Before I start off with this topic I want to express how thrilled I am with the addition of the A350-1000. I have been honestly wanting this addition ever since the A350-900 released. I am not even going to talk about how much I want the 767-300ER to be reworked because I know that aircraft is just going to continue to be ignored just like the 747-400 and a few others.
However if you haven’t read the title yet this topic is about the A350-1000 and not infinite flight’s hatred towards the 767s. So let me start off with the first performance issue and that is the lack of lift. This thing flies more like an MD-11 than an A350-1000 when it comes to lift. During my takeoff phase from IAH earlier yesterday going to DOH I flew with 327 passengers, 60,000lbs of cargo and 250,000lbs of fuel. Now with this much weight I expect it to fly like a heavy. But I put my thrust to like 90% throttle and at 170kts and flaps 2, I was struggling to lift off the ground. Then when I got off the ground the plane struggled to climb. I don’t want to even begin talking about this aircrafts horrible landing performances. I have done some solo testing of this aircraft and when below MLW, at 150kts of airspeed, full flaps and on glide slope I should not have to fly with 50% trim just to maintain a steady sink rate and flare.
Which leads me to the next performance issue which is the lack of thrust. As I was looping around IAH doing the realistic sharp bank angle going north I didn’t get to 250kts of airspeed until I passed over the airport. Halfway through my loop I had to increase my throttle to 95% thrust and that still was barely enough at a climb rate between 1,000FPM and 2,500fpm. I had retracted the flaps once I got over the airport which forced me to increase my pitch. I don’t know about you guys but last I checked the A350-1000s are equipped with RRT XWB-97s not RRT XWB-84s. So why does the A350-1000 feel worse than the A350-900?
I am not trying to hate on this addition but rather point out some performance issues so that infinite flights pilots don’t end up with another situation like the 767s where these issues get put on the back burner for decades to come.
You were essentially at MTOW with the weight numbers you quoted. 90% throttle was probably not quite enough. Depending on what FLEX temperature Simbrief gave you, it likely would’ve required mid-high 90s.
Depending on then how much you reduced the throttle for climb, it’s not entirely surprising that you struggled to gain speed.
I wouldn’t even know where to find that in simbrief. I only use simbrief for the route planning. But what about the lift during the landing phase I mentioned? Because it’s not just the lift during take off phase. The lift is a problem with landings as well.
Given that the performance data is hidden rather deep within the flight plan file - you can use Simbrief’s separate performance tools.
If you are on the beta with access to the FMS feature, you can see the takeoff FLEX temp Simbrief gives on the TAKEOFF PERF page.
Some aircraft in Infinite Flight typically require more than this at the quoted approach speeds (cough cough A330). It ultimately depends on the final approach pitch angle as well. It’s sort of hard to know whether trim levels are “wrong” or “right” compared to IRL since Infinite Flight uses a different trim measurement.
Also my piloting performance might also just be a little rusty. The aircraft type I am far too used to is the 777s. I remember before I quit flying on infinite flight several months ago I used to fly alot of 777 flights. One the things I love about the 777s is the thrust and amount of lift they have but more importantly is the tilted landing gear that makes a firm landing look like butter. I wish airbus put in the same effort into their A350s.
It’s essentially what Boeing calls “SEL TEMP” in their takeoff calculations. It’s an an artificial, higher outside air temperature that’s entered into the flight computer in order to “command” a reduced-thrust takeoff from max power (TOGA).
Well the 777s in Infinite Flight are rather overpowered from their IRL counterparts. The A350 behaves much more realistically (the A350-1000 more so over the -900 imo).
The A350-900 features a tilted main landing gear, and this behavior is correctly animated in the simulator. The A350-1000, however, uses a different landing gear design. While it does not have the same bogie tilt as the A350-900, its main landing gear noticeably pitches forward as the aircraft settles onto the runway, particularly after a slight overflare during touchdown.
The A350-1000’s main landing gear is missing its forward articulation/compression animation during touchdown. The A350-900 correctly animates its bogie tilt, but the -1000 remains rigid, causing the wheels to appear to dig into the runway as the aircraft settles. Adding the correct landing gear articulation would significantly improve the realism of the touchdown sequence.
