Author Topic: Training videos (Read 159359 times)

Britjet · « **Reply #40 on:** Fri, 6 Feb 2015 09:44 »

Hi Hardy,

Sorry, the "resolution" there, as I called it, was just referring to a possible way to make the PSX model exactly fit the BA RB211 re the ATM derate, which as I said, might be inappropriate, so no problem there.

Thanks for the input on the % CG - I had forgotten that!

Peter

Hessel Oosten · « **Reply #41 on:** Fri, 6 Feb 2015 13:47 »

Aha !

Quote

The value *after the decimal* is the actual thrust value

Complete logical, but you have to think about it..... :oops:
Instructive +++

Thanks both, up to the next video ...

Hessel

calimhiro · « **Reply #42 on:** Fri, 6 Feb 2015 14:09 »

I think it's a little more complicated than that, and you'll need the B747-400 FPPM.
Some interesting reading here :
http://www.smartcockpit.com/aircraft-ressources/Reduced_Thrust_Operations.html

Stephane

Hessel Oosten · « **Reply #43 on:** Fri, 6 Feb 2015 14:29 »

Quote

a little more complicated

Thanks Stephane,

Only 106 pages (with big pictures) more .... :lol:
No problem, many of us do really feast of it !

Hessel

Hardy Heinlin · « **Reply #44 on:** Fri, 6 Feb 2015 14:37 »

This presentation doesn't say that the equation "1.50 EPR minus 10% = 1.45 EPR" be wrong, does it?

Hessel Oosten · « **Reply #45 on:** Fri, 6 Feb 2015 23:03 »

Hi flexible and fixed thrust deraters ...

Now, I'm really confused.

Learned from Hardy 2 messages ago, that the percentage E.P.R. reduction should not be calculated from e.g. the 0,00 to 1,70 range, but (of course) from the 1,00 to 1,70 range.

But now the PDF which Stephane/Calimhiro uploaded 2 messages before.

Please see pages, only 6 and 7.
There are figures with the relationship between E.P.R. and resp. Fanspeed and Exhaust Gas Temperature.

In the figure is clearly shown an EPR derate/reduction from 1,51 to 1,33.
It's mentioned there, that that reduction (delta = 0.18 ) is -25- %.

And now the question: From which values in that figure is the 25 % calculated ?

Apparently I'm blind; can't figure it out.

Hessel

Garry Richards · « **Reply #46 on:** Fri, 6 Feb 2015 23:33 »

Typo? Figures equate to 35% reduction.

calimhiro · « **Reply #47 on:** Sat, 7 Feb 2015 05:05 »

For each aircraft type and engine variant, Boeing publishes a Flight Planning Performance Manual (FPPM) which contains all datas, graphics and tabs for performance's calculations. Some parameters are not linear.
That's why I said that a FPPM would be nice to have. Unfortunately, as you may know, this is Boeing copyrighted and cannot be distributed.
Maybe Hardy, you could write to Boeing directly, and try to get one.

Stephane

martin · « **Reply #48 on:** Sat, 7 Feb 2015 07:27 »

"Excellent stuff, these videos are."
__________________[size=8]Yoda the Jedi[/size]

It has been said before, and I'll say it again: This is great instruction.
Thank you!

Cheers,
Martin

Triple7 · « **Reply #49 on:** Sat, 7 Feb 2015 07:52 »

Hi,

From FPPM for RB211 G's. EPR is for 0 pressure altitude at different temps.

TO - 1.46,50,53,56,59,62,65,68,71,72
TO1-1.42,45,48,50,53,55,58,61,65,65
TO2-1.37,40,42,45,47,49,52,54,56,56

Hessel Oosten · « **Reply #50 on:** Sat, 7 Feb 2015 10:05 »

Stephane and Gary thanks !

@ Stephane. My understanding from the figure is that the non linearity doesn't play a role here.
The rough values/lines we are talking about here, are nearly linear in that part of the figure -and- more important i.m.o. the type of figure does "correct" for non-linearity with the readings on X- and Y- axis.

@Gary. THAT could be the case! I also came at a percentage of 35 % instead of the mentioned 25% , but did believe that on a scanned a page from an official manual a typo (ehhh... writo...) couldn't exist ...
Indeed it's handwritten, but that could also be official...
I did look in my old .. 767 manauls (= 1 meter bookshelf...) and found in -non- of the pages with all the graph's, any handwriting !

Hessel

p.s. And NOW back to the GREAT video's !!!
It's an old Boeing-rule that in a weekend at least 1 is produced ....

Britjet · « **Reply #51 on:** Sat, 7 Feb 2015 13:43 »

Go Around video up - the first of two on the subject.

Cheers!

Peter

jtsjc1 · « **Reply #52 on:** Sat, 7 Feb 2015 15:38 »

Peter these videos are excellent! Having a 744 captain giving instruction on procedures together with Hardy's manual really makes this sim the best PC program out there. Much appreciated thanks! :mrgreen:

GodAtum · « **Reply #53 on:** Sat, 7 Feb 2015 16:45 »

wow amazing videos, thank you so much :mrgreen:

400guy · « **Reply #54 on:** Sat, 7 Feb 2015 17:18 »

Things were a lot simpler back in the 747-100 days when we just had to fly the airplane

Great teaching aids in these videos, much appreciated by this "old dog".

Horst · « **Reply #55 on:** Sat, 7 Feb 2015 17:37 »

Hi Peter,

many thanks for the video 4).

Every time very interesting to hear and to watch.

How many go-arounds you made in your active pilot life?

greetings
Horst

Britjet · « **Reply #56 on:** Sat, 7 Feb 2015 19:48 »

Thanks, Horst

I don't think I ever had an "active" pilot life!
In terms of Go-Arounds - not many - probably countable on two hands..In long-haul you don't get many opportunities..
(Mostly as a result of close spacing on final, a couple of TCAS events from other aircraft, one or two minor technical issues..very little that was weather related...)

Cheers,

Peter.

Britjet · « **Reply #57 on:** Sat, 7 Feb 2015 19:49 »

Quote from: 400guy

Things were a lot simpler back in the 747-100 days when we just had to fly the airplane

Great teaching aids in these videos, much appreciated by this "old dog".

You should have tried the 707
Peter

Britjet · « **Reply #58 on:** Sat, 7 Feb 2015 20:47 »

I think I may be able to finally settle this derate discussion as to whether the derate is linearly mathematical (or should it be mathematically linear?).

If you will trust me to quote from the Boeing FFPM for JAR-OPS (ie Europe) for the RB211 524 G-series..

"Regulations permit the use of up to 25% takeoff thrust
reduction for operation with assumed temperature
reduced thrust. Use of reduced thrust is not allowed on
runways contaminated with water, ice, slush or snow.
Use of assumed temperature reduced thrust is not
recommended if potential windshear conditions exist.
The assumed temperature reduced takeoff EPR is read
from the Max Takeoff EPR table at the assumed
temperature. The minimum allowable EPR for reduced
thrust, based on 25% takeoff thrust reduction, is shown
below. It is not recommended to set takeoff EPR lower
than the scheduled Climb EPR.

MAX TAKE OFF EPR FOR ACTUAL OAT:- 1.90, 1.80, 1.70, 1.60, 1.50, 1.40
MIN TAKE OF EPR ALLOWED:- 1.67, 1.59, 1.52, 1.45,1.37,1.30 respectively..

As they say- "Do the math" !
Perhaps you can construct your own table :-)

Britjet

Martin B · « **Reply #59 on:** Sat, 7 Feb 2015 22:25 »

Love the videos, thanks.

Re the GA, when you pause the video at 800' AGL after pushing TOGA, climb rate is 2750 fpm and the thrust briefly touches full GA thrust even though it's the single-push TOGA which aims for a climb rate of 2,000 fpm.

Then when pushing FLCH it goes to full thrust again, even though it's less than 1,000ft to altitude capture.

Is there a way to keep the thrust more constant and gentle throughout the TOGA procedure, up to and including acceleration and alt capture, just as there is on take-off using TO2/CL2 with VNAV for example?

Thanks,

M