dc-9 xtra fuel

[cgw444]

Is there a way to add the optional fuel tanks that were offered
for the dc-9. The one I can remember is the 580 gal. that
was placed in the fuselage just forward of the wing.

[aerofoto - HJG Admin]

There "probably is" .... BUT .... possibly not wiithout risking "buggering up" the current panel related weight calculations in respect of T/O and FLAP V-speed, and engine thrust computations too .... since, as I recall, there "IS" a relationship between all of these factors and each of the DC9 panels we currently offer "HERE" ".

As my friend and colleague George CARTY will probably confirm .... the engineering behind each of the HILMERBY DC9 panels we curretly offer "IS" extremly complex !!!! ;D

IF" you're using these/our DC9's with the panels we offer .... then all of the above indicated concerns are probably quite valid.

"IF NOT" .... then adding more fuel/tanking (probably per CFG modifications) may upset the current WEIGHT & BALANCE data .... as has been compiled by us .... and which might, in turn, result in pitch/trim issues in virtual flight or even ground stability problems too.

In all honesty .... I don't really think you'll need to add any more fuel than what we provide per the maximum/100% fuel loadings each of our DC9's installs with (the majority of our aircraft each load into FS with both 100% fuel and PAX/FREIGHT loadings .... resulting in a nominal default overload .... with the end user then being expected to reduce either, fuel, or PAX/FREIGHT, or both, accordingly, in order to set each aircraft version at, or around, its certified MGTOW). Although tanking configurations between DC9 aircraft/operators does differ considerably, we only represent 1 or 2 configurations at the very most .... and what we currently provide, in terms of fuel loadings, is probably "more generous enough" anyway in most cases/for most flying

"IF" you want to carry more fuel .... in order to be able to just fly further .... then I'd recommend simply restricting/reducing your PAX/FREIGHT loading in order avoid having to offload excessive fuel quantities .... AND ALSO .... avoid editing the CFG related tanking data which may, potentially, risk buggering up a number parameters as I've already hinted above

Mark C
AKL/NZ

[n156499000]

But if you want to live with some panel incompatability, here are the available fuel configurations for the DC-9 Series 50.

580 US Gal Supplemental Fuel
[FUEL]
Center1 = -8.595, 0.0, 0.0, 893.0, 10.7
Center2 = -0.875, 0.0, 0.0, 580.0, 1.0
LeftMain = -13.814, -18.0, 0.00, 1393.0, 7.7
RightMain = -13.814, 18.0, 0.00, 1393.0, 7.7
fuel_type = 2.00
number_of_tank_selectors = 1
electric_pump = 0

780 US Gal Supplemental Fuel
[FUEL]
Center1 = -8.595, 0.0, 0.0, 893.0, 10.7
Center2 = -0.875, 0.0, 0.0, 780.0, 1.0
LeftMain = -13.814, -18.0, 0.00, 1393.0, 7.7
RightMain = -13.814, 18.0, 0.00, 1393.0, 7.7
fuel_type = 2.00
number_of_tank_selectors = 1
electric_pump = 0

1000 US Gal Supplemental Fuel
[FUEL]
Center1 = -8.595, 0.0, 0.0, 893.0, 10.7
Center2 = -0.875, 0.0, 0.0, 1000.0, 1.0
LeftMain = -13.814, -18.0, 0.00, 1393.0, 7.7
RightMain = -13.814, 18.0, 0.00, 1393.0, 7.7
fuel_type = 2.00
number_of_tank_selectors = 1
electric_pump = 0

1360 US Gal Supplemental Fuel
[FUEL]
Center1 = -8.595, 0.0, 0.0, 893.0, 10.7
Center2 = -0.875, 0.0, 0.0, 580.0, 1.0
Center3 = -22.414, 0.0, 0.0, 780.0, 1.0
LeftMain = -13.814, -18.0, 0.00, 1393.0, 7.7
RightMain = -13.814, 18.0, 0.00, 1393.0, 7.7
fuel_type = 2.00
number_of_tank_selectors = 1
electric_pump = 0

1560 US Gal Supplemental Fuel
[FUEL]
Center1 = -8.595, 0.0, 0.0, 893.0, 10.7
Center2 = -0.875, 0.0, 0.0, 780.0, 1.0
Center3 = -22.414, 0.0, 0.0, 780.0, 1.0
LeftMain = -13.814, -18.0, 0.00, 1393.0, 7.7
RightMain = -13.814, 18.0, 0.00, 1393.0, 7.7
fuel_type = 2.00
number_of_tank_selectors = 1
electric_pump = 0

1780 US Gal Supplemental Fuel
[FUEL]
Center1 = -8.595, 0.0, 0.0, 893.0, 10.7
Center2 = -0.875, 0.0, 0.0, 780.0, 1.0
Center3 = -22.414, 0.0, 0.0, 1080.0, 1.0
LeftMain = -13.814, -18.0, 0.00, 1393.0, 7.7
RightMain = -13.814, 18.0, 0.00, 1393.0, 7.7
fuel_type = 2.00
number_of_tank_selectors = 1
electric_pump = 0

2250 US Gal Supplemental Fuel
[FUEL]
Center1 = -8.595, 0.0, 0.0, 893.0, 10.7
Center2 = -0.875, 0.0, 0.0, 1250.0, 1.0
Center3 = -22.414, 0.0, 0.0, 1000.0, 1.0
LeftMain = -13.814, -18.0, 0.00, 1393.0, 7.7
RightMain = -13.814, 18.0, 0.00, 1393.0, 7.7
fuel_type = 2.00
number_of_tank_selectors = 1
electric_pump = 0

[aerofoto - HJG Admin]

But if you want to live with some panel incompatability, here are the available fuel configurations for the DC-9 Series 50

.


George CARTY did actually produce, and supply me, "4 tank versions" (increased fuel capacity) for each the following DC9 panel/aircraft base pack/engine types ....


DC9-10 JT8D-1 4 TANK VERSION .... both panel and base pack !

DC9-10 JT8D-7 4 TANK VERSION .... both panel and base pack !

DC9-10 JT8D-9 4 TANK VERSION .... both panel and base pack !

DC9-30 JT8D-9 4 TANK VERSION .... both panel and base pack !

DC9-30 JT8D-11 4 TANK VERSION .... both panel and base pack !

DC9-30F JT8D-9 4 TANK VERSION .... both panel and base pack !

DC9-30F JT8D-11 4 TANK VERSION .... both panel and base pack !

DC9-30 REFAN JT8D-109 4 TANK VERSION .... both panel and base pack !


These other files were never released by us/HJG .... simply because we (George and myself) decided that 1 tanking configuration "only" for each of the DC9 panel/aircraft base pack/engine types we represent .... and which are currently represented by "16 different DC9 Panel" versions anyway .... was "QUITE SUFFICIENT" for HJG purposes as well as being good representation of the DC9 generally.

Whilst we (George and myself again) are both "fine" with the prospect of each of these other tanking options .... we considered "some people" might simply not be unable to adapt, easily, to the concept of there being 2 different tanking configurations available for some of the same DC9 panel/aircraft base pack/engine type options represented by us/HJG.

We therefore released "3 TANK" versions (only) for all DC9-10, -20, -30 SERIES aircraft .... and "4 TANK" versions (only) for all DC9-40, and -50 SERIES aircraft .... these, according to our research, being the "most common" tanking configuration applied to each of these aircraft types.

Aircraft configurations do, of course, vary "considerably" among operators !

I do have "ALL" of these other non-released "4 TANK" DC9 panel/aircraft base pack/engine type options safely tucked away .... and.... haven't, yet, decided what, if anything, I'll do with them .... apart from continuing to use them myself

"N156499000" .... thanks for the data you've provided .... BUT .... without wanting to sound like a "killjoy" (because that's honestly not my actual intention), folk contemplating using it must be reminded .... that although this other data may work OK (barring "possible" incompatibilities hinted above) we/HJG can only provide support for the data which is supplied by us .... as is contained within each of the files currently downloadable from our own website

Mark C
AKL/NZ

[acourt]

The easiest solution I've found is to add the appropriate amount of aux fuel back into the center tank enroute, once you've burned a sufficient amount from the center tank. It's not pretty, since your takeoff weight isn't accurate, but it does give your the extra range.

[aerofoto - HJG Admin]

That's .... probably .... the better way to handle this sutuation (if one feels they need to) rather than stuffing around with any of the currently stated CFG based FUEL values which could, possibly, risk erroneous panel/gauge indications or other simulation performance issues.

The CENTER fuel tanks on each of our DC9's do represent the greatest capacity .... and therefore constitute the greatest "weight" in terms of fuel loading.

In my basic FLYING GUIDE notes (which are "very basic" recommendations only), I've recommend keeping most of the fuel quantity outboard .... in the wing tanks .... only because doing so is/seems to be by far the best/easiest method by which to reduce all-up weight (remembering most of our aircraft load into FS with both 100% fuel and PAX/freight loads which the end user is then expected to adjust, manually, per fuel, or payload, or both, editing/reduction using the FS based FUEL/PAYLOAD plan) in order to set each aircraft version at/near it's certified MGTOW. This does seem to work fine despite the fact I don't know whether or not what I've recommended is, actually, an authentic procedure. FS "IS" (from my experience at least) more-or-less respectful of weight .... to a point .... but .... in some cases (except in cases of obvious fuel load imbalance) it doesn't seem to mind a heck of lot just how that simulated weight, like fuel, might be distributed .... BUT .... that's just FS for ya ;D

Using our DC9 panels .... as procedure immersing as these may be in a lot of respects .... I don't think fuel quantity can be transferred from one tank to another using the panel related switches (like "IS" currently possible using the FSFT CONCORDE PROJECT MACH 2 simulation which we host "HERE") without pausing FS, and then manually editing FS based FUEL/PAYLOAD plan, and then restarting/unpausing FS again .... which I, personally, resent/avoid doing once started with everything up and running well ;D

Mark C
AKL/NZ

[acourt]

Mark,

You've got the right idea with fuel management. For all models of the DC-9 (including the 717), fuel is normally loaded first into the main tanks, until full, then then into the center fuel tank, until full, then into any aux tanks.

As far as use of the fuel goes, the 717 burns center fuel first, then main fuel. The DC-9 uses only main tank fuel for takeoff and landing. During taxi and once airborne, center fuel should be used first.

Al

[cgw444]

Thanks for all the info.

The reason I ask this question to begin with is I recently tried
a dc9 flight from jfk to tncm [st maarten] based on an incident that I read about involving an overseas national dc9-33cf.

That aircraft had to ditch because after 3 go arounds due to bad weather they ran out of fuel.

I used the evergreen dc9cf but it had standard fuel so I reloaded
in mid air - so I guess thats what I will stick with.

[aerofoto - HJG Admin]

The reason I ask this question to begin with is I recently tried
a dc9 flight from jfk to tncm [st maarten] based on an incident that I read about involving an overseas national dc9-33cf.

That aircraft had to ditch because after 3 go arounds due to bad weather they ran out of fuel

That's the flight where everyone .... with the exception of 1 PAX .... all went boating isn't it ?

As I recall it was an ONA DC9-33F leased to ALM .... N935F .... on May 2nd 1970.

"IF" .... you reduce your PAX/FREIGHT load "a bit" (though it shouldn't be necessary) .... so as to avoid having to offload too much fuel quantity in order to set the simulation at/near it's certified MGTOW .... then our "DC9-30 JT9D-17" aircraft base pack and panel combination should still give you/ensure more than sufficient fuel capacity to complete a New York/St.Marten flight .... "direct" .... and with the tanking configuration we currently offer.

Mark C
AKL/NZ