JohnC--"rim"ember the '50s--PacRim jetblast

[jkcook28]

Kicking off leg one YPDN-->WIIH. A-4C

[jkcook28]

Down safe at WIIH.

Fuel used: 5765.4 lbs.

Indonesian bonus: -30 min.

Night landing #1

pic of Daves' J-29 landing just after.

[MaddogK]

From your duenna log:

24/04/2010 15:11:54; -10.927512; 126.107162; 30156; -1; 623; 396; 0
24/04/2010 15:21:55; -10.422587; 124.429963; 30159; -15; 623; 396; 0
24/04/2010 15:31:56; -10.098641; 122.718055; 30156; 0; 624; 397; 0
24/04/2010 15:41:56; -9.805911; 120.999953; 30156; 0; 624; 397; 0
24/04/2010 15:51:56; -9.452262; 119.317725; 29987; 0; 611; 394; 0
24/04/2010 16:01:57; -9.073615; 117.646881; 29987; 0; 611; 395; 0
24/04/2010 16:11:57; -8.677689; 115.980488; 29986; 0; 611; 395; 0
24/04/2010 16:21:57; -8.302891; 114.310045; 30152; 27; 617; 397; 0
24/04/2010 16:31:58; -7.919651; 112.632844; 30126; 0; 615; 397; 0
24/04/2010 16:41:58; -7.527997; 110.967346; 30031; 22; 612; 396; 0
24/04/2010 16:51:58; -7.100337; 109.317399; 30077; 0; 611; 397; 0
24/04/2010 17:01:59; -6.544936; 107.705993; 30070; 0; 611; 397; 0

M .98 for almost 2 hours, 874 gallons used for 1466.9 nm.

...Looks like you're gonna be the winner.

[salt_air]

dam John!.....Nice one.

[jkcook28]

From your duenna log:



M .98 for almost 2 hours, 874 gallons used for 1466.9 nm.

...Looks like you're gonna be the winner.

I tested a bunch of airplanes Maddog, and it's why I chose the A-4. Had a tailwind the whole route too. Dave for sure, and perhaps others will beat me in fuel economy; we shall see on speed...

[Dangerousdave26]

Dave for sure, ..

I am employing Secret Rosewell Alien Technology that the Swedish bought from the US...

We put Moth balls in the fuel tank before we take off.

[jkcook28]

Leg two, WIIH-->WSSS. A-4C

[jkcook28]

Safely down WSSS.

Fuel used: 2090.5 lbs.

Night landing #2

Singapore bonus: -30 min.

[jkcook28]

Next up: WSSS-->WMKJ. A-4C

[jkcook28]

Down safe WMKJ.

Fuel used: 299.2 lbs.

Night landing #3

Malaysia bonus: -30 min.

[jkcook28]

One more for tonight: WMKJ-->VVTS. A-4C

[MaddogK]

I tested a bunch of airplanes Maddog, and it's why I chose the A-4. Had a tailwind the whole route too. Dave for sure, and perhaps others will beat me in fuel economy; we shall see on speed...

heh, I'm not complaining. I'm just amazed you kept it subsonic considering the top speed is 649kts, and 50 kts faster than my 'A' model thats faster IRL than the 'C' (by 20 kts). Even your fuel consumption is surprising considering the A-4 is supposed to get only 1800 miles with 1800 gallons, and you got 1400 on 875 gallons.

Nice plane, one day I'll have to buy them Razbam thingy's.

[Dangerousdave26]

Nice plane, one day I'll have to buy them Razbam thingy's.

Pack 1 $19.95 from FS Pilot shop

http://www.fspilotshop.com/index.php...a&filter_id=39

Just bought it today so I could see him in it.

Nice plane

[MaddogK]

Pack 1 $19.95 from FS Pilot shop

http://www.fspilotshop.com/index.php...a&filter_id=39

Just bought it today so I could see him in it.

Nice plane

LOL, I'm still paying off the 30 bucks for the Alpha Sabre I wont be using.

[jkcook28]

Safe @ VVTS.

Fuel used: 2920 lbs.

South Vietnam bonus: -30 min.

[jkcook28]

heh, I'm not complaining. I'm just amazed you kept it subsonic considering the top speed is 649kts, and 50 kts faster than my 'A' model thats faster IRL than the 'C' (by 20 kts). Even your fuel consumption is surprising considering the A-4 is supposed to get only 1800 miles with 1800 gallons, and you got 1400 on 875 gallons.

Nice plane, one day I'll have to buy them Razbam thingy's.

I don't build 'em; I just fly 'em. Can't quote any real world numbers either because I don't care. All jets are notorious for incorrect fuel use in the sim; some worse than others.
I'm having fun. Don't care squat if I win.
Go fly now Maddog!

[Vicious]

Now that's a hot leg. WTG!! :salute:

Vicious

[jkcook28]

Next up is VVTS-->VDMK. A-4C

[jkcook28]

Down safe VDMK.

Fuel used: 600.9 lbs.

TOTAL fuel used to date: 11,676 lbs. (for Rob:d)

Cambodia bonus: -30 min.

edit: goo weather and a dirt strip; as usual it clears up on rollout...

[jkcook28]

Time to visit uncle Ho in Haiphong. VDMK-->VVCI. A-4C

[gandy]

John on your third leg it looks like you was flying at mach 1 which is not allowed, 661 knots GS is mach 1 and you was flying at 662 knots GS. I could be wrong as my math is not that great but it does look like you broke the sound barrier on that flight.

[MaddogK]

John on your third leg it looks like you was flying at mach 1 which is not allowed, 661 knots GS is mach 1 and you was flying at 662 knots GS. I could be wrong as my math is not that great but it does look like you broke the sound barrier on that flight.

Ya, max IAS was 701, snuck it in between duenna samples. Kinda hard to say 'overspeed' in a dive when the max alt was 5k feet.

[srgalahad]

John on your third leg it looks like you was flying at mach 1 which is not allowed, 661 knots GS is mach 1 and you was flying at 662 knots GS. I could be wrong as my math is not that great but it does look like you broke the sound barrier on that flight.

661 knots GS is mach 1
First, GS is variable with the relative head/tail wind so it's no use.
However, "given a standard temperature condition of 15c, the speed of sound at sea level is 661 knots." Note: that's at ISA (29.92" and 15*C)

.. and that's one of the flaws with using "mach". It's a variable. It is dependent on temperature and air density which will vary in r/l and the sim. On one test flight I did, I zigzagged back and forth across the northern hemisphere jet stream. M 0.89 stayed constant and the IAS varied somewhere in the range of +20 to -10 kts as I went from the 'warm' side to the 'cold' for a period of about 30 minutes.

For our testing purposes, MSFS "Clear" wx is used to recreate ISA which would be calculated by flight test engineers to obtain performance data, or in our case, the ability (or not) to reach M 1.00 in level flight at a variety of altitudes. Once in operation (ie the race) Real World Wx and altitudes then adds in temp and density so IAS vs Mach is now not constant.

Here is a reference I found to explain why the website does NOT include Mach numbers in there data...
http://www.militaryfactory.com/aircraft/mach.asp

Rob

[Dangerousdave26]

John on your third leg it looks like you was flying at mach 1 which is not allowed, 661 knots GS is mach 1 and you was flying at 662 knots GS. I could be wrong as my math is not that great but it does look like you broke the sound barrier on that flight.

What is not allowed is an aircraft that can achieve Mach 1 under its own power. What you saw there was a 180 degree wind shift that threw the aircraft over mach 1. The aircraft can only produce enough power to fly in level flight .98 Mach. Which does not give you a whole lot of wind shift room before you break the sound barrier.

Which brings us to a story you should hear Rob tell about an air traffic control towers inaugural celebration.

The aircraft John is flying has a max mach number of 1.20 which the aircraft can only reach in a very steep dive. This is far more accurate than having an aircraft like the F-86 with a max mach of .99 when the real aircraft could exceed mach 1 in a dive.

[MaddogK]

LOL, Touche' DD. Discredit the messenger. Surely you don't mean my F-86 that goes overspeed at M. 1.02, much less realistic than an A-4 that goes overspeed at M 1.2, and runs M 0.98 all day long.

...now isn't this fun ? I love the part about the undocumented wind shift.