15 hour range? Let's talk 737 MAX 8 fuel burn and performance!

I don’t know if it’s more spacious (I think it’s the same cabin width) but definitely more airy. I wouldn’t mind it either. Plus it’s easier to sleep on bc it’s quiet

Suboptimal cruise but it’ll still make it no problem

2 Likes

I am 27 minutes out of LHR. almost 12hrs flying so far and I still have 2hrs of fuel left at M0.84 at FL410

Officially landed in London Heathrow. OOL-CMB-LHR in a Max 8.
First pic is leaving Colombo.


Second pic is flight time after arriving in Heathrow and the remaining fuel:

1 Like

Nice! seems like people are having fun with the range lol

1 Like

Now to return to Australia. Flying EGLL-LSZS-VCBI-YSCB

1 Like

I did ZSPD - KIAD non-stop and I landed with practically no fuel left (200kg). However I think I could’ve flown farther if I didn’t cruise at FL410 for the first 3-4 hours.

360 is max optimal, for maximum efficiency don’t go above that I think

May I introduce yet another aircraft to this convo then: the original 737! Great buzzsaw in the front, and a sweet crackling noise at the rear, plus bucket reverser action!

Not that finding one of these is exactly the easiest thing, but Venezuela and African countries are good places to look at.

1 Like

I think Raglan has one up in Canada (although I’m not sure if it still flies or how to get on it).

1 Like

Nolinor’s sole reason of existence is the 737-200 (or at least that’s what their social media makes it feel like).

Nolinor’s sole reason of existence is to post brainrot on Instagram

2 Likes

It’s 737-200 brainrot, so I’ll gladly take it.

1 Like

Just did a flight from KBFI to WSSS on the MAX and I crashed into the sea after 14 h 59 mins. I would say I flew pretty long considering I faced quite a strong headwind for most part of the flight.

2 Likes

Headwind doesn’t change fuel burn for the most part but good to know that my numbers are pretty accurate lol

3 Likes

Out of curiosity I asked AI what the ballpark max climb rate might be achievable on a typical commercial airliner on a lightly loaded ferry flight.

It’s answer sounds low: “2,500 to 3,500 feet per minute”

I had wanted to cross reference the following:

An irl A330 pilot said he once did 7,000 fpm.
Stated just after 39:05 in:
Microsoft Flight Simulator 2024 - Airbus A330 FIRST FLIGHT | Real A330 Pilot

A bit more about:

This was interestingly stated:

source: Turbine Engines

Again, how to integrate the fuel burn non-linearities with the interaction of the unlimited combinations of the flight state-variables is likely a non-trivial problem in balancing the simulation design goals.

Below is kind of an interesting comparative depiction of the jet engine non-linearity vs piston propeller aircraft (same source)

3 Likes

Honestly, I feel like these performance issues (specifically on the takeoff roll and in the climb) plague almost every aircraft in IF, not just the max. A reference I usually have for the takeoff roll is MROC airport, and since the runway is 8000 feet and the airport is at 3000 feet elevation, even narrow bodies often use nearly the entire runway, with under 2000 feet to spare usually. The widebodies there actually need to takeoff the opposite direction with a tailwind since there is a displaced threshold there that gives then 2000 extra feet to takeoff.

Not in IF. I can easily takeoff in these widebodies on runway 7 with just the 8000 feet, and can takeoff in the narrowbodies before even reaching runway 25’s markings. And that’s without pushing past 100% N1 (which these airplanes often use IRL due to the high elevation). Once in the climb, with a few % N1 below takeoff thrust, I can easily achieve 4500 fpm (should usually not exceed 3500 fpm unless you’re extremely light) and reach 10000 feet in under 3 minutes. The OEW is also wrong on plenty of planes besides the max, with my takeoff weight frequently being below what Simbrief gives me. The initial climb (with flaps down) and cruise performance is better on most of these planes but there are still these two massive oddities

4 Likes

This topic is worth a read. And some of the replies as well:

5 Likes

Maybe consider:

An error of just a few percent near a high throttle setting can disproportionately affect perceived power due to the engine’s exponential response to throttle position, making it seem like the simulator has too much available power, even if there’s only a small margin of error in the data available for the algorithm.

A simulator provides a highly realistic experience that’s ‘close enough’ to real-life performance for training and recreational purposes (I tend to emphasize “feel”, with numbers close enough being secondary).

A long time ago, an irl 767 pilot told me: ‘You need to learn to fly the simulator,’ to emphasize that it’s not possible to capture everything exactly.

When it seems like I have a bit of excess power in reserve, I de-rate my usage of it, keeping in mind the nearly impossible task to perfectly model the interactions of all the variables of physical reality.

1 Like

I have been trying to do a 360 on landing with this for weeks but I keep crashing or most of it happens on the ground and it’s not as cool 🤣

I did manage to land almost completely backwards a couple of times though…

Did you have to remind me of the rb211 migraine inducer .