Either really (to my memory). I think it works more effectively on the -400.
I don’t really use the 747 a lot so you might be right because nothing is perfect.
But to my knowledge for every aircraft flaps should never be used at cruising altitude.
Don’t always quote me on my advice 😂
I fly all the commercial fleet most of the time, and have many experiences with stalling the 747, diverting in the middle of the night… it’s been fun.
But you helped add 10 hours of fuel left on a 747 flight of mine, why shouldn’t I recommend you for that? 😂you do help with all other aircraft, but you saved me from quitting a flight of mine or taking a stopover, at least! ;)
Ok thank you guys for your help
@DeerCrusher your dog is so cute!
My pleasure my friend !
There is no fuel burn issue. The tip you’re telling people is not correct based on factual fuel burn values.
See my example below. 747-400 cruises at M.855. Let’s round to M.86 since we can’t do .005 increments. Trimmed out at 50% flaps up, I’m burning 22,300lbs/hr. Now if we look at the specs found online, you’ll see that this 22,300 number is actually within 1500lbs of what they’re saying online.
When I did your method, you’re doing 15,900lbs/hr. Now, sure its more efficient, but you’re flying in a nose down attitude (not realistic) and flaps at 10 degrees at cruise (not realistic). Not really glitching per say but you are burning less fuel than what is normal. So it could be considered. That being said, its likely that you are not step climbing appropriately, your aircraft is too heavy for the altitudes you’re going to, route of flight planned is not appropriate for winds, etc. All sorts of reasons that you could use Flaps 10 as a crutch to make up for erroneous planning.
Not saying your planning is bad, but if you have to use Flaps when the fuel burns are correct, there’s something wrong in the planning process.
So, I think before we make a statement and declare that the 747 has a “fuel burn” issue as you say with certainty, I would do the research first before making such an assumption. Fuel burn is spot on according to various sources.
Fly the aircraft with flaps up, normal configuration, plan appropriately. Never hurts to pack extra fuel.
having flown the B744 and B748 on several occasions, i agree with @DeerCrusher , the flaps have no use in cruise. I cruise with the 747s just like I would with any other aircraft in game. To be honest, you don’t even need trim, and I usually don’t bother touching trim anyways. As for fuel, I just set the fuel to what my SimBrief block fuel value is, and i’ve never had any problems with running out of fuel. Sure, it may be red for quite some time, but it will work, trust me.
Instead of using flaps use trim. It helps to bring the nose down but it doesn’t create drag.
I can back you up on this, the few times I’ve tried the 74 without flaps I’ll either end up stalling or I’ll sake up to find I’m only 1000nm from my origin going about 140kts with a pitch of about 70°. With flaps 10° though, I’ve been able to do flights of about 7500nm with the 747 no problem.
Increase your speed, that should help
Wait so for all those times that I thought the 747-8 was bad with fuel lol this could help me 😂😂
I gave up on super long hauls with the 747 a while back. It’s just not very reliable. I think I’m gonna go vote for a rework actually…
Flying the B747 takes skills, planning and patience. My first few flights I didn’t plan sufficenitntly and had issues like was described above. But when I did my research and planned accordingly (following fpltoif, for all the criteria including speed, altitudes, step climbing etc). Every flight since then in the B744 ( and I have done many longhaul) I have had no issues, never had to divert for fuel and landed with the flight time as calculated by fpltoif.
The initial climb will show as negative figures on the fuel consumption at first when you are heavy, but that is because you are flying a big heavy bird and will be burning lots of fuel on your climb. But when you get to your cruise it will sort it self out.
It’s all about the planning.
The only problem with doing it realistically (without flaps etc) is that it becomes highly unstable when winds come into play. It’s prone to heavily bank left and right until the autopilot disengages. Most of us aren’t looking at the screen for 10+ hours so using flaps in cruise is more of a safety measure to make sure it won’t crash while you’re away.
I think this is where flight planning comes in very handy. I’ve flown the 747(-400/8) severally on flights as long as 11h and never had this problem. Weather and cruise altitudes should be highly considered to get the most economical route ie one that consumes the least fuel.
Another thing to note, with 10h flight time remaining, the aircraft is not only carrying pax and cargo but also has its fuel tanks filled to the brim hence slightly higher fuel burn at early phases of a long haul. It’s too early to make a decision to divert at that stage unless you’re flying a route like Johannesburg-Sydney which spends most of its time isolated from suitable airports. In this situation, plan like a two jet with ETOPS fuel. I usually ad 15T to my required fuel in case of unprecedented snags.
I simply search for the flight time on google flights if possible.
Add 1-2 hours of extra fuel depending on weather conditions.
Never had a problem
I would recommend using the fuel indicated when you make your fpl on simbrief.com when possible as it takes into account the weather, actual flight distance and alternate airports when calculating fuel which might vary. It might be a longer process, but you also get a more accurate fuel load by doing so :). The 2h extra fuel is a good thing on your part.
This topic was automatically closed 90 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.