Results 1 to 17 of 17
  1. Username Protected
    Member

    Posts
    51 Posts
    Thanked 28 times
    Phenom 100 Owner & Pilot
    Join Date
    Joined Jan 2021
       #1  

    ForeFlight Phenom 100 FL400 and FL410 Calculations

    I am planning a trip from KVNY to KLNK 8am PT on 8/6/2021 via HARYS4.LAS Direct. Payload 720, start fuel 2750#, with 50# for taxi. Looking at optimal cruise altitude, I noticed ForeFlight is calculating FL400 and FL410 with more fuel burn. I have not seen this in the past, particularly when temps are ISA minus.

    I'd like to hear from another Phenom 100 operators if they are experiencing the same calculation. Am I missing something?
  2. Username Protected
    Member

    Posts
    53 Posts
    Thanked 35 times
    Phenom 100 Owner & Pilot
    Join Date
    Joined Oct 2020
    #2  
    (Username Protected),

    I see that too. FL390 is less fuel than FL410. I’m on iPhone at present and can’t really look but wondering what the temps are reading? Name:  DD1CD829-3E70-451A-B2AB-9CFA7D00548A.jpg
Views: 1238
Size:  58.0 KB
  3. Username Protected
    Member

    Posts
    51 Posts
    Thanked 28 times
    Phenom 100 Owner & Pilot
    Join Date
    Joined Jan 2021
       #3  
    Temps attached. I’m getting different numbers than you. I have my correction sliders zero’d out in the aircraft performance profile. NavLog and Wind Advisor do not match for me either.
    Name:  7045C9AA-173B-46F9-A6A9-DC5A23BCCF7F.jpg
Views: 1173
Size:  93.6 KBName:  FBF27E8A-5499-4C7E-8B94-12E6BDCEF4CF.jpg
Views: 1204
Size:  55.3 KB
  4. Username Protected
    Member

    Posts
    53 Posts
    Thanked 35 times
    Phenom 100 Owner & Pilot
    Join Date
    Joined Oct 2020
    #4  
    Well, I was on my iPhone and didn’t properly enter the weights. My performance profile is zeroed out too. I also had 8pm instead of 8:30 am pacific but I believe they use estimated winds that far out, not


    Name:  54CAEA8B-2AF8-404D-8909-66E9EDFE25DD.jpg
Views: 1184
Size:  143.7 KB

    Name:  11C018B7-28AD-4588-ADF9-5CE4C2DD8CE6.jpg
Views: 1194
Size:  55.5 KB
  5. Username Protected
    Member

    Posts
    51 Posts
    Thanked 28 times
    Phenom 100 Owner & Pilot
    Join Date
    Joined Jan 2021
       #5  
    They use forecast winds within 7 days. Something is off. Was not like this a week ago when I was planning a Florida trip. Fuel burn should be around 1900#s at FL400 or FL410.
  6. Username Protected
    Star Contributor

    Posts
    745 Posts
    Thanked 507 times
    Phenom 300 Owner & Pilot
    Join Date
    Joined Oct 2020
    #6  
    I looked at this with (Username Protected) yesterday and sent the following feedback to ForeFlight:

    I ran two similar flight plans using my account, attaching the nav logs. The FL390 version gets to TOC at 0:37 (close to LAS waypoint). The FL410 version is at FL391 by LAS (so same performance up to that point), but doesn't reach FL410 until 1:12 into the flight. As a former P100 pilot I can guarantee to you it doesn't take 35 minutes to climb 2000 ft (57 ft per min?) and the POH doesn't match that either.

    ForeFlight Navlog FL390.pdf
    ForeFlight Navlog FL410.pdf

    Will see what they come back with.
  7. Username Protected
    Member

    Posts
    31 Posts
    Thanked 63 times
    Other Services Provider
    Join Date
    Joined Jun 2021
    #7  
    Hi all, (Username Protected) with ForeFlight


    I appreciate the feedback on this. Turns out there was a bug in our model since Embraer's In-Flight software ran FL410 twice and the climb time/fuel/distance values were doubled for that FL. I fixed the model a couple of hours ago and added Mach 0.60 as well (another request that came in). It should automatically update the next time you start FF (if unsure, killing the app and restarting always forces model updates).


    Right now I show 43 minutes to FL410 with 10300 lbs TOW and ISA+10C through FL400 and ISA+1C at FL410 (data ends right around ISA to ISA+5C at FL410 above 10000 lbs).
  8. Username Protected
    Star Contributor

    Posts
    745 Posts
    Thanked 507 times
    Phenom 300 Owner & Pilot
    Join Date
    Joined Oct 2020
    #8  
    (Username Protected),

    Thanks for fixing the issue and replying in the forums. Love ForeFlight use it every flight!
  9. Username Protected
    Member

    Posts
    51 Posts
    Thanked 28 times
    Phenom 100 Owner & Pilot
    Join Date
    Joined Jan 2021
       #9  
    (Username Protected),

    Thank you to you and your team for listening and hopping on this quickly. It is appreciated.

    I'm looking forward to seeing Runway Analysis for the Phenom 100 in the future.

    Same as (Username Protected), I love ForeFlight and use it every flight. If there is any way I can assist making ForeFlight further optimized for the Phenom 100, please let me know.
  10. Username Protected
    Really Frequent Poster

    Posts
    155 Posts
    Thanked 58 times
    Phenom 100 Owner & Pilot
    Join Date
    Joined Oct 2020
    #10  
    Ditto, it's awesome to see you participating in the forums! Can't wait for Runway Analysis for the 100.
  11. Username Protected
    Member

    Posts
    31 Posts
    Thanked 63 times
    Other Services Provider
    Join Date
    Joined Jun 2021
    #11  
    Happy to provide a little extra support. Runway Analysis is more or less "around the corner". At least for BCU-7 aircraft. BCU-6 will be about a month later.

    General curious question - does anyone use Opera software for this or does everyone use a third party app with full airport/runway data support? I'm guessing the latter, just not sure.

    Another curious question. Phenom 100 supports a range of level off altitudes from 400 ft through 1500 ft (those two specifically are called out in the AFM or POH). This is the initial acceleration level off after an engine failure during takeoff. I'm curious what pilots are trained on here. With the 100 being somewhat performance challenged, is a 400 ft level off trained on or higher? Is the concept of clearing obstacles in a Final Segment climb trained on?
  12. Username Protected
    Really Frequent Poster

    Posts
    155 Posts
    Thanked 58 times
    Phenom 100 Owner & Pilot
    Join Date
    Joined Oct 2020
    #12  
    Interesting, I had no idea that the BCU affected the performance tables. I recently upgraded to BCU-8, presumably it's reasonable to use BCU-7 numbers?
  13. Username Protected
    Member

    Posts
    51 Posts
    Thanked 28 times
    Phenom 100 Owner & Pilot
    Join Date
    Joined Jan 2021
       #13  
    Quote Originally Posted by (Username Protected) View Post
    General curious question - does anyone use Opera software for this or does everyone use a third party app with full airport/runway data support? I'm guessing the latter, just not sure.
    I personally use a third party app for this. I believe Opera is uncommon and I have not met anyone that uses it.


    Quote Originally Posted by (Username Protected) View Post
    With the 100 being somewhat performance challenged, is a 400 ft level off trained on or higher?
    I have been trained to climb V2 until minimum 1000' AGL or clear of terrain, whichever is higher. Then transition to Vfs.


    Quote Originally Posted by (Username Protected) View Post
    Is the concept of clearing obstacles in a Final Segment climb trained on?
    I do not believe so. You would not transition to the Final Segment until cleared of terrain.
  14. Username Protected
    Frequent Poster

    Posts
    102 Posts
    Thanked 123 times
    Phenom Instructor/Mentor
    Join Date
    Joined Oct 2020
    #14  
    (Username Protected)-

    Hello, I've been instructing in the Phenoms for over a decade, presently I do not know a single person who uses OPERA. When the planes were new it seemed more common for operators to carry a laptop and run OPERA in-flight, but there were issues with OPERA not supporting newer Microsoft OSs, so it became harder and harder to make it work. Starting as far back as 2011/ 2012 I remember Embraer pushing hard for pilots to use iPreflight for their day to day performance calculations- even they didn't see OPERA being used "tactically".

    For both the 100 and 300, the minimum AP engagement height on one engine is 1000' AGL. Because of this, there is a widely used standard that 1000' AGL is the acceleration altitude. I personally train pilots to confirm and use the iPreflight acceleration altitude, but I don't think most pilots are very aware of the nuances of the segments and the possibility that an obstacle may need to be cleared in the final segment. iPreflight seems to default to 400' AGL for the 100 if the SDP doesn't require otherwise.

    Can't wait for the 100 to be available! Tyson set me up with the CJ3 when you rolled out RA and I couldn't be more impressed with the product and value you are delivering.
  15. Username Protected
    Member

    Posts
    31 Posts
    Thanked 63 times
    Other Services Provider
    Join Date
    Joined Jun 2021
    #15  
    Hi (Username Protected)

    [you're busy in the CJP forum too, I hear ;-) Thanks for your CJ3 feedback and contribution around the recent KBDN questions there. I provided some feedback to Stephen E, which he may share in the forum]

    This is very helpful to me. Since none of our currently supported aircraft support a true four segment climb with a Final Climb segment, we target 1500 ft gross level off height in a 2nd segment climb, or higher if an obstacle pushes it higher. The problem with that on the 100 is that it's quite restrictive once you get much above 3000 ft elevation and hot/heavy (and forget F2 takeoff...).

    I was looking at a 400 ft level off solution, but then you still need to get to 1500 ft in a Final segment climb. I'm curious if iPreFlight supports that Final segment climb to 1500 ft (or higher with obstacle) or they simply end the climb at 400 ft if an obstacle does not push it higher?
  16. Username Protected
    Frequent Poster

    Posts
    102 Posts
    Thanked 123 times
    Phenom Instructor/Mentor
    Join Date
    Joined Oct 2020
    #16  
    From conversations with APG, I believe they calculate the net flight path all the way to the holding fix and hold they provide for the SDP, or 30 miles if straight out. So yes, from what they’ve told me, they continue to evaluate the net flight path versus obstacles in the final segment.
  17. Username Protected
    Frequent Poster

    Posts
    104 Posts
    Thanked 39 times
    Phenom Instructor/Mentor
    Join Date
    Joined Oct 2020
    #17  
    The only reason we teach 1000’ at CAE for acceleration altitude is due to the single engine AP engagement limitation. It makes it easier to train. It’s 400’-1500’ as previously stated and varies depending on the obstacles at the take off airport. If you look at DAL taking off north it’s actually higher than 400’ due to the buildings downtown.

Posting Permissions