Jump to content

Su-25T fuel consumption table


esb77
 Share

Recommended Posts

The, "I just want to fly around and blow s**t up version"

For max range operate at 90% to 95% throttle rpm.

For max loiter time operate at 80% to 90% throttle rpm.

 

Distance flown in kilometers on 520 kg (1200 lbs) of fuel with clean plane, initial velocity 340 to 400 km/h

Altitudes are barometric.

 

Test flights recorded in July 2013, future DCS updates that change the flight model or aircraft data would change the results, possibly to a significant degree.

 

[TABLE]

________Throttle settings rpm

________100%__95%__90%__85%__80%__70%

Altitudes

100m____ 57 ___85_____96__101___110___114

1000m___62____92____106__114___129___114

3000m___72___117____132__156___142___N/A*

5000m___84___144____176__160___N/A*__N/A*

[/TABLE]

 

*insufficient thrust to maintain level flight

 

 

Distance in kilometers flown on 520 kg of fuel, v init 400 km/h

Payload: gun ammo 100%, Kh-29L x 2, A-8 9A4172 Vikhr x 2, Kh-25ML x 2, S-25L x 2, R60M x 2

4364 kg weapons mass (9601 lbs).

 

[TABLE]

____________ Throttle settings

Altitudes

____________100%___95%___90%___85%___80%___70%

100m________58______79____83_____80_____77____N/A*

1000m_______62______87____89_____84_____77____N/A*

3000m_______73_____104____99_____N/A*___N/A*__N/A*

5000m_______86_____123____N/A*___N/A*___N/A*__N/A*

[/TABLE]

*insufficient thrust to maintain level flight

 

Figures in the above tables were taken from test flights in DCS World and relative error for all figures should be less than 5%.

 

These are not ideal fuel consumption data in terms of mass burned/time for given atmospheric condition and speed. They also don't give you a way to calculate available loiter times.

 

So what good are they?

 

They give you a decent overview of how a frogfoot with either a very light or medium total payload (fuel + weapons mass) is affected in terms of available range vs throttle management.

 

The super simplified science of this stuff, is that for max range you want minimum net drag, and for max loiter time you want to balance low drag with low air speed.

 

Looking at the tables you should be able to see that in general higher altitude and lower throttle tend to increase range. This holds true until the increased AoA needed to maintain level flight at higher altitudes and lower speeds increases net drag to the point where the gains from lower air density and lower air speed are overcome. Of course adding external weapons loads also mucks around with your total drag too.

 

Keep in mind that the data here are for level straight flight. Maneuvering will play merry hell with your fuel consumption, and not in a way that's favorable to you.

 

What's provided here should be enough to let you figure out how to avoid needlessly wasting fuel. If you want enough detail to do preflight planning you either need to use the mission editor/planner functions or you need to dig out a notebook and start taking notes while watching both your clock and fuel gauge very carefully (it's very sound piloting practice, but not as immediately gratifying as watching stuff explode).

 

Su-25T tips for beginners here http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=110779


Edited by esb77
  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1

Callsign "Auger". It could mean to predict the future or a tool for boring large holes.

 

I combine the two by predictably boring large holes in the ground with my plane.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

nice can you make the same for the A version

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]W10(64bit)Asus Rog Strix Z370-F - i7 8700K - Dark Rock Pro 4 - 16 giga ram Corsair vengeance 3000 - MSI RTX 2070 Super - Asus Rog Phobeus soundcard - Z906 Surround speaker - Track ir5 - HOTAS Warthog

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, seikdel, km flown on a fuel load of 520kg fuel.

 

I'm trying to test and publish some of the really basic performance data that is absent from any of the DCS and LOMAC documentation.

 

If I don't give up in frustration, that's a lot of testing and a lot data recording. I also have to try to design flight test procedures that give meaningful results instead of irrelevant garbage.

 

Given those issues and the fact that I like destroying Georgian armor more than basic flight testing there's only so much time I'm willing to spend cleaning test data up past the 'useable' stage.

 

Pretty data and brilliant well written conclusions will be a long time coming unless someone else does the prettying up.

 

I assume that people will read fairly carefully, can do basic unit conversions, and know math to the extent of addition, subtraction, multiplication, and division.

 

Ideally I'd put out stuff with the polish of a good technical manual, but I have to consider how much time I want to spend playing the game vs publishing supplements to the game manual.

 

I do try to check the info threads I post at least a few times, so if I was especially sleep deprived and wind up posting something very confusing I will try to come back and edit it to a more useful version, and am happy to do so.

Callsign "Auger". It could mean to predict the future or a tool for boring large holes.

 

I combine the two by predictably boring large holes in the ground with my plane.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just for reference and a bit more on why my posts can be a bit rough around the edges.

 

After: writing a test procedure worksheet, making a test mission in the mission editor, flying the test missions, recording the data, doing a basic write-up, and posting it to the forums, I had spent about 3.5 hours working on it. Mind you, that's with most of the flying done at 6x fast forward.

 

Cleaning up the post to be easier to read might have only taken another 10 min, but I was tired, and tired of working on the fuel consumption basics post.

 

If I wanted to do what I would consider acceptable quality of real fuel consumption and loiter time tables it would probably take me at least another 8 to 12 hours on top of what I've already done.

Callsign "Auger". It could mean to predict the future or a tool for boring large holes.

 

I combine the two by predictably boring large holes in the ground with my plane.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

thanks for this^^ the Grach was always what brough me to FC. May I make PDF of your threads about Grach?

AWAITING ED NEW DAMAGE MODEL IMPLEMENTATION FOR WW2 BIRDS

 

Fat T is above, thin T is below. Long T is faster, Short T is slower. Open triangle is AWACS, closed triangle is your own sensors. Double dash is friendly, Single dash is enemy. Circle is friendly. Strobe is jammer. Strobe to dash is under 35 km. HDD is 7 times range key. Radar to 160 km, IRST to 10 km. Stay low, but never slow.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You may indeed make PDF's of any of the Su-25T info I put up on the forums.

 

Next up in my flight test program will be turn performance. I've gotten reputable sources on procedure and done the preliminary math, but the flight tests are going to be more involved (and there will be a lot of them) so it may be a few weeks before that gets posted.

Callsign "Auger". It could mean to predict the future or a tool for boring large holes.

 

I combine the two by predictably boring large holes in the ground with my plane.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Author of the table calculations could add Excel diagram. It would visualize situation better for memory :)

 

Good job btw.

Reminder: Fighter pilots make movies. Bomber pilots make... HISTORY! :D | Also to be remembered: FRENCH TANKS HAVE ONE GEAR FORWARD AND FIVE BACKWARD :D

ಠ_ಠ



Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...