Santos Dumont Airport

Ok guys I did a quick search on the subject and didnt find, but I might have missed it, so if there is a topic about it already, just let me know and close this one.

Anyways, I’ve tried to fly with E-195 to Santos Dumont airport and the performance check said it couldnt land/t.o. due to the size of the runway,

This is totally out of reality, since there are many, many flights with the 195/190 and etc…

Then I went to check the Boeing and Airbus perf tool… Which is also totally wrong. There are several airlines that fly in and out SDU operating Boeing 737, a320/19/18 and embraer’s 190/195

Buy the way I fly the a320/19/18 into the sdu and we use flex thrust during t.o. so… yeah

So, whats up?

AS uses a heavily simplified performance system. There will always be edge cases like London City, SDU or other stuff like hot-and-high airports that won’t work as expected. Not much we can do about this. It might improve with future versions of the performance system, but I doubt that it will be “perfect” in the foreseeable future.

Okay, thanks for the answer.

Wouldnt be the case in this kind of situation to "cheat" and make it more real?

In my (very newbie) opinion the runway lenght are there just for the perf tool right? If it is wrong it loses the reason to be there. So in airports like london city and SDU why not change the lenght of the runways to the minimum necessary of those airplanes that really fly there, this way it would remain real on the "airplane model/size" limitation instead of being real on the numbers which does not mean anything if it is wrong.

What you guys think?

Of course this would require some work, but maybe members that are into aviation at this level can help.

It would just cause the same problem in another way: Suddenly you have far too large aircraft operating out of airports that can’t support them in real live (Example: if I remember correctly you can fly an A300 (?) into LCY right now). Same amount of complaints, just by other people ;)

I understand, but I was just thinking on how to make it better. I still think that if it were corrected in the way that I said above would be more realistic. In real life you probably can fly an a300 in and out a very very short runway, it just wouldnt be feasible in a line operation. Aircraft can take off and land @ very short runways, what changes is that it doesnt make sense to penalize payload or power or turnaround time to operate in some airports. There are a lot of options to increase MTOW in short runways, like Derated take off. If the short runways airports could handle aircrafts like a300 in their minimum operating weight would still be more realistic than not having aircraft that can operate on their maximum take off weight on those runways.

Im very new here and Im not trying to change the rules of the game or anything… Im not even a premium account member YET, but still… I think this game is looking awesome, I really want to continue playing and contributing to the community in any way that i can.

Pardon my ignorance, but how could you increase take off performance by de-rating your engines?

well, we’re going to enter in aerodynamics here, but I’ll try to be simple and make sense…

what really increases the distance required for T.O. its not the distance required for lift off, which most of the times is very low if you use a high lift configuration (slats and flaps), what makes it big is the stop distance at V1(decision speed) in case of a rejected/aborted take off.

So, lets think about it… if you reduce v1, the distance required to stop will be less, but then you enter in another problem, v1 has to be bigger than Vmcg (minimum control on ground speed) which is mostly influenced by the power of the engines. So in case of an engine failure the more power you have in ONE side of the aircraft more counteract "capability" is needed, and this is obtained by the airflow over the controls surfaces which is the same as speed. The same thing applies when flying, Vmc (speed of minimum control) is mostly influenced by offset power. So reducing the maximum trust to the absolute minimum required to take off with a determined weight/pressure alt/wind reduces Vmcg which reduces V1 which reduces required accelerate stop distance with that weight, then you have to keep the power to that maximum setting cuz Vmc is calculated based on it, remember more engine thrust higher Vmc.

In short runways accelerate stop distance is the most limiting factor, and the more weight, more distance required to accelerate to v1 and to stop just before it, if an engine failure occurs. Reducing V1 allows a higher Toff weight