There's times I wish I could produce videos .... and right now's one of them
I've had a look at our current B727-200F ADV JT8D-9 base pack files (only) .... both NTL/VHF and TL versions. No time to check "the lot" though.
Both of these contain correct data by virtue of content and Last Modified dates for their supporting FDE files, so, no problem's there.
I took the TL version for a spin. It doesn't perform any differently from the NTL/VHF version. Both use the very same weight and power assignments. The only difference is their CFG stated Lighting configurations and 3D models .... which is why they're separate base pack files.
I loaded the simulation as per the current guide and applied the same recommended power settings to fly more-or-less the same climb profile all the way up to cruising altitude.
I didn't experience any problem/s at all
I need to say the current guide was compiled almost 10 years ago. If I were recompiling it now (and I may), then, apart from fixing a few minor typo's I'd likely make a few "very minor adjustments" to what's currently recommended based on experience since gained with these B727 simulations .... to the extent I'd probably now recommend a slightly shallower ROC all the way up to cruising altitude, but, for around the same recommended power settings.
In order to be able to reply to this query (since it's been a while since I'd properly flown any of our B727's) I performed 4X MGW departure T/O's .... climbing to cruising altitude (31,000 FT) during each test.
The first 2 tests followed the present guide whilst the last 2 tests were flown in accordance with a shallower climb profile all the way up to cruising altitude .... and each using the same recommended power settings. I never hit 300 KTS at any stage. My climb speed remained at a steady 270 through 290 KIAS with the simulation eventually settling into a 31,000 FT cruise at around 295 KIAS or MACH 0.78 .... and which is about right.
I simply can't replicate the issue you've described .... at least not in accordance with the way I fly our B727 simulations.
Just a few advisory details ....
In the case of our JT8D-9 powered B727 simulations, when correctly paired with our corresponding JT8D-9 panels, the maximum power setting used for TO should not exceed N2 94.2% .... and which equates to the indicated pre-bugged EPR value of 2.04 (that for the JT8D-7 it's lower .... and the -D-15 and -17 each correspondingly higher) if you're using the panels we market. If you're not using our panels .... then .... all of my words will be about as useless as tits on a bull.
"IF" .... you're using greater than the recommended maximum power setting and/or are too slow to reduce power after clean up .... and/or are flying a shallower ROC .... and/or are much lighter than MGW also .... THEN (all of these factors combined) .... you're likely going to get into trouble with airspeed and very quickly if you don't manage the power.
"IF" you've set a much lighter than MGW loading .... THEN .... you can/should probably be using a reduced TO power setting (just as we advised in the case of a similar L-1011 report) .... provided you've also got a good RWY length of course, or in cases of shorter RWY's, use the recommended maximum power setting, but, once cleaned up after T/O opt to use a less power throughout the climb and whatever ROC might be appropriate in order to keep airspeed under control. I read your evidence that you've apparently done this, but, I've never known power indications to be "THAT LOW".
Flying these B727 simulations .... at no stage should the AI pitch attitude ever be allowed to exceed +10 (+11 at the very most) degrees.
Again .... I can't replicate your problem in accordance with the way I/we recommend these simulations be flown
I suspect your difficulties may simply come down to "technique".
Dare I ask though .... Have you, by any chance, applied any FDE editing yourself ?
PLEASE NOTE: I'm not suggesting you've edited your FDE's, but rather, are merely inquiring as to whether, or not, you may have.
Other than the above advice ....
I also note you say you've checked your panel/base pack assignments .... BUT .... suggest you re-check these once again. The FDE supporting these simulations represent different weight and power statements for each aircraft version and if mismatched "WILL MOST CERTAINLY" throw performance/s right out of whack.
Try reinstalling everything also .... just in case what you currently have was corrupted during downloading processes. Such "CAN" (albeit rarely) happen.
Mark C
AKL/NZ