A Company Oral for Boeing 767

[Chris Higgins]

I'll post the answers tomorrow:

1.) How many FCCs does it take to be monitored for the engagement of an autopilot?

2.) What is the brake failure progression for the 767, with reference to the source of hydraulics, (ie: left, centre, or right)?

3.) On the alternate brakes, what number of anti-skids modules are being used?

4.) With the failure of the left main (AC) buss in anything other than autoland below 200', how many autopilots can be engaged?

5.) The Ram Air Turbine runs from which hydraulic system?

6.) What does it power?

7.) It's source is from above stand-pipe, or below stand-pipe?

8.) Emergency brakes and nosewheel steering; how is this activated? From which hydraulic source? Above stand-pipe or below stand-pipe?

9.) On the Auto Land Status Annunciator you are below 1500' AGL and receive a top flag that reads "Land 3"

i) Where is the Centre FCC obtaining it's power from?

ii) In this circumstance is anything able to be read on the lower window of the ASA?

10.) ON the ASA, with "Land 3" annunciated, and now below 200', the aircraft suffers a left ac buss failure, what indication on the ASA would you receive?

[Chimbu chuckles]

How timely is this...I've got recurrent on the 24/25th of this month:}

1/. 1. Each autopilot channel has 1 FCC/1 IRS/I RA/1 ILS

2/. Normal brakes= R/H system. Alternate Brakes= Center system standpipe. Accumulator = right system.

3/. I have no idea how many modules but with normal brakes you have individual wheel antiskid whereas with alternate you only have individual axle antiskid...so perhaps 8 normal and 4 alternate.

4/. 2 ...Hence you would get a 'Land 2' ASA. and can only fly to Cat 2 minima.

5/. Center system

6/. Hydraulic flight controls only

7/. The only standpipe on the 767 is center system reserve brakes and steering...the RAT has nothing to do with standpipes on the 767...757 different story.

8/. Activate the Reserve Brakes and nosewheel steering switch. Center hydraulic. Below standpipe I think...accumulator is right system

9/ i). Hot Battery bus
ii) No...until something breaks...and only then if it breaks above 200 radio alt.

10/. Below 200' radio a single system downgrade is not annunciated so no change. If the APU is running there will be automatic transfer so no degradation caused by AC bus failure...that's why we start the APU at 10K on an autoland approach. If you lose two systems, left and right AC for instance (and the APU was not running), you would get a No Autoland annunciation. If the APU was running the first AC buss failure would be taken over by the APU and the second bus failure would be detected as a single channel failure so the ASA would not change and the autoland would happen as normal...when you disconnect the A/P on rollout the EICAS screeen would light up with the various failures because now they are no longer inhibited...I think.

:ok:

[blueloo]

1/ Autopilot Engagement
Autopilot engagement requires at least two FCCs and pushing one of the MCP autopilot engage switches.


...and i cant be bothered typing the rest up here.

[planemad2]

5.) The Ram Air Turbine runs from which hydraulic system?

Obviously a trick question. ;)

It doesn't RUN from ANY hydraulic system, it runs from ram air. :rolleyes:

WHEN it runs, IT pressurises the centre system for flight controls.

[Chimbu chuckles]

Didn't even notice the 'from' in that question:\

[Oz Ocker]

Didn't even notice the.. A case of "fools rush in", mate?
RTFQ, lotsa pilots ave bombed exam questions because they answered what they THOUGHT the question was, not what it REALLY was.

[Chimbu chuckles]

I think you're taking this a tad serious Oz mate. And I answered the question correctly anyway;)

Chuckles.

Ps After 25yrs the next flying written I fail will be the second one:} :ok:

[planemad2]

It is probably NOT a trick question in this case, especially on a Pilots exam, just poorly worded.

However that is exactly the sort of thing they would ask of Engineers, and unless (as somone already pointed out) you always RTFQ, people would fall for it. ;)

The way the question is presently worded though in this case, my answer is the only truly correct one. :uhoh:

[Chimbu chuckles]

that's fair...When I (sorta) read the question I just thought about the RAT deploying and driving the center system flight control hydraulics...when I read your response I went back and read the question again...I think it's just badly worded rather than a trick...teach me to do these things at midnight instead of going to bed like a normal person would/should.:(

[Oz Ocker]

Yeah pm2, your answer IS the only correct one, sorry Chimbu mate, your's was a blooper.
Another thing yer gotta learn in this industry mate, is that it doesn't matter how long yer in it for, ya don't gain immunity from makin mistakes. Ya just realise that sometimes in the past you was lucky enough that you accidentally didn't get caught.
Ya get wiser, but not necessarily smarter.

(Trick) Questions like that one about the RAT on the 767 are often chucked in on other types, prolly just ta stop too many people gettin 100%.

Now ya better get back to yer study Chimbu, F/O's are supposed ta know EVERYTHING, mate - it's only the Captains who don't, cos that's when they turn to the F/O!! :}

[Chimbu chuckles]

Ok....I'll just get me coat....and leave...sniff!:{


I still think you're holding on too tight Oz;)

[Inverted FL]

I still think you're holding on too tight Oz

Haha, either that or sand in his vagina

[Chris Higgins]

1: It takes two FCCs to engage an autopilot. One FCC is active, the other is monitored passively for comparison to prevent an autopilot hardover. The use of the centre autopilot allows left and right FCCs to be monitored passively.

2. The brake failure progression for the B-767 is Right normal/ Centre Alternate/ Centre Reserve (following activation of Reserve Brakes and Nosewheel Steering switch), then back to right accumulator. With the exception of Centre Reserve, all is done with a system of priority valves.

3. The number is not that important, only to know that it's half the number of anti-skid control on alternate brakes. I still think that the redundancy of seperate lines and to have any anti-skid is superb! Chimbu gets the actual number though! (4 vs 8)

4. Believe it or not...NONE. If you lose the left AC buss in cruise you can't engage an autopilot!

The left AC buss powers the left and centre Flight Control Computers in normal operations. The autoflight system requires two for comparison.

During autoland above 200'AGL The left AC buss powers the left FCC, the center FCC is powered through the hot batt buss and the right is through the right AC buss. Should one buss become inop, the autoland status should just change from "Land 3" to "Land 2" and on the lower window "No Land 3".

Finally, any attempt to engage an autopilot at any time you've lost the left AC, (even below 1500') will not work.

5,6,7).

The Ram Air Turbine powers the flight controls only, utilising Centre hydraulics, from above standpipe. (There's a movie on Air Canada running out of gas that shows it doing wayyyy more, but it doesn't.)

Remember, on the 767, the center system does have a standpipe, but only for reserve brakes and nosewheel steering.

8,9,10)

I gotta give credit to Chimbu on this one too. The 767 was among the first of the "smart" quiet dark cockpits to be introduced and his answers are all correct.

Below 200', (on an auto land), master cautions are inhibited and there is no EICAS message of any failures. You would see the appropriate failure if you looked up at he overhead, but I really don't think any company wants you doing that below 200'.

The autoland status would not change as the redundancies for a safe autoland are still present.

The "center" FCC is obtaining its power from the hot batt buss through it's own stby tru and is "locked" out from changing back to the left AC buss.





Any questions or arguments feel free to post. Or you can e-mail me at [email protected]

All the best!

[OPSH24]

can't argue with that then;)

[planemad2]

Except of course, you didn't answer #5. ;) :rolleyes:

[Chimbu chuckles]

Am in an internet cafe in BKK so can't check but I have a feeling that the center FCC may be powered from the left AC normally but if that is not available then it automagically switches to the right AC...I therefore humbly submit that you will have the center and right A/P available after a left AC bus failure.

It would seem rediculous to leave such an otherwise well sorted, ETOPS approved, aircraft having to be handflown after such a simple, singular system failure.

Or am I remembering it wrong?

[ftrplt]

Chimbu,

the question concerns a L BUS failure, as opposed to a L GEN failure.

In this case, the R GEN is unable to get power through the failed left AC Bus to the Centre AC Bus, therefore you will have no AP's (only the R AP is powered, but 2 required to engage 1)

Left Bus failure on an autoland <200ft; the Centre AC is powered by the Hot Battery Bus, giving you the C and R A/P's.

[Chimbu chuckles]

Indeed....I was (unknowingly)thinking about the GE powered 767, which I have flown as opposed to the PW powered 767 which I fly now. On the PW powered 767 left AC bus failure leads to no autopilots...on the GE you still have the right hand one. A quick check of my QRH this morning resolved the ambiguity...one reason I don't make a HUGE effort to memorise things klike this.

Just one reason the GE 767 is a better machine.

[ftrplt]

yes you do have the right AP (FCC), but as mentioned you need 2 FCC's to engage one A/P, therefore you cannot engage any A/P's.

[Chimbu chuckles]

According to my Boeing Vol 1 on a GE powered 767-300 you need one FCC to engage an autopilot...two on a PW powered 767-300.

On a GE Powered 767 when you have a left AC bus fault (not an IDG fault) you lose the left and center FCC but can still operate the rh autopilot via the MCP and the right FCC.

I am not making this stuff up...we had 2 GE powered 767s.

[ftrplt]

from my GE 767-300 OM:

Autopilot engagement requires at least two FCC's and pushing one of the MCP autopilot engage switches

[Chimbu chuckles]

That's exactly what mine says under the list of individual aircraft registrations that equate to the PW powered 767s we own.

Under the list of individual aircraft registrations that equate to the GE powered 767s we own it states;

Autopilot engagement requires at least one FCC and pushing one of the MCP autopilot engage switches.

Now I really don't think this is a point worth argueing over...perhaps it's a matter of whether the aircraft are relatively new build or early serial numbered aircraft....the amendment date of the page 4.20.2 is February 14, 2001.

How about we move on from this minor point and start challenging each other, purely from a fun and educational POV, with some other technical questions...after all I think you would agree that the level of systems knowledge Boeing seems to want us to have is hardly conducive to truly understanding the aircraft when things go pear shaped....thankfully a remarkably rare event given the miles of wiring, hyd pipes etc etc in a modern widebody...I am amazed they don't break more often.

[Chris Higgins]

Yes, you're all correct. The changes were divided among serial numbers that equated to a popular engine variance, but not confined to same.

The only way to be sure is to check the Airplane Flight Manual and Quick Reference Handbook.

Just as part of your pre-flight, look up "Loss of Left AC Buss" and see what it says.

I did seven type ratings in seven years. I never did fly the 767 or 757. I just taught systems, did sim and did the orals.

At the moment I fly domestic and international on the Hawker 1000 for Netjets. I have been scheduled to go to Flight Safety for the Citation X in February. I never knew such a job existed when I started to learn to fly in Port Macquarie in 1983. I can't ever remember feeling this happy. I have just returned from St Maarten in the Carribean. My driveway is under six inches of snow and my three boys are watching a movie next to the fire place.

I enjoyed my time at Boeing Flight Safety in Seattle teaching the 757 and 767 on behalf of USAir, evn though it will be all for naught when they go out of business. People wonder why I didn't pursue Qantas more seriously, but my American bride would not have been happy that far from her family.

I will say this though... judging by the selection process at Qantas, (I've been through it three times), I think that the QF HR have a very distorted view of what makes a good pilot.

"Would you spend more on street lighting...or the arts?"

Here it is, some of you have been flying the 767 since 1983, the year it was certified, the year I was in the Year 10 in High School... and probably just discovered you can't engage an autopliot if you lost the left AC buss on your 76'.

Somebody needs to realign the QF training department ...and recruitment back to things that are just a little bit more relevant to what we actually do up "there".
:ok:

[ftrplt]

I did once ask why the QRH stated

'all autopilots MAY be inoperative'

guess thats why.

no arguments CC, just thought you were wrong based on what is in our book. Guess its nothing to do with the engine fitted, but purely a model #.


I will say this though... judging by the selection process at Qantas, (I've been through it three times), I think that the QF HR have a very distorted view of what makes a good pilot.

Somebody needs to realign the QF training department ...and recruitment back to things that are just a little bit more relevant to what we actually do up "there".

Mr Higgins, just exactly what are you cr##pping on about??

[Chris Higgins]

ftrplt

I'm sorry to have offended you, and I must admit it was flame bait to include that, but I have my reasons.

My family went to Australia twice this last twelve months and I ran into second officers that have not made it through upgrade.

One was recruited in 1988!

Sooooo, is the problem in upgrading training or recruitment? Or do you think there isn't a problem?

[ftrplt]

dont really know why I am bothering, but anyway. (getting OT)

I'm sorry to have offended you, and I must admit it was flame bait to include that, but I have my reasons.

not offended, just wondering about the relevance to the thread at hand.



My family went to Australia twice this last twelve months and I ran into second officers that have not made it through upgrade.

Havent made it through or chosen not to?? Given there are 350 S/O's on the 400, dont you think you maybe drawing just a slightly long bow?


Sooooo, is the problem in upgrading training or recruitment? Or do you think there isn't a problem?

what was the problem again?

[Chris Higgins]

Ah, well, um?

You don't think that shows a general lack of ambition do you? I thought we were after ambitious people who felt comfortable with high levels of responsibility?

Are you saying that's not a recruitment objective?

I certainly understand the benefits of seniority with bidding lines and vacation, but American Airlines has always had a policy of, "up or out".

Do you think that it's healthy for senior crews to rest on the lower levels of responsibility, allowing others with less time and training cycles to be promoted?

I agree it's okay to use seniority to your advantage, but mate, there's gotta be a limit!

(To answer your question, he didn't make it through FO, and I sure hope that he does next time. Does that reflect on the quality of training? Quite possibly. Yes I've failed a flight test before, and no I don't think anyone's immune from a mistake.)