Roger Roger
Bottom of the list
Heh this makes me think of a bit in the old airnet “Right Now” video..
Someones
Not
Flying
The
PROFILE
@Stone Cold @mikecweb
B737 Talk
- Thread starter ///AMG
- Start date
Someones
Not
Flying
The
PROFILE
@Stone Cold @mikecweb
Cherokee_Cruiser
Bronteroc
No, we can use it. The only prohibition at our shop is flaps 2. Manual says because there’s no published speeds for it, which IMO is BS, because if you go flaps 2 then you see a 2 indicator on the speed scale.
Minuteman
I HAVE STRONG OPINIONS ABOUT AUTOMOTIVE LIGHTING!
I would rather have real and valuable technology advances come into use under the umbrella of differences training, if it's a choice between that or a next-next-next-gen different type rating.
As has been already been observed repeatedly over the years, an aircraft with EFIS and RNAV and stability management computers and digital pressurization controllers already has the same type rating as something with steam gauges, no FMS, totally different engines, and a MTOW with half the current max gross. The strict type rating regime has already a been made a fop and it's probably time to evolve into the FAA can be authoritative over again.
Cherokee_Cruiser
Bronteroc
I just believe that the MAX 7, 8, 9, and 10 have already been announced years ago and that they should get grandfathered in. Now by all means if Boeing says a new MAX11 variant is coming, then for sure apply the new EICAS requirements.
As it stands now, I would hate it if a differences course was approved and I fly the MAX 10 with the EICAS variant and the MAX 8 and 9 with the current system annunciator panel method. When things go wrong, I would like one consistent method to deal with it. Make the MAX 8,9, and 10 the same.
And of course, let the 737 die with the last iteration being the MAX 10.
no speeds published? Flaps 2 is same as flaps 1: 230. Panel placard says it too, along with the speed scale marking. Weird…
inigo88
Composite-lover
I hadn’t followed the MAX keeping a system annunciator vs EICAS, but that’s pretty absurd given todays technology. Then again it’s par for the course.
(From this great blog in 2011, which still feels very relevant: Boeing’s MAX, Southwest’s 737)
(From this great blog in 2011, which still feels very relevant: Boeing’s MAX, Southwest’s 737)
Minuteman
I HAVE STRONG OPINIONS ABOUT AUTOMOTIVE LIGHTING!
Oh that can't be Southwest; they're using the autothrottle.I hadn’t followed the MAX keeping a system annunciator vs EICAS, but that’s pretty absurd given todays technology. Then again it’s par for the course.
View attachment 66175
(From this great blog in 2011, which still feels very relevant: Boeing’s MAX, Southwest’s 737)
(Continental did this weird six pack for a while, too.)
ppragman
FLIPY FLAPS!
Ok, hot take here, but I’m actually a Big proponent of big color coded annunciators in a very big purposeful panel unless the EICAS system is really good at prioritizing what’s actually an issue? Or your aircraft manual is just rock solid.I hadn’t followed the MAX keeping a system annunciator vs EICAS, but that’s pretty absurd given todays technology. Then again it’s par for the course.
View attachment 66175
(From this great blog in 2011, which still feels very relevant: Boeing’s MAX, Southwest’s 737)
Granted, my only experience with something approximating an airline EICAS is the FMS in the Pilatus and the Twin Otter… and I had no trouble adapting, but… I’d say I prefer a traditional annunciator panel.
At least in the sim it seemed easier to me to be able to identify a problem with the “Nancy” as opposed to the EICAS, in the types I flew that had both. Maybe that says something about my spatial awareness or something lol.
inigo88
Composite-lover
I’m with you on the human factors side of the big color coded annunciators working better for my monkey brain while flying, but I think what you wrote in bold is exactly the point. EICAS is a filter that takes in all data and then prioritizes it into Warning, Caution and Advisory messages. Furthermore once you’ve dealt with the issue you can cancel it into the background to avoid the distraction of past issues already dealt with if a new issue pops up, or recall everything to get a complete picture.
This is a pretty cool read on the human factors strategy behind the 777 EICAS: http://www.infinidim.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/EICAS-ECL-Guide.pdf
I’ve never flown anything with an EICAS either, but (in addition to staying at the Holiday Inn last night) I did have the opportunity to help in a very small way with programming the logic of one. Even for a simple non-safety critical advisory message there is a crapload of Boolean algebra that goes into it, and you basically have to evaluate every permutation of true/false readings you could get from your desired sensors, the theoretical state the aircraft would be in for each of those possible combinations and then decide whether the message should be displayed or suppressed.
You can bet that the engineers working the warnings and cautions are making massive matrices of true/false combinations of the warning and caution messages themselves to evaluate which emergency could produce which combo, what message to prioritize at the top of the list in each possible scenario, and then technical writers are writing it all up for AFMs and checklists.
TL;DR - EICAS is a completely different human factors approach you have to train for. Now you push and cancel the single master caution/warning button to silence the aural warning and train yourself to look in one place at the EICAS page for the prioritized warnings, cautions and advisories, deal with the threats in the correct order and then cancel them to make way for new ones. I think where it really shines is on airplanes that are so technologically advanced that the annunciator lights get too complicated, and there are too many places to look for them, and when dealing with a new emergency our feeble human brains may mistake lights from an old emergency and react incorrectly.
Curious to hear from those of you that have flown both. Which do you like better and why?
Last edited:
Roger Roger
Bottom of the list
EICAS allows so many more options as far as contextual inhibiting, collector messages, etc. and none of those tiny damn bulbs and those annunciator housings that explode in a million tiny pieces if you look at them wrong when changing one of said tiny damn bulbs
Your explanation wins.
Roger Roger
Bottom of the list
The LR45 has EICAS as well as a “crew warning panel” that duplicates just red CAS messages
///AMG
Well-Known Member
I took Cherokee's post to be in reference to VREF speeds, rather than placard/max, but I could be mistaken. As in I can't select VREF 2 on the FMC approach page
///AMG
Well-Known Member
ah, makes sense. I thought he was referencing the company’s stance on placard speeds.
I think the sim must be too dark, because they clearly have a stance against illuminating it enough to be able to actually read
Also, it isn't like I select VREF for anything other than landing flaps, and just use the bugs for F1/F5/(F15/F25 if two engine) on the speed tape anyways, so I too think this might be a strange restriction
Roger Roger
Bottom of the list
The UNS FMS/Honeywell EFIS combo in the Lear has a cool feature called floating ref, where if you tell it to it will continuously calculate and display a ref bug automagically adjusted for your current weight and flap setting. If desired you can even program in a gust factor (or any other reason) additive. Or you can just fly .65 AOA.I think the sim must be too dark, because they clearly have a stance against illuminating it enough to be able to actually read
Also, it isn't like I select VREF for anything other than landing flaps, and just use the bugs for F1/F5/(F15/F25 if two engine) on the speed tape anyways, so I too think this might be a strange restriction
But the best presentation I’ve seen is the PC-12NG dynamic speed bug. I think from my limited understanding it’s similar to the Àîrbüs green dot.
ASpilot2be
Qbicle seat warmer
I think you would really enjoy the Airbus system. You comply with the ECAM items, then you have to go through all the systems affected by problem. Then you get a status page.
It's really straightforward and is great for situational awareness.
Roger Roger
Bottom of the list
