Ok, I'll eat the crow I deserve, or how I learned to love the Bus.

[Cherokee_Cruiser]

Or reset the cruise alt in the prog page. Watch the speed though (likes to slow down). Pro tip: entering any single digit in LSK 1L will set the cruise alt to whatever is in the FCU! No idea why...

Entering a number at/below current altitude should lock in your current altitude on CRZ prog page.

You can also re-enter the temp on the Perf page for it to recalculate. If anyone can tell me why the plane wants to scream down after leveling off and capturing the first altitude when descending on multiple altitudes. It thinks it's high and the hockey stick never readjusts.

Yes, things changeable on the Perf page will also re-define the descent arrow/TOD. Anything that gets the FMGC to "think" will redefine the vertical profile.

 

[Zapphod Beblebrox]

I asked our Airbus training committee about messing with he MCDU or using the FCU to speed up a descent to make a restriction. The most learned and studied august, honorable, and Da Ichi, Numero Uno, El Supremo, General Admiral Commander said: "Honnie machtoto, cannie butu!" Translation: You mess with this too much and it will bite you ass like wild boar. "Watch box real close and if you get nervous eat a banana".

 

[derg]

I figure even as an experienced pilot, every time you do something, you're only 95% accurate. The more times you mess with stuff that really don't need messing with, well, the holes in the swiss cheese start lining up.

 

[ian]

There is at least one place you need to do this.

On the CASTA out of LAX, which has since been replaced, you'd be climbing out of LAX at 6,000 FPM to the same place in space that traffic on the SADDE is descending to at a rate lower than this, but sometimes still relatively quickly.

If one or both aircraft don't reduce their rate of climb/descent, you both get an RA as the descending aircraft is leveling at 10,000 and the climbing aircraft is going to 9,000.

I was teaching guys to switch into VS and roll it down to 1,000 FPM around 7,000, since you'd transition from FLCH to VS before you went into ASEL (ALT* on the bus). The training department was teaching guys to keep it in FLCH (OP CLB on the bus) and override the thrust levers to produce a 1,000 FPM climb. The second technique wouldn't really translate very well on the bus, since it'd put you into mixed automation modes.

granted it's an archaic 737, but any time i'm approaching a level off in the terminal area I do V/S do avoid that exact scenario.

 

[ClarkGriswold]

granted it's an archaic 737, but any time i'm approaching a level off in the terminal area I do V/S do avoid that exact scenario.

That's just good pilot •.

 

[Box hauler]

In my dumb dumb opinion, don't mess with V/S approaching level off. If ALT* happened at the same distance from level off all the time sure, but because it may go to alt* 3000 feet from level or 1500 feet from level off it's not good practice. The airplane does fine in managed so let it do its thing and babysit it while you eat your lunch. Anyone who flies this thing knows it can be confusing so if it's doing what you want stay managed, and if it's not go selected to fix it. As far as the speed issue goes if the STAR says transition at 280 etc I just put that in the box as my transition speed.The Bus doesn't seem to like being managed in one mode ( i.e. Altitude ) and selected in another like (i.e. Speed) and you would hate to go selected and forget about it as you blast through 10k at 280. One thing I have learned so far on this airplane is it's not like most airplanes. When the AP is off it's time to be a pilot, when the AP is on it's time to be a manager.

 

[derg]

Preach!

 

[Snuggle]

I don't mess with V/S approaching a level off. I saw a guy do it to "smooth" out the level off once, and he ended up turning the altitude knob by accident.

Just let it do it's thing man.

 

[derg]

I don't mess with V/S approaching a level off. I saw a guy do it to "smooth" out the level off once, and he ended up turning the altitude knob by accident.

Just let it do it's thing man.

Which leads me to my other pet peeve, not looking at the FMA during automation changes. Watched a guy nearly overspeed the jet because he mistook the speed knob for the heading knob. The autopilot is what you want, the FMA is what you're getting...

 

[Cass]

The autopilot is what you want, the FMA is what you're getting...

Yessir. Probably one of the more important pieces of real estate on the screen, IMO.

 

[Soul Brotha']

Which leads me to my other pet peeve, not looking at the FMA during automation changes. Watched a guy nearly overspeed the jet because he mistook the speed knob for the heading knob. The autopilot is what you want, the FMA is what you're getting...

Fact and fiction. I was taught the FMA is fact and the FCP is fiction. Would like to believe the FCP is right but the FMA tells the truth.

 

[PeanuckleCRJ]

We do too but ALT* happens when it happens and it's best not to screw with your mode anywhere near capture. But dey don't hear me doh.

Once in ALT* let it do it's thing, but pulling for V/S won't make it go all maddog either... I know that's why you're so twitchy about it. There are times with crazy early captures that it is appropriate to intervene and give it a better look!

 

[jtrain609]

Once in ALT* let it do it's thing, but pulling for V/S won't make it go all maddog either... I know that's why you're so twitchy about it. There are times with crazy early captures that it is appropriate to intervene and give it a better look!

Let me make sure I understand you correctly.

You're climbing at a very hyperbolic 10,000 FPM. You're at 1,000' and you're trying to capture 10,000'. The aircraft goes into ALT* at 3,000'. You're saying that if you pull VS, and select 1,000 FPM, that the aircraft will slow the descent rate to the selected 1,000 FPM, and then recapture ALT*?

 

[PeanuckleCRJ]

Let me make sure I understand you correctly.

You're climbing at a very hyperbolic 10,000 FPM. You're at 1,000' and you're trying to capture 10,000'. The aircraft goes into ALT* at 3,000'. You're saying that if you pull VS, and select 1,000 FPM, that the aircraft will slow the descent rate to the selected 1,000 FPM, and then recapture ALT*?

Correct. @Derg and @Cherokee_Cruiser are a bit off in lala land (love you guys!) in the tweaking with alt* on fifi. you can recage her look on the alt*, and if you f it up, she'll still go "nope!" and go right back into alt*.

 

[PeanuckleCRJ]

She won't correct it to 1000 fpm, to be clear... she will go to the new mode (V/S), then look at the 1G roll in on the altitude again and go back into ALT* when it is time for the roll in.

 

[tcco94]

Hey 319/320 peeps...

Been wondering what's the difference with some of them having the signature triangle winglet (what I thought was called a sharklet) and the Boeing version tall winglet? I thought those were just on the neo version. I'm pretty sure neo is still relatively new and I'm starting to see the tall winglet more and more by plenty of airlines too.

Just a curious thought I've been wondering geeking out on taxi.

 

[Cruise]

As far as I know, the sharklet (new winglet) is just Airbus' newest version of fuel-saving wingtip modification. They're putting them on both CEOs and NEOs. Apparently they can be retrofit on some of the last ones off the assembly line with the traditional style winglet but for most of them, no-go due to wing structural differences.

But I'm sure someone with better aviation geekery than I ever care to have can school us both.

 

[🦈💜]

This is all funky, and I can imagine a 175 gal or guy being somewhat inclined to chafe at it. But meh—if I went through training on the airplane, I'd probably fly it the way I was trained to fly it, and the rest is academic.

 

[Nark]

As far as I know, the sharklet (new winglet) is just Airbus' newest version of fuel-saving wingtip modification. They're putting them on both CEOs and NEOs. Apparently they can be retrofit on some of the last ones off the assembly line with the traditional style winglet but for most of them, no-go due to wing structural differences.

But I'm sure someone with better aviation geekery than I ever care to have can school us both.

I haven't updated the COM lately (march), but looks like they revamped the fuel imbalance limitations to make them simpler. I'm 99% sure the fuel imbalance was different from the classics to the sharklets.

The classic 321's seem to have a difference to the newer ones, with sharklets.

I don't know why you'd want to futz with adding sharklets to a classic. It's not that much of a fuel saver. Buy a NEO instead.

 

[Cptnchia]

Pilots fly airplanes. Management buys them. If they decided there was a cost advantage to retrofitting sharklets, that's their job.