Why does the Airbus STOP on the runway?
12-13-2006, 07:45 AM
#61
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2005
Position: MD-11/10 Captain
Posts: 533
Originally Posted by KiloAlpha
I have no idea what you dumbass is talking about??
12-13-2006, 07:56 AM
#63
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2005
Position: AA A320
Posts: 1,624
Originally Posted by III Corps
And since you are a SAAB driver, we don't want to talk about the problems the 2000 had which required first the MECs and then the PECs for elevator feel...
12-13-2006, 09:25 AM
#64
Organizational Learning
Joined APC: Nov 2005
Position: Directly behind the combiner
Posts: 4,948
Originally Posted by Ranger
I'm not a Bus driver (thank God) so I can't speak specifically to that airplane. The tire speeds on the MD-11 are company imposed limitations. Neither the aircraft nor tire manufacturers impose the limits. Even at 10K for a 90 degree turn the inside nosewheel tire is off of the ground during the turn.
It's true that there is no stated restriction on the use of max autobrakes in the MD-11. But I think we'd pretty much all agree that you need a good reason to use max. The brake temps get pretty high after a max brake landing. And if I remember correctly, there's a required minimum 45 minute turn time after a max brake landing. Like we could turn one faster than that.
At touchdown, there is a certain amount of kinetic energy that must be converted to something else in order for the airplane to achieve taxi speed. A good deal of that is converted into heat in the brakes. Whether it takes 3 seconds, or 15, it is about the same. What I'm trying to say is MAX braking rate shouldn't make the brakes a whole lot hotter than MED or MIN. Yes, somewhat higher, but I don't know about "brake temps get pretty high" higher.
But the reversers... yeah, I know the reversers change a lot of that. If you have a long runway and get to use reversers down to 60 knots, and then start using wheel brakes, they'll absorb a lot less energy, and be lots cooler. Consider, however, that our landing distances are calculated using no reversers, and brake temps have to be within limits in that case, too. Basically, the cooler temperatures enjoyed by using MIN BRAKES are not because of the slower rate, directly. The cooler temps result from longer use of the reversers.
I don't recall a 45-minute cooling restriction after MAX BRAKING . . . but it's been a couple of years. Where did that come from? The APLC module requires cooling when certain environmental conditions and aircraft weights are combined, but I don't think it mentions AutoBrake setting. There's not even an INPUT for that parameter.
MINIMUM QUICK TURNAROUND TIME
When a specific combination of OAT, Pressure Altitiude,
Winds and Runway Slope is encountered
for a given runway, the aircraft is required to remain
in the blocks for a minimum turnaround time.
When these conditions are experienced, a "B" is
shown next to the affected runway and a note appears
in the lower portion of the screen stating "BReqd
Block Time (Min): xx”.
When a specific combination of OAT, Pressure Altitiude,
Winds and Runway Slope is encountered
for a given runway, the aircraft is required to remain
in the blocks for a minimum turnaround time.
When these conditions are experienced, a "B" is
shown next to the affected runway and a note appears
in the lower portion of the screen stating "BReqd
Block Time (Min): xx”.
I might have missed it or forgotten it, so that's why I'm askin'. I'm not aware of such a restriction in the DC-10, and I am supposed to know that stuff now.
BTW, I've seen a MAX BRAKING stop in the DC-10 (from the Oiler's Seat) in Subic... impressive.
.
12-13-2006, 09:49 AM
#65
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2006
Position: 1559
Posts: 1,533
Originally Posted by TonyC
Isn't it the outside nosewheel tire that comes off the ground in sharp turns?
No, inside of the turn. Same as one of Velvet Elvis' rent-a-Lambos (just ask him)
Of course all the wheels are "outside" of the cabin
12-13-2006, 10:28 AM
#66
gets every day off
Joined APC: Mar 2006
Position: Retired MD11 Capt
Posts: 705
Don't pay attention to any of these guys, Kilo Alpha. Enjoy (and flaunt) your knowlege while you can... It's axiomatic that age and knowlege are inversely proportional.
By the time you're Capt Mark's age, you'll be just as dumb as he is, and by the time you're 60, you'll be sitting on the toilet mumbling to yourself "this is the only time I really know what I'm doing".
Ah, the omniscience of youth... When I was 23, I knew EVERYTHING! I mean EVERYTHING!
By the time you're Capt Mark's age, you'll be just as dumb as he is, and by the time you're 60, you'll be sitting on the toilet mumbling to yourself "this is the only time I really know what I'm doing".
Ah, the omniscience of youth... When I was 23, I knew EVERYTHING! I mean EVERYTHING!
12-13-2006, 10:45 AM
#67
Line Holder
Joined APC: Aug 2006
Position: Between a rock and a hard place
Posts: 92
Originally Posted by KiloAlpha
Jets are for jacuzzi's
And the tail has never fallen off the SAAB yet. Maybe it's just me.. I kinda like when the tail stays intact with the rest of the fuselage, make the plane much easier to fly
POS french airplane !
And the tail has never fallen off the SAAB yet. Maybe it's just me.. I kinda like when the tail stays intact with the rest of the fuselage, make the plane much easier to fly
POS french airplane !
Here's a quote from the NTSB's report:
The National Transportation Safety Board determines that the probable cause of this accident was the in-flight separation of the vertical stabilizer as a result of the loads beyond ultimate design that were created by the first officer’s unnecessary and excessive rudder pedal inputs. Contributing to these rudder pedal inputs were characteristics of the Airbus A300-600 rudder system design and elements of the American Airlines Advanced Aircraft Maneuvering Program.
A 747, 777 or even your beloved Saab would have ended up in exactly the same condition had it been placed in a similar aerodynamic condition.
12-13-2006, 01:10 PM
#68
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2005
Position: AA A320
Posts: 1,624
I don't love the SAAB, it's the vehicle I am paid to fly. It's my POS, if you will. You can trash talk on it all day long, I don't care. It doesn't hurt my feelings, I'm not gonna cry myself to sleep, I don't feel any less of a man for flying a TP, on and on and on ... I don't *****n care !
You are all morons for entering into a debate about who's plane is better; do you honestly care ??
I don't fly for fun anymore, it's my job. I couldn't give two sh*ts what it is I am flying. I'd fly a Seneca if it were associated with high pay, great benefits, retirement, et cetera.
You are all morons for entering into a debate about who's plane is better; do you honestly care ??
I don't fly for fun anymore, it's my job. I couldn't give two sh*ts what it is I am flying. I'd fly a Seneca if it were associated with high pay, great benefits, retirement, et cetera.
12-13-2006, 01:19 PM
#69
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2006
Position: B-777 Captain
Posts: 943
Originally Posted by Nitefrater
Don't pay attention to any of these guys, Kilo Alpha. Enjoy (and flaunt) your knowlege while you can... It's axiomatic that age and knowlege are inversely proportional.
By the time you're Capt Mark's age, you'll be just as dumb as he is, and by the time you're 60, you'll be sitting on the toilet mumbling to yourself "this is the only time I really know what I'm doing".
Ah, the omniscience of youth... When I was 23, I knew EVERYTHING! I mean EVERYTHING!
By the time you're Capt Mark's age, you'll be just as dumb as he is, and by the time you're 60, you'll be sitting on the toilet mumbling to yourself "this is the only time I really know what I'm doing".
Ah, the omniscience of youth... When I was 23, I knew EVERYTHING! I mean EVERYTHING!
12-13-2006, 01:26 PM
#70
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2006
Position: 767A (Ret)
Posts: 6,248
Success!
Originally Posted by Nitefrater
Ah, the omniscience of youth... When I was 23, I knew EVERYTHING! I mean EVERYTHING!
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
