Notices

C Series Info

Old 12-29-2017, 05:12 PM
  #1931  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Jun 2015
Posts: 3,117
Default

Originally Posted by JamesBond View Post
The A350 manuals absolutely suck. You could throw out about 400 pages (I am not kidding) of the Vol 2 and wouldn't miss anything essential.
Personal experience? Just looked on DeltaNet. Seems the 350 gurus didn't even bother to convert Vol 1 and/or Vol 2 to "Delta Common."
FL370esq is offline  
Old 12-29-2017, 05:27 PM
  #1932  
Da Hudge
 
80ktsClamp's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Oct 2006
Position: Poodle Whisperer
Posts: 17,473
Default

Originally Posted by crewdawg View Post
I agree and I use it often, but that doesn't mean having VNAV/Managed work in heading mode wouldn't be a nice feature. It would have been helpful on many arrivals in AMS. Plus, pretty much every time I touch the V/S knob, the Captain freaks out...then goes on about how this isn't the 737, blah blah blah. Then when he gets a short notice restriction, rather than going to V/S, he scrambles through the 12 step process, fix info, abeam, pull for heading, etc... Then is full boards and speeding up when he figures out we are way above the path.
Oh gosh. Guys flipped out on me using V/S in the Boeings, too. Button pushers that don't understand why they are doing what they are doing can get extremely annoying.

3:1 math quick and a transition to V/S or FPV fix things very quick with high accuracy on every airplane... then go banging away at the MCDU to back you up with the tennis ball/barney's butthole.
80ktsClamp is offline  
Old 12-29-2017, 05:28 PM
  #1933  
veut gagner à la loterie
 
forgot to bid's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: Light Chop
Posts: 23,286
Default

Originally Posted by FL370esq View Post
Personal experience? Just looked on DeltaNet. Seems the 350 gurus didn't even bother to convert Vol 1 and/or Vol 2 to "Delta Common."
We may be going towards Airbus fcom. Idk. I'll ask. But the 320 vol 2 changed recently to more fcom like, which btw, is changing to less technical material.
forgot to bid is offline  
Old 12-29-2017, 05:29 PM
  #1934  
Da Hudge
 
80ktsClamp's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Oct 2006
Position: Poodle Whisperer
Posts: 17,473
Default

Originally Posted by forgot to bid View Post
We may be going towards Airbus fcom. Idk. I'll ask. But the 320 vol 2 changed recently to more fcom like, which btw, is changing to less technical material.

...and chock freaking full of errors!
80ktsClamp is offline  
Old 12-29-2017, 05:51 PM
  #1935  
Gets Weekends Off
 
GogglesPisano's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Sep 2013
Position: On the hotel shuttle
Posts: 5,806
Default

Originally Posted by 80ktsClamp View Post
...and chock freaking full of errors!
Errors? You want errors? 2 years on the 717 and the Vol 2 is still a doozy. 4 pages on how the toilets work (all wrong.) Maybe 6 pages on the Autoflight System (mostly wrong.) No wonder no one reads them.

Best systems book ever was the CRJ200 FCOM. Enough schematics, PSI’s and voltages to make an engineer wet his pants. Absorb what you want, discard the rest.

Now they’re written by interns whose second language is English.
GogglesPisano is offline  
Old 12-29-2017, 05:57 PM
  #1936  
veut gagner à la loterie
 
forgot to bid's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: Light Chop
Posts: 23,286
Default

Hey now, 320 fctm had like 3 or 4 places referencing the stick shaker...

Btw, there was a vendor issue on the 320 vol 2 that could not be resolved. They had to publish it and next rewrite will have a new vendor.
forgot to bid is offline  
Old 12-29-2017, 06:01 PM
  #1937  
veut gagner à la loterie
 
forgot to bid's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: Light Chop
Posts: 23,286
Default

Originally Posted by GogglesPisano View Post
Errors? You want errors? 2 years on the 717 and the Vol 2 is still a doozy. 4 pages on how the toilets work (all wrong.) Maybe 6 pages on the Autoflight System (mostly wrong.) No wonder no one reads them.

Best systems book ever was the CRJ200 FCOM. Enough schematics, PSI’s and voltages to make an engineer wet his pants. Absorb what you want, discard the rest.

Now they’re written by interns whose second language is English.
I think the 717 fleet was forced to write in the books "reference afm..."

But there was no 717 afm. Or something along those lines, whatever it was the book didn't exist. I think PLAD wanted it in there because the 737 has it.
forgot to bid is offline  
Old 12-29-2017, 06:17 PM
  #1938  
Gets Weekends Off
 
GogglesPisano's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Sep 2013
Position: On the hotel shuttle
Posts: 5,806
Default

Originally Posted by forgot to bid View Post
I think the 717 fleet was forced to write in the books "reference afm..."

But there was no 717 afm. Or something along those lines, whatever it was the book didn't exist. I think PLAD wanted it in there because the 737 has it.
My take: The 717 is the red-headed step child of the Boeing Borg. They don’t support it. They had an intern write the Vol2 15 years ago and no one has paid much attention to it since. I’ve seen a fair amount of grammatical errors and contradictions.

When I went through 737 and ER schools, however, I was very impressed with the Vol2’s. It’s as if they took an engineer PhD and an English PhD and put them in a room together and told them to write a factual systems description — oh and by the way update it every 6 months or so. With the 717 it was: Just knock it out Suraj and maybe you’ll get a job at Boeing one day.

In either case, more pictures and fewer paragraphs are what pilots really want.
GogglesPisano is offline  
Old 12-29-2017, 06:36 PM
  #1939  
veut gagner à la loterie
 
forgot to bid's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: Light Chop
Posts: 23,286
Default

Originally Posted by GogglesPisano View Post
My take: The 717 is the red-headed step child of the Boeing Borg. They don’t support it. They had an intern write the Vol2 15 years ago and no one has paid much attention to it since. I’ve seen a fair amount of grammatical errors and contradictions.

When I went through 737 and ER schools, however, I was very impressed with the Vol2’s. It’s as if they took an engineer PhD and an English PhD and put them in a room together and told them to write a factual systems description — oh and by the way update it every 6 months or so. With the 717 it was: Just knock it out Suraj and maybe you’ll get a job at Boeing one day.

In either case, more pictures and fewer paragraphs are what pilots really want.
I don't know if this is true but I met an instructor on the 88 years ago who said he was tasked with making the 88 fctm. They handed him the 737 fctm and said make it match.
forgot to bid is offline  
Old 12-29-2017, 06:56 PM
  #1940  
Gets Weekends Off
 
qball's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Mar 2011
Position: Cockpit speaker volume knob set to eleven.
Posts: 1,410
Default

Originally Posted by JamesBond View Post
The A350 manuals absolutely suck. You could throw out about 400 pages (I am not kidding) of the Vol 2 and wouldn't miss anything essential.
The original Airbus manuals were terrible over 20 years ago. Sadly, we seem to be making ours more like them.
qball is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
acousticgrace
Regional
10
09-25-2014 10:37 AM
rmr1992
Cargo
24
09-11-2014 09:17 AM
Horhay
United
131
02-13-2013 10:58 PM
fartsarefunny
Foreign
6
06-14-2012 05:17 AM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Your Privacy Choices