I guess for the fun of it I’ll continue, maybe I’ll try an ultra realistic attempt with no abuse of this fact
I kind of want to get to the bottom of what causes this. Currently I suspect that it’s because the drag is not modeled well at high altitudes so dropping the flaps mid cruise increases lift so much that the AoA goes flat or negative which has some sort of performance benefit. Ie, the engines can do less work because their thrust is going directly to moving the plane forward and not having to keep it afloat as well.
Definitely, with the 330-200 it’s very easy to see the difference between flaps 3 and Full. AoA goes minus like hell
I guess it does have something to do with that air density/ drag level, like you said :)
It’s weird because it works on such a wide variety of planes. For example I took an A333 to FL360 at 100% load which should equate to about 14,500 lb/hr but dropping flaps full reduces it to 9,500, which is almost 25% less than the A333 flying “normally” at the optimal altitude of FL280 (12,500 lb/hr).
Interesting, I’ll have to explore it a bit more I don’t have a real clue about this phenomenon 😂
I am actually thinking of making this challenge restricted to realistic flap usage and restart my attempt (I won’t get far LOL, maybe change the plan)
(No flaps at cruise maybe)
Discourse discovers having a conversation
If you’re serious about having people compete that’s a pretty difficult thing to enforce though, unfortunately. Even if you fell under “realistic” range you could easily drop flaps for 10-20 minutes and gain like 5-6 minutes of flight time and then chalk it up to “small optimizations”.
You’re absolutely right, no way to actually enforce that… I’ll keep it as is.
Thank you for smarting me up dude!
Please Note everyone, added a little section to the challenge
Figan’s Attempt: Critical Update
Hi everyone,
Sometimes in aviation, plans have to change, and today is one of those moments. My attempt to fly from WMKK (Kuala Lumpur) to SCEL (Santiago, Chile) has faced a challenge. Due to low fuel reserves, I’ve decided to divert to SPJC (Lima, Peru) to ensure a safe and successful landing.
Current Progress
• Original Route: WMKK → SCEL
• Distance Flown: ~9,997 NM of ~12,671 NM
• Distance Remaining to SCEL: 2,674 NM
• New Destination: SPJC (Lima, Peru)
• Altitude: FL347 (Descent to 33,000ft)
• Ground Speed: 435 knots
• Fuel Used: 77,979 kg
• Fuel Remaining: 7,421 kg (~9%)
• Flight Time: 19 hours 26 minutes
• Estimated Time to SPJC: ~3 hours
Key Learnings
This diversion highlights the challenges of pushing the Airbus A330-200F to its absolute limits, particularly when balancing fuel burn and cargo load. While I won’t reach Santiago on this attempt, the data collected will provide valuable insights into planning ultra-long-haul cargo flights in the future.
I’ll post another update once I’ve landed safely in Lima and analyze this ambitious attempt further. Thanks for following along with this journey—your support makes it even more rewarding!
Safe skies,
Figan
My journey has taken another unexpected turn! After initially diverting to SPJC (Lima, Peru), it became clear that even that destination was out of reach due to fuel constraints. I’ve now diverted to SEQM (Quito, Ecuador) to ensure a safe landing.
Current Status
• Original Route: WMKK → SCEL
• Distance Flown: 10,366 NM
• New Destination: SEQM (Quito, Ecuador)
• Fuel Remaining: ~5% (3,852 kg)
• ETA to SEQM: ~52 minutes
This journey has truly pushed the limits of the Airbus A330-200F and tested every aspect of route planning and fuel management. Stay tuned for the final update once I’m safely on the ground in Quito!
Safe skies,
Figan
Final Update: Safely Landed at SEQM
Hi everyone,
After an incredible 22 hours and 10 minutes of flying, I’ve safely landed at SEQM (Quito, Ecuador). This journey has been nothing short of an adventure, filled with meticulous planning, unexpected diversions, and valuable lessons in fuel management and decision-making.
I’ll add my Journey in detail in the post itself :)
Stay tuned!
wow 22 hours unbelievable amazing job man!
This is interesting, going to have to experiment with this. Thanks for the info
Thanks mate!