ASpilot2be
Qbicle seat warmer
That's why I do V/S towards the last thousand feet of the descent.
Airbus Tech Support Desk is OPEN
- Thread starter derg
- Start date
Bandit_Driver
Gold Member
CEO 320/321 engine starts with the IAE you can start engine 2 as soon as the start valve as closed on the first engine. This happens around 45% N2.
The NEO engines PW1133's run and start a lot hotter. Dual cooling in more of a thermal stabilization of the engine prior to start. When you turn the mode switch to start ignition it powers the fadecs and displaces the cooling times for each engine. Now press the dual cooling switch and select engine 1 on to start it. The computer will motor both engines around 10% N2 for the longest cooling time required. It will then close the ENG2 start valve and open Engine 1's start valve fully and motor it up to the start speed. Now you can taxi on 1 engine or as soon as the start valve is close you can start engine 2.
If one engine says cooling and the other, doesn't you are stuck starting the engines independently and cannot use dual cooling
Dual cooling times depend on:
Engine Temp at Shut down
Time at gate
Density Altitude
Density Altitude
Current OAT
Engine Oil Temp
Last edited:
CoffeeIcePapers
Well-Hung Member
Speed mode can be a tricky bitch. “Oh, I’m going too fast, let me pitch up.” Spoilers. “Oh, now I need to add power”
Bandit_Driver
Gold Member
Lose Both RA's in the bus isn't fun. 5G could be a hoot.
Plane will go into Direct Law when the gear is extended.
FLIGHT CONTROL PROTECTIONS LOST
RA 1 + 2 NOT AVAILABLE
AUTO CALLOUTS NOT AVAILBLE
CAT 2 NOT AVAILABLE
GPWS NOT AVAILBLE
AP 1 + 2 WILL BE LOST (WHEN LDG Gear IS DOWN ONLY)
TCAS REAC W/S DETECTION NOT AVAILABLE
Plane will go into Direct Law when the gear is extended.
FLIGHT CONTROL PROTECTIONS LOST
RA 1 + 2 NOT AVAILABLE
AUTO CALLOUTS NOT AVAILBLE
CAT 2 NOT AVAILABLE
GPWS NOT AVAILBLE
AP 1 + 2 WILL BE LOST (WHEN LDG Gear IS DOWN ONLY)
TCAS REAC W/S DETECTION NOT AVAILABLE
roundout
VNAV monitor
I'm wondering if the bigger danger isn't that the RAs would get lost, but that they would give erroneous data. Flying along fat dumb and happy stable at 1000 feet and it goes in to flare mode or something.
This. All this.
I’ve given my students the “always ask yourself: ‘what do you get? What do you lose?‘ when you’re choosing a flight mode.
”i JuSt ThInK vErTiCaL sPeEd Is SmOoThEr”
“You’re new to the jet, let the bus be a bus and I’ve been able to guess exactly ZERO times what descent/climb mode the pilots are using up front.”
Eeeeeeeeeeeeeyup. We practiced that in the simulator once and it was straight up Donkey Kong.
jtrain609
Antisocial Monster
[/QUOTE]
Guys in the EMB-175 would do FPA -1.5 and tell me it gives them about 1,000 FPM.
"1,000 FPM in VS gives you exactly 1,000 FPM."
*HEAD EXPLODES*
Guys in the EMB-175 would do FPA -1.5 and tell me it gives them about 1,000 FPM.
"1,000 FPM in VS gives you exactly 1,000 FPM."
*HEAD EXPLODES*
Minuteman
I HAVE STRONG OPINIONS ABOUT AUTOMOTIVE LIGHTING!
The good news there is that the RA almost certainly won't present an inaccurate value that a human would believe for longer than a few seconds before failing itself.
The height is measured by timing the round trip of a chirped signal reflected off the ground. More than anything, a potential 5G problem would overwhelm the RA's ability to receive the reflected signal. Obviously that's still a problem at 500 feet on a CAT II, but there's not gonna be a Die Hard II scenario where a false-but-believable signal is present. (Aside: even a malicious actor with a ground station would have a relatively brief overflight time to attempt something like that).
Unfortunately, Turkish Airlines 1951 proved that automation isn't as savvy as a human and momentary false data is sufficient to confound its operation. That was a 737NG that got a lot of publicity, but around the same time some RAs on A320s were failing in a similar fashion because water was getting into the antennae, freezing, and caused delamination and (IIRC) caused flare mode to activate higher-up on approach.
Maybe it's a race between airplanes and self-driving cars to see who will have object permanence first.
jtrain609
Antisocial Monster
McDoo.
Cherokee_Cruiser
Bronteroc
Scooby Doo
Bandit_Driver
Gold Member
We also have D C D U too for dick doo too. Lol
DeltaAlphaNovember
Well-Known Member
McDoo is what you take after eating McDonald's.
McDoo
juxtapilot
Snowflake
Does the A220 have similar laws and protections to the “real” Airbus?
Minuteman
I HAVE STRONG OPINIONS ABOUT AUTOMOTIVE LIGHTING!
So I don't have an extensive understanding of the architecture, but modern aircraft don't have a flight control computer (or n-redundant central PFCs).
I mean, there are still flight control computers under normal circumstances to do all the normal stuff like envelope protection, load alleviation, redundancy monitoring, etc. But those computer don't talk directly to the flight controls anymore. Instead there are Remote Electronic Units (REUs) distributed all around the aircraft that manage a subset of control surfaces, normally following the instructions from a PFC. The REU interprets what the PFC wants and translates that into an actuator command.
But all the communication traffic among the computers on the aircraft is happening over a hardened ethernet network (at least on segmented VLANs I imagine), so all the computers are able to talk to each other instead of a PFC sitting at the center of a star-shaped network. What this means is that the REUs have the same access to the inputs used by the dedicated PFC. So if, for some reason, the all the PFCs stop working, each REU can know what commands the crew or automation want and operate in a "direct-like" mode. Essentially, parts of a "legacy" PFC have been decentralized.
Edit: "modern" = A220, EMB-545/550, G650, G500/G600, G700. The 777 had a progenitor concept with its ARINC 629 buses and ACEs. Now it appears the 777X will the using common-compute system (CCS) and REUs.
I mean, there are still flight control computers under normal circumstances to do all the normal stuff like envelope protection, load alleviation, redundancy monitoring, etc. But those computer don't talk directly to the flight controls anymore. Instead there are Remote Electronic Units (REUs) distributed all around the aircraft that manage a subset of control surfaces, normally following the instructions from a PFC. The REU interprets what the PFC wants and translates that into an actuator command.
But all the communication traffic among the computers on the aircraft is happening over a hardened ethernet network (at least on segmented VLANs I imagine), so all the computers are able to talk to each other instead of a PFC sitting at the center of a star-shaped network. What this means is that the REUs have the same access to the inputs used by the dedicated PFC. So if, for some reason, the all the PFCs stop working, each REU can know what commands the crew or automation want and operate in a "direct-like" mode. Essentially, parts of a "legacy" PFC have been decentralized.
Edit: "modern" = A220, EMB-545/550, G650, G500/G600, G700. The 777 had a progenitor concept with its ARINC 629 buses and ACEs. Now it appears the 777X will the using common-compute system (CCS) and REUs.
Last edited:
DPApilot
GUYSH! GUYSH! GUYSH!
How can we leave out mechanical backup?!
jtrain609
Antisocial Monster
Also known as, "we hope you don't have to do this because you'll have about as much control as a DC-10 after an uncontained engine failure."