C Series Info
01-28-2019, 10:40 PM
#3351
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2013
Position: A320 Left seat
Posts: 2,580
Originally Posted by 80ktsClamp
We aren't. Try again. AA has self imposed limits like NW used to do.
But I do agree on the dual trucks, I never worried about the 757 having stopping power, the A321 is kind of stingy when it comes to giving up her energy once the weights on the wheels.
01-29-2019, 03:54 AM
#3353
:-)
Joined APC: Feb 2007
Posts: 7,339
Originally Posted by J Fish
I have heard one of the big issues when anylizing replacing the 757 with the 321 isn't range but cargo capacity. Apparently this is due to brake energy limits on the 321 due to the single truck landing gear.
AA has a few 321s in a 102 seat config for transcons, I wonder how profitable that is. Inevitably, the A321 is going to be a major player in crossing the Atlantic, since the alternatives are limited. The 797 doesn't have an engine yet, and the current efficient engines can't be scaled up, or down to fit it. That airplane is a long way off.
01-29-2019, 04:59 AM
#3354
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2013
Position: Port Bus
Posts: 725
Originally Posted by Big E 757
This is the first I’m hearing about it too, and I’m based there. If it’s an airport limitation, I’d like to hear about it.
But I do agree on the dual trucks, I never worried about the 757 having stopping power, the A321 is kind of stingy when it comes to giving up her energy once the weights on the wheels.
But I do agree on the dual trucks, I never worried about the 757 having stopping power, the A321 is kind of stingy when it comes to giving up her energy once the weights on the wheels.
01-29-2019, 05:40 AM
#3355
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2015
Posts: 438
Originally Posted by Hillbilly
According to the 10-9 - G, P, R & U are restricted to 10kts straight and 5kts turns.
Is that for the 767-400? I’m curious because of how they wrote that. Two separate sentences inside the box. I think it’s for the 767-400, but one would think they would’ve have worded it differently if not. I.E. For all other aircraft, ............
01-29-2019, 06:46 AM
#3356
Can't abide NAI
Joined APC: Jun 2007
Position: Douglas Aerospace post production Flight Test & Work Around Engineering bulletin dissembler
Posts: 11,989
Originally Posted by 80ktsClamp
We aren't. Try again. AA has self imposed limits like NW used to do.
Almost all the E175's do this to remain within our scope limits too. The jet is certified to 89,000lbs, we limit permitted flying at 86k.
The FAA does not care, and will even issue an Airworthiness Certificate with whatever weight you desire on it, as long as it is less than the aircraft's actual certified limit.
Last edited by Bucking Bar; 01-29-2019 at 06:58 AM.
01-29-2019, 07:33 AM
#3357
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2005
Posts: 1,943
Originally Posted by Pogey Bait
The A321neo has a completely different wheel braking system than the A321ceo; the neo will not even get warm when landing in DCA, in the middle of summer, after a transcon.
Just curious as to how the system is so different given that a typical MED autobrake landing on the 321ceo gets 500+ temps within five minutes.
01-29-2019, 07:52 AM
#3358
:-)
Joined APC: Feb 2007
Posts: 7,339
Originally Posted by contrails
Can you elaborate a little?
Just curious as to how the system is so different given that a typical MED autobrake landing on the 321ceo gets 500+ temps within five minutes.
Just curious as to how the system is so different given that a typical MED autobrake landing on the 321ceo gets 500+ temps within five minutes.
https://www.safran-landing-systems.c...v_15_mid_2.pdf
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
