Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • Users
Collapse
Just Flight Community Forum
  1. Home
  2. Just Flight
  3. MSFS Products
  4. Black Square Add-Ons
  5. Starship
  6. Significant fuel burn discrepancy at FL200-FL240

Significant fuel burn discrepancy at FL200-FL240

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Starship
15 Posts 6 Posters 1.2k Views 1 Watching
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • P Offline
    P Offline
    ProfCrash
    wrote on last edited by
    #4

    Thanks that might help @Black-Square. I agree the temperature delta doesnt account for the difference, I was posting the interpolated results for better comparison

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • MD82M Offline
      MD82M Offline
      MD82
      wrote on last edited by MD82
      #5

      @Mad_X Check out item 3 of a write up I've made a few months back.

      One Request, One Observation

      It's almost identical I believe as yours. But the funny thing is, my fuel used did agree with the tables. Just not the indication. Have a look at item 3 of my post and try to do the same. Doesn't need to be as complex. You can take remaining fuel at the start, then (leaving power constant) take another reading 15 minutes later. That difference in fuel remaining, multiply it by 4 to get your 2-engine fuel burn in pounds/hour. Divide that by 2, and you get the average engine fuel flow. That value should match the fuel flow indicator (and also your tables).

      For me, it matched the tables, but not the indicator. As you can see from my post, I didn't hear anything back other than that it should work normally.

      1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • M Offline
        M Offline
        Mad_X
        wrote on last edited by
        #6

        @Black-Square Nick, did you have the chance to look into this? I love the starship and my only gripe is this issues that when trottling back the fuel burn just is really off. Thanks so much 🙂

        1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • Black SquareB Offline
          Black SquareB Offline
          Black Square
          Black Square Developer
          wrote on last edited by
          #7

          I'll take a look later. I'll be honest, given the discrepancy is so large, I was hoping you guy would find something on your side that explained it, especially MD82's comments. I'll dig in later.

          P 1 Reply Last reply
          1
          • Black SquareB Black Square

            I'll take a look later. I'll be honest, given the discrepancy is so large, I was hoping you guy would find something on your side that explained it, especially MD82's comments. I'll dig in later.

            P Offline
            P Offline
            ProfCrash
            wrote on last edited by
            #8

            @Black-Square

            I was able to reproduce the issue on my end as well.

            FL200
            Max Range Power set by FF, torque is too high
            Screenshot 2026-06-15 154703.png

            Max Range Power set by Torque, FF is too low
            Screenshot 2026-06-15 155314.png

            FL240
            Max Range Power set by FF
            Screenshot 2026-06-15 155820.png

            The trend continues. I didnt grab an image of the set by torque at FL240 as I had a GFI outlet I had to replace.

            Thanks,
            Crash

            1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • M Offline
              M Offline
              Mad_X
              wrote on last edited by
              #9

              @Black-Square Did you have time to take a looki Nick? 🙂

              1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • P Offline
                P Offline
                ProfCrash
                wrote on last edited by
                #10

                @Black-Square just wondering if there was an any update on this one?

                1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • P Offline
                  P Offline
                  ProfCrash
                  wrote on last edited by
                  #11

                  @Black-Square Hey Nick, Will the new PT6 model be implemented for the starship in 2024?

                  1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • P Offline
                    P Offline
                    ProfCrash
                    wrote last edited by
                    #12

                    @Black-Square Hey Nick, hope all is well. Any word on the fuel burn discrepancy?
                    -Crash

                    1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • Black SquareB Offline
                      Black SquareB Offline
                      Black Square
                      Black Square Developer
                      wrote last edited by
                      #13

                      I just wanted to let you all know that I have made some notes to myself tonight while working on the King Air regarding this. I think I may have found the issue that's causing it. It can be nearly impossible to coax the exact desired engine behavior out of MSFS, even with corrections applied to every parameter in my current engine simulations. This might have been the result of one of those corrections, but it's very careful work to figure out exactly what's going on, and avoid the risk of upsetting every other data point in the performance tables. I'll let you know what I can find, but I make no promises.

                      O 1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      • Black SquareB Black Square

                        I just wanted to let you all know that I have made some notes to myself tonight while working on the King Air regarding this. I think I may have found the issue that's causing it. It can be nearly impossible to coax the exact desired engine behavior out of MSFS, even with corrections applied to every parameter in my current engine simulations. This might have been the result of one of those corrections, but it's very careful work to figure out exactly what's going on, and avoid the risk of upsetting every other data point in the performance tables. I'll let you know what I can find, but I make no promises.

                        O Online
                        O Online
                        Outermarker
                        wrote last edited by
                        #14

                        @Black-Square Have you had a chance to take a look at the recently implemented changes to the turbine engine simulation in SU6? From what I've read so far from other devs it sounds promising:

                        alt text

                        1 Reply Last reply
                        0
                        • J Offline
                          J Offline
                          jmarkows
                          wrote last edited by
                          #15

                          Oh boy, maybe we'll finally be able to increase prop pitch on the TBM without dumping airspeed.

                          1 Reply Last reply
                          0
                          Reply
                          • Reply as topic
                          Log in to reply
                          • Oldest to Newest
                          • Newest to Oldest
                          • Most Votes


                          • Login

                          • Don't have an account? Register

                          • Login or register to search.
                          • First post
                            Last post
                          0
                          • Categories
                          • Recent
                          • Tags
                          • Popular
                          • Users