job? Would be nice to see which manuals you used for these figures because an A340 on a long flight doesnt come close to 2000 fpm after takeoff irl whatsoever.

Edited Monday at 12:11 PM by angie23

[iniSteven]

5 hours ago, angie23 said:

If YT videos are not enough, why not simple load the Inibuilds A340 to MTOW, in summer conditions and replicate a real world takeoff which some pilots have uploaded to YT and see that the A340 in the real world, despite being lighter or at the very most, at MTOW, climbs out far less than what we are experiencing in the sim. That to me is pretty simple logic. Many are noticing this so wouldn't the proper solution be to investigate and sort it out instead of asking simmers to do your job? Would be nice to see which manuals you used for these figures because an A340 on a long flight doesnt come close to 2000 fpm after takeoff irl whatsoever.

Because there are so many variables in a youtube video we can't account for. We don't know the weather, we don't know their airlines thrust calculations. I mean we don't even know what thrust was used in the original video of this thread!

We have to the best of our knowledge replicated the by the book values of the manuals we have. If you can find hard data that contradicts us and provides us the necessary data to fix it, then we will do so. But if you can only find youtube videos, then there's nothing we can change as we aren't going to fiddle with the flight model based on vibes when we have actual performance tables and real pilots saying that our model seems accurate.

[angie23]

1 hour ago, iniSteven said:

Because there are so many variables in a youtube video we can't account for. We don't know the weather, we don't know their airlines thrust calculations. I mean we don't even know what thrust was used in the original video of this thread!

We have to the best of our knowledge replicated the by the book values of the manuals we have. If you can find hard data that contradicts us and provides us the necessary data to fix it, then we will do so. But if you can only find youtube videos, then there's nothing we can change as we aren't going to fiddle with the flight model based on vibes when we have actual performance tables and real pilots saying that our model seems accurate.

I don't think you understood what I suggested for you to try.

If people are complaining to you, that your aircraft is climbing way higher than real life, and you don't know what variables the real planes in the videos affected it's takeoff performance, then load your plane up to the maximum. Takeoff on the longest flight the a340 can achieve from a hot or high airport and watch as your a340 climbs like a rocket. Then compare it with videos in which the plane in real life is only flying across the pond or at a distance less than 4000 nautical miles. I did just this and was able to climb out from MMMX at 2400 feet a min at MTOW. That alone is a massive indicator in itself. I respect what you have achieved and look forward to a future update of you making the takeoff performance mirror the real plane. It would be a shame to pretend that you do not know that the a340 is supposed to lumber into the air and not shoot up like a big twin.

[iniSteven]

54 minutes ago, angie23 said:

I don't think you understood what I suggested for you to try.

If people are complaining to you, that your aircraft is climbing way higher than real life, and you don't know what variables the real planes in the videos affected it's takeoff performance, then load your plane up to the maximum. Takeoff on the longest flight the a340 can achieve from a hot or high airport and watch as your a340 climbs like a rocket. Then compare it with videos in which the plane in real life is only flying across the pond or at a distance less than 4000 nautical miles. I did just this and was able to climb out from MMMX at 2400 feet a min at MTOW. That alone is a massive indicator in itself. I respect what you have achieved and look forward to a future update of you making the takeoff performance mirror the real plane. It would be a shame to pretend that you do not know that the a340 is supposed to lumber into the air and not shoot up like a big twin.

I just did that and I wasn't even able to take off. This is at TOGA, 276.2t, 34c, standard pressure. MMMX runway 05L:

I appreciate your passion for the aircraft, but we have to trust the book numbers and the word of real pilots that the model is accurate.

-Steven

[N77022]

I don't feel the airplane is as overpowered as much as the sidestick just seems excessively sensitive to pitch inputs during rotation.

Several up-close PFD videos during takeoff, specifically VR, show the ground roll guidance cue at 10deg pitch-up, with a very slow pitch response from the airplane. I've noticed if I put the ground roll guidance cue at 10deg on the ini A340, the nose wheel hops off the ground aggressively, nearly causing a tailstrike regardless of takeoff performance settings.

Overall though, excellent airplane. I love it, and can't wait to see where ini takes the product into the future.

[angie23]

I really appreciate this back and forth bc it's helped me to understand your stance a lot better. All due respect, I did say hot OR high airport. Not hot and high airport. "Takeoff on the longest flight the a340 can achieve from a hot or high airport". 

My flights always use real world weather so the temperature would have been between 18 and 24 degrees last week, since it was a redeye flight back to Europe taking off at dusk. Not 34 degrees Celsius at Mexico City but it's my fault for providing you ammunition to seek to disprove a typo I made ("MTOW") instead of trying to disprove the actual agenda I have made across two messages. The fact you've gone out your way to raise the temperature while setting the plane to MTOW at a high altitude airport to show you cannot takeoff at all, sort of proves more that you are fully aware of your shortcomings but either don't care or are not able to provide the correct modelling as you could have easily just provided a screenshot to show the climb rate of your aircraft from a hot OR high airport OR at the maximum permitted weight OR any airport at MTOW since I meant to have said the "maximum allowed weight" for my flight bound for Frankfurt. At other airports such as VHHH, I did load the aircraft up with enough payload to obtain MTOW and was able to achieve 3000 ft a minute when it should be closer to 1000. I will say that your climb rate after cleaning up the flaps at climb thrust is accurate but for some reason, your plane is getting to the air far too easy.

 

I had to screenshot this thread and our back and forth last night to ask some ex colleagues whether the point I was trying to make was or wasn't clear enough and all understood my point: The Inibuilds A340-300 has a superior climb rate that is not representative of the real A340-300. This is a fact noticed by real airline pilots, including myself. Finally, yes I am passionate but it is not about passion sir. It is about having realism in the sim. I have flown (in order) ATRs, Fokkers, 767s, 737s and briefly, the 777 until covid and have associates who are F/Os on A340s. I find your claim that so called A340 pilots, stating your 2500-4000 fpm climb rate on long haul flights as "accurate" dubious since this is something I nor my friends have ever witnessed. The dirty config climbout should be between 800 and 2200 depending on heavy/light TOW and reasonable FLEX setting.

It would be great to see you provide evidence of your claim of going by credible sources or at least, providing a side my side comparison video of a real takeoff vs your own replicated takeoff in sync and showcasing both real world and in sim PFDs.

 

In closing, as an ex pilot myself, those videos of real life A340 takeoffs can be replicated in sim by simply taking the aircraft to it's extreme limit at said airport (zero wind component + higher temp to achieve aircraft's takeoff limits since we don't know the real world variables). Not beyond it to prove the plane cannot takeoff, come on brother ha ha. I understand that you won't do this but it is a suggestion because the least you can do is let simmers know your plain is not accurate. Also, the A340 does not get into the air with such shallow nose up authority but I won't bother stress this since you we seem to be getting nowhere with the excessive, big-twin climb rate.

 

Keep in mind, every four engine jetliner has a much shallower climb rate than that of twin engine ones and for good reason. I appreciate your engagement. 

 

Best Regards

[CONVEEN]

in this video there was climb many time 2700-3000feet/min.

Edited 11 hours ago by CONVEEN

[Beurreesale]

Please @iniSteven read us. It’s been disapointing considering the great addon it is already and the great addon It could be.

-It’s too easy to lift off the aircraft during initial rotation and it’s going airborn too fast while in the real life every A343 take off is a battle against causing a tail strike or just even lifting off (We all remember the Edelweiss descending just after lift off).

 

-After experiencing the aircraft quite a few times now and viewing a lot of videos of real Life and the INI. I’m sorry but I want to see these books because It isn’t normal to make 3000ft/min in Mexico close to MTOW. The real problem isn’t the CLB itself because after puting CLB THR the ROC is just perfect. So I think the Thrust between CLB until TOGA is way to high and by reading all the comments this might be something to be change to have something more realistic for T/O. 
 

I do really hope your are considering and reading ours resquests and we are aware that is still an early stage of the addon and futurs updates are on the way. But please, change the initial ROC, this is the major problem which prevent the addon to be perfect ! We want to feel a real A340 really struggling to get off the ground and climb those first thousand feet !

Thanks for reading.

 

Regards.

[iniSteven]

Here's my attempt at recreating a takeoff from youtube. I think we're pretty close. Absolutely nowhere near the 4000fpm you're claiming.

Here's the data and their initial climb rate, vs. mine. I've included the full video of the takeoff for you.