Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 31 views

    1st-Flight Operations Web Conference QUESTIONS

    Uploaded by

    nabil raies

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    1st-Flight Operations Web Conference QUESTIONS

    Uploaded by

    nabil raies
    31 views3 pages

    Original Title

    1st-Flight_Operations_Web_Conference_QUESTIONS

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    31 views3 pages

    1st-Flight Operations Web Conference QUESTIONS

    Uploaded by

    nabil raies

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    of 3

    Questions & Answers on…

    RTOW charts, Frequently Asked Questions

    Introduction

    On the 05-May-2009, Thierry PAYA-ARNAUD presented the Flight Operations Web Conference
    on “RTOW charts, Frequently Asked Questions”.

    During the conference, the participants asked questions to the speaker, and we tried to answer as
    many questions as possible in due time.

    After the conference, we compiled a summary, based on the questions asked during and after the
    conference. Here is an extract from this Questions & Answers session.

    Questions & Answers

    For the same conditions, if there is the same TOW for CONF 2 and CONF 3, which one is
    more favorable?

    According to FCOM, use the configuration that gives the highest flex. If both of them provide
    the same level of flex thrust or if you cannot flex, use the one with the highest flaps setting.
    This may change in specific conditions. Please refer to FCOM 2.02.14. P2.

    I understand that when the code changes between 2 boxes, one can interpolate between the
    take off weights.
    But can we also interpolate for the speeds, which at times change dramatically?

    Yes. Interpolation shall be done for all parameters (weight and speeds).

    Sometimes, ATC requires the aircraft to enter the runway using alternate runway entrance.
    The take off runway distance available is then reduced. And the crew needs to update the
    take off speeds accordingly.
    How can we handle this?

    There is no simple way to handle that with paper RTOW charts. A specific chart may be
    used for a very often used taxiway, but that increases the number of charts. The use of LPC
    (software on board) allows this type of computation.

    I've checked the landing distance performance of our A320-211 using the FOVE landing
    module. The difference between normal landings distance vs. abnormal, especially on
    contaminated runways seem to be negligible.

    The impact of failure during the flight depends on the failure case. This impact is given in the
    QRH with failure coefficients. Some of them are low (1.1 or 1.2) because the failure only
    requires higher speed and has no effect on braking capability of the aircraft. In any case,
    keep in mind that the distances given by the QRH or the LPC are reference landing
    distances and that the crew shall retain a runway with sufficient margins.

    02 April 2010 1
    Similar for takeoff, how do you calculate MIN ACC ALT and MAX ACC ALT for go-around with
    Engine Out?

    There is no MIN ACC ALT or MAX ACC ALT definition for go-around. What has to be
    checked in case of a go-around is that the aircraft remains above the plane (i.e. surface)
    defined by the missed approach gradient.
    You can refer to the presentation held in Paris Conference this year for more details on go-
    around procedure check.

    Why has the Bleed corrections to Flex increased a lot recently?

    The Anti-ice corrections increase is linked to an Octopus change. You can refer to PEP 4.4
    reasons for change.
    The principle of anti-ice corrections on takeoff charts have been modified: the reduced
    temperatures list (below 10°C OAT) is used only to determine weight and speed corrections,
    the complete temperatures list is used for flex temp correction.
    The same principle is used in the FCOM.
    As a consequence, Flex corrections for anti-ice may have been updated in the FCOM
    and takeoff charts corrections must be recomputed.

    With TmaxFlex of ISA+75, for sure you would go below 25% max legal thrust reduction? Can
    you explain?

    Airbus re discussed this 25% max reduction and obtained a new certification from authorities
    for this modification. Keep in mind that it was already possible for other manufacturer to go
    beyond 25% using Flex on Derate.

    Can you please discuss Airbus philosophy for operations with the A320 on runways with a
    width less than 45 meters?

    Operating on a runway with a width lower than 45 m implies an increase in VMCG to be able
    to control the aircraft inside the limits of the runway as described in the regulation. This
    VMCG increment is automatically taken into by the software provided the runway width has
    been correctly entered.

    Conclusion

    We hope that you found the above helpful.

    If you have further questions on this topic, please use the usual email address for Flight
    Operations / Performance related questions:
    fltops.perfo@airbus.com

    02 April 2010 2
    Proprietary document.
    By taking delivery of this document (hereafter “document”), you accept on behalf of your
    company to comply with the following. No other property rights are granted by the delivery of
    this document than the right to read it, for the sole purpose of information. This document, its
    content, illustrations and photos shall not be modified nor reproduced without prior written
    consent of AirbusS.A.S. This document and the materials it contains shall not, in whole or in
    part, be sold, rented, or licensed to any third party subject to payment or not. This document
    may contain market-sensitive or other information that is correct at the time of going to press.
    This information involves a number of factors which could change over time, affecting the true
    public representation. Airbus assumes no obligation to update any information contained in
    this document or with respect to the information described herein. The statements made
    herein do not constitute an offer or form part of any contract. They are based on Airbus
    information and are expressed in good faith but no warranty or representation is given as to
    their accuracy. When additional information is required, Airbus S.A.S can be contacted to
    provide further details. Airbus S.A.S shall assume no liability for any damage in connection
    with the use of this document and the materialist contains, even if Airbus S.A.S has been
    advised of the likelihood of such damages. This license is governed by French law and
    exclusive jurisdiction is given to the courts and tribunals of Toulouse (France) without
    prejudice to the right of Airbus to bring proceedings for infringement of copyright or any other
    intellectual property right in any other court of competent jurisdiction.

    02 April 2010 3

    You might also like