A320 questions, DAL A320 lines
05-25-2010 | 07:00 AM
#21
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: May 2009
Posts: 154
Likes: 0
From: Cessna 152
05-25-2010 | 02:49 PM
#22
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 409
Likes: 0
From: L Side
I spent a lot of time on A300/310, but none on the A320. I will assume similar architecture.
" Profile" cruise would limit autopilot pitch authority to +1.15/-.85 G. Pitch was used to maintain speed within these parameters. The real goal was to limit autothrottle movement and reduce fuel consumption. The book said a 1% reduction in consumption.
I never saw more than 50' variance in reasonablr air. RVSM compliance was never an issue, and ride smoothing for pax was a secondary benefit.
Moutain Wave, or moderate turb would necessitate an exit from "Profile" and restore full autopilot pitch authority.
320/330 drivers : is this similar in your jet ?
" Profile" cruise would limit autopilot pitch authority to +1.15/-.85 G. Pitch was used to maintain speed within these parameters. The real goal was to limit autothrottle movement and reduce fuel consumption. The book said a 1% reduction in consumption.
I never saw more than 50' variance in reasonablr air. RVSM compliance was never an issue, and ride smoothing for pax was a secondary benefit.
Moutain Wave, or moderate turb would necessitate an exit from "Profile" and restore full autopilot pitch authority.
320/330 drivers : is this similar in your jet ?
When the aircraft is in ALT CRZ mode with the autopilot engaged, autothrust engaged in MACH mode, and is within a +/- 3 knot range of the target speed, the autothrust soft mode engages. This mode reduces the thrust variation in cruise, specifically in light turbulence. The autothrust soft mode disengages when the speed deviation fro the target becomes too large or is modified.
From the 320 manual:
SOFT ALTITUDE
On reaching the planned cruise altitude, ALT CRZ engages and the A/THR maintains the speed/mach target.
Two minutes after ALT CRZ engages, if the mach mode is operative, SOFT ALT mode engages. This allows the aircraft to deviate +/- 50 feet from the target altitude, thereby minimizing thrust variations and reducing fuel consumption.
Couldn’t find any numbers on the fuel savings, but 1% sounds reasonable.
05-25-2010 | 03:32 PM
#23
No one's home
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,091
Likes: 0
I created a whole separate thread about flying the bus. With the 330's on property with my company I'm curious about some of the characteristics from Airbus when compared to Boeing. I'm on the 76 right now and find it to be a pleasure to fly. The 767 feels like a Cessna on roids if you ask me....You can always feel what she's going to do, and anticipate every move she's going to make...you cant overfly that airplane. Climbing to altitude with the PW birds are a joy....a little sluggish if you get one of the old GE birds as we have a few in the fleet.
Anyone have an experience in the Bus and the 767?
Anyone have an experience in the Bus and the 767?
The 757 felt a bit less agile than the 767 but I only flew the 76-ER at weights for transcon, not over the pond. Both were very easy to fly although neither had very good drag devices. Both were, like the 737, difficult to slow down/go down.
The -320 family (310/320/321) was a change more in the way one thinks than the way one flies. The FMC is different in that it is FROM a waypoint rather than like in the Boeings TO a way point. Some FCM differences such as the 'bus will NOT start down at TOD unless you activate it.
Handling.. one is FBW. One is not. Being able to go to max AOA for windshear is one major point. No hunting for max AOA, nudging the burble, etc. FULL aft stick and hold on.
Roll. One is aileron deflection for roll rate and the 'bus is commanded roll rate, ie, you can't cross control for x-winds on the bus.
Cockpits. All comfortable and on the -320 you could roast weenies in the winter and hang meat in the summer. VERY effective air conditioning. The pull out table ion the 'bus supports 65Kg. ??
Braking.. we had the brake fans on our 'bus and more often than not, we used them. Braking was good on all but nothing to write home about.
Flaps.. the over-the-nose view on the bus is VERY good with both config 3 and 4.
Autothrottles versus auto-thrust. One moves. One doesn't. The former can give you tactile feedback for movement (even if the engine has failed) and the latter forces you into an instrument scan so you know what your engines are doing. AND if you want to be Jerry Jet-pilot, you can disconnect both and push and shove to your heart's delight.
The 'bus CAN fly with ALL electrics gone. It is not an easy task but if all electrics fail, you have FADECs for the engines, cables to the rudders and a trimmable horizontal stabilizer so while it is DIFFICULT, it is not impossible to fly with ALL electrics gone contrary to myths.
The 'bus IS different but the -80 is different. Play to strengths. respect weaknesses and fly the airplane that has the best trips, the best layovers and forget who made it. All of 'em are GOOD.
05-25-2010 | 08:34 PM
#24
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 102
Likes: 0
From: 767 Right
Flew the 757/767 and the -320 on the line. Got a chance to fly the -330 and -340 at the factory.
The 757 felt a bit less agile than the 767 but I only flew the 76-ER at weights for transcon, not over the pond. Both were very easy to fly although neither had very good drag devices. Both were, like the 737, difficult to slow down/go down.
The -320 family (310/320/321) was a change more in the way one thinks than the way one flies. The FMC is different in that it is FROM a waypoint rather than like in the Boeings TO a way point. Some FCM differences such as the 'bus will NOT start down at TOD unless you activate it.
Handling.. one is FBW. One is not. Being able to go to max AOA for windshear is one major point. No hunting for max AOA, nudging the burble, etc. FULL aft stick and hold on.
Roll. One is aileron deflection for roll rate and the 'bus is commanded roll rate, ie, you can't cross control for x-winds on the bus.
Cockpits. All comfortable and on the -320 you could roast weenies in the winter and hang meat in the summer. VERY effective air conditioning. The pull out table ion the 'bus supports 65Kg. ??
Braking.. we had the brake fans on our 'bus and more often than not, we used them. Braking was good on all but nothing to write home about.
Flaps.. the over-the-nose view on the bus is VERY good with both config 3 and 4.
Autothrottles versus auto-thrust. One moves. One doesn't. The former can give you tactile feedback for movement (even if the engine has failed) and the latter forces you into an instrument scan so you know what your engines are doing. AND if you want to be Jerry Jet-pilot, you can disconnect both and push and shove to your heart's delight.
The 'bus CAN fly with ALL electrics gone. It is not an easy task but if all electrics fail, you have FADECs for the engines, cables to the rudders and a trimmable horizontal stabilizer so while it is DIFFICULT, it is not impossible to fly with ALL electrics gone contrary to myths.
The 'bus IS different but the -80 is different. Play to strengths. respect weaknesses and fly the airplane that has the best trips, the best layovers and forget who made it. All of 'em are GOOD.
The 757 felt a bit less agile than the 767 but I only flew the 76-ER at weights for transcon, not over the pond. Both were very easy to fly although neither had very good drag devices. Both were, like the 737, difficult to slow down/go down.
The -320 family (310/320/321) was a change more in the way one thinks than the way one flies. The FMC is different in that it is FROM a waypoint rather than like in the Boeings TO a way point. Some FCM differences such as the 'bus will NOT start down at TOD unless you activate it.
Handling.. one is FBW. One is not. Being able to go to max AOA for windshear is one major point. No hunting for max AOA, nudging the burble, etc. FULL aft stick and hold on.
Roll. One is aileron deflection for roll rate and the 'bus is commanded roll rate, ie, you can't cross control for x-winds on the bus.
Cockpits. All comfortable and on the -320 you could roast weenies in the winter and hang meat in the summer. VERY effective air conditioning. The pull out table ion the 'bus supports 65Kg. ??
Braking.. we had the brake fans on our 'bus and more often than not, we used them. Braking was good on all but nothing to write home about.
Flaps.. the over-the-nose view on the bus is VERY good with both config 3 and 4.
Autothrottles versus auto-thrust. One moves. One doesn't. The former can give you tactile feedback for movement (even if the engine has failed) and the latter forces you into an instrument scan so you know what your engines are doing. AND if you want to be Jerry Jet-pilot, you can disconnect both and push and shove to your heart's delight.
The 'bus CAN fly with ALL electrics gone. It is not an easy task but if all electrics fail, you have FADECs for the engines, cables to the rudders and a trimmable horizontal stabilizer so while it is DIFFICULT, it is not impossible to fly with ALL electrics gone contrary to myths.
The 'bus IS different but the -80 is different. Play to strengths. respect weaknesses and fly the airplane that has the best trips, the best layovers and forget who made it. All of 'em are GOOD.
05-26-2010 | 05:37 AM
#25
No one's home
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,091
Likes: 0
The cockpit is comfortable with good foot rests and the instrument scan is unobstructed by a yoke. Also without the yoke, entry is a bit easier. The sidestick controller is a non-issue. Takes no time to get used to it.
I've found the harshest critics of an airplane are often fliers who have NOT flown the airplane. I saw this with guys talking about the 20 series Lears which were not hard to fly if you just paid attention to them and the mis-information about the 'bus that came from the video on the crash at Habsheim. And funny thing is that while many decry the FBW on the 'bus, most seem perfectly happy with FADECs that limit the amount of thrust you can get from the engines. So one is unhappy that you have a flight envelope but is happy with a power limit. ??
05-26-2010 | 05:19 PM
#26
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,130
Likes: 0
From: B737 CAPT IAH
Flew the 757/767 and the -320 on the line. Got a chance to fly the -330 and -340 at the factory.
The 757 felt a bit less agile than the 767 but I only flew the 76-ER at weights for transcon, not over the pond. Both were very easy to fly although neither had very good drag devices. Both were, like the 737, difficult to slow down/go down.
The -320 family (310/320/321) was a change more in the way one thinks than the way one flies. The FMC is different in that it is FROM a waypoint rather than like in the Boeings TO a way point. Some FCM differences such as the 'bus will NOT start down at TOD unless you activate it.
Handling.. one is FBW. One is not. Being able to go to max AOA for windshear is one major point. No hunting for max AOA, nudging the burble, etc. FULL aft stick and hold on.
Roll. One is aileron deflection for roll rate and the 'bus is commanded roll rate, ie, you can't cross control for x-winds on the bus.
Cockpits. All comfortable and on the -320 you could roast weenies in the winter and hang meat in the summer. VERY effective air conditioning. The pull out table ion the 'bus supports 65Kg. ??
Braking.. we had the brake fans on our 'bus and more often than not, we used them. Braking was good on all but nothing to write home about.
Flaps.. the over-the-nose view on the bus is VERY good with both config 3 and 4.
Autothrottles versus auto-thrust. One moves. One doesn't. The former can give you tactile feedback for movement (even if the engine has failed) and the latter forces you into an instrument scan so you know what your engines are doing. AND if you want to be Jerry Jet-pilot, you can disconnect both and push and shove to your heart's delight.
The 'bus CAN fly with ALL electrics gone. It is not an easy task but if all electrics fail, you have FADECs for the engines, cables to the rudders and a trimmable horizontal stabilizer so while it is DIFFICULT, it is not impossible to fly with ALL electrics gone contrary to myths.
The 'bus IS different but the -80 is different. Play to strengths. respect weaknesses and fly the airplane that has the best trips, the best layovers and forget who made it. All of 'em are GOOD.
The 757 felt a bit less agile than the 767 but I only flew the 76-ER at weights for transcon, not over the pond. Both were very easy to fly although neither had very good drag devices. Both were, like the 737, difficult to slow down/go down.
The -320 family (310/320/321) was a change more in the way one thinks than the way one flies. The FMC is different in that it is FROM a waypoint rather than like in the Boeings TO a way point. Some FCM differences such as the 'bus will NOT start down at TOD unless you activate it.
Handling.. one is FBW. One is not. Being able to go to max AOA for windshear is one major point. No hunting for max AOA, nudging the burble, etc. FULL aft stick and hold on.
Roll. One is aileron deflection for roll rate and the 'bus is commanded roll rate, ie, you can't cross control for x-winds on the bus.
Cockpits. All comfortable and on the -320 you could roast weenies in the winter and hang meat in the summer. VERY effective air conditioning. The pull out table ion the 'bus supports 65Kg. ??
Braking.. we had the brake fans on our 'bus and more often than not, we used them. Braking was good on all but nothing to write home about.
Flaps.. the over-the-nose view on the bus is VERY good with both config 3 and 4.
Autothrottles versus auto-thrust. One moves. One doesn't. The former can give you tactile feedback for movement (even if the engine has failed) and the latter forces you into an instrument scan so you know what your engines are doing. AND if you want to be Jerry Jet-pilot, you can disconnect both and push and shove to your heart's delight.
The 'bus CAN fly with ALL electrics gone. It is not an easy task but if all electrics fail, you have FADECs for the engines, cables to the rudders and a trimmable horizontal stabilizer so while it is DIFFICULT, it is not impossible to fly with ALL electrics gone contrary to myths.
The 'bus IS different but the -80 is different. Play to strengths. respect weaknesses and fly the airplane that has the best trips, the best layovers and forget who made it. All of 'em are GOOD.
I've got quite a bit of time in many aircraft includind the A320 family. By technique, I would wait to enter into a side slip until inside 30 feet or so leading with the rudder and allowing the aircraft to compensate with aileron for flight path stability. You still have to land in a side slip but achieve it in a different manner. Those that fight the flight characteristics of the aircraft have issues with it.
The A320 is by far the best flying transport category aircraft I have had the pleasure to fly. And, IMO, the best way to fly it is auto pilot and thrust off, FD off, and FPV. Used to surprise the sh@t out of folks that didn't understand the "bird" display or the aircraft. The interface with the aircraft is different. It has computer augmented flight path stability. Having one Direct law landing under my belt showed when all the magic fails, it flys like a non-FBW aircraft when the magic goes away.
Bottom line, the magic is an aid for the pilot and not a replacement for skill. To the max extent possible I hope all drivers operate with the automation off. Why the heck else would you even show up at work? For the great pay?
Lee
05-27-2010 | 09:07 AM
#28
First Rule of Fight Club
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,536
Likes: 0
From: My seat smells like cat pee
From the 320 manual:
SOFT ALTITUDE
On reaching the planned cruise altitude, ALT CRZ engages and the A/THR maintains the speed/mach target.
Two minutes after ALT CRZ engages, if the mach mode is operative, SOFT ALT mode engages. This allows the aircraft to deviate +/- 50 feet from the target altitude, thereby minimizing thrust variations and reducing fuel consumption.
Couldn’t find any numbers on the fuel savings, but 1% sounds reasonable.
SOFT ALTITUDE
On reaching the planned cruise altitude, ALT CRZ engages and the A/THR maintains the speed/mach target.
Two minutes after ALT CRZ engages, if the mach mode is operative, SOFT ALT mode engages. This allows the aircraft to deviate +/- 50 feet from the target altitude, thereby minimizing thrust variations and reducing fuel consumption.
Couldn’t find any numbers on the fuel savings, but 1% sounds reasonable.
05-27-2010 | 11:09 AM
#29
No one's home
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,091
Likes: 0
I've got quite a bit of time in many aircraft includind the A320 family. By technique, I would wait to enter into a side slip until inside 30 feet or so leading with the rudder and allowing the aircraft to compensate with aileron for flight path stability. You still have to land in a side slip but achieve it in a different manner. Those that fight the flight characteristics of the aircraft have issues with it.
The A320 is by far the best flying transport category aircraft I have had the pleasure to fly. And, IMO, the best way to fly it is auto pilot and thrust off, FD off, and FPV. Used to surprise the sh@t out of folks that didn't understand the "bird" display or the aircraft. The interface with the aircraft is different. It has computer augmented flight path stability. Having one Direct law landing under my belt showed when all the magic fails, it flys like a non-FBW aircraft when the magic goes away.
Others bristle at the envelope but it is not a fighter (which also have envelopes) and within the envelope you have essentially care-free handling. And if one need to feel like a fighter pilot in an airliner you can buy a pair of baggy pants and wear a g-suit under the baggy pants. No one will know until you yell, 'Bandit at 2 oclock!!'.. no, wait.. that's the 3-15 from Newark. Never mind.'
Someone said that remove all the magic and you have a Boeing. I wouldn't say that because I don't want to start a food fight.
05-27-2010 | 12:24 PM
#30
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 409
Likes: 0
From: L Side
Landing wings level may be technique and I won't argue with it, but the automation will land the aircraft with no/little crab with the wing down if an auto-land is performed.
From the A330 manual:
ALIGN SUBMODE
Align is a sub-mode of LAND that lines up the aircraft's axis with the ILS course at approximately 45 feet. Align sub-mode is not displayed to the crew.
Note: Align sub-mode is often known as "decrab" function.
If the aircraft aligned the yaw axis with the localizer at 45' and did not put a wing down I'm not sure how it would maintain centerline with a cross-wind. I have routinely touched down with a wing into the wing. There's even a call on all the Airbii that I've flown that is to be made by the PM/PNF if the bank angle exceeds 7 degrees. Additionally, the geometry limits for each type are published by Airbus an FYI (I guess) so that pilots know how much wing down they can use without scraping a wingtip or engine cowling.
From the A330 manual:
ALIGN SUBMODE
Align is a sub-mode of LAND that lines up the aircraft's axis with the ILS course at approximately 45 feet. Align sub-mode is not displayed to the crew.
Note: Align sub-mode is often known as "decrab" function.
If the aircraft aligned the yaw axis with the localizer at 45' and did not put a wing down I'm not sure how it would maintain centerline with a cross-wind. I have routinely touched down with a wing into the wing. There's even a call on all the Airbii that I've flown that is to be made by the PM/PNF if the bank angle exceeds 7 degrees. Additionally, the geometry limits for each type are published by Airbus an FYI (I guess) so that pilots know how much wing down they can use without scraping a wingtip or engine cowling.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
