Question for A330 drivers

[michelda]

Hi guys

I have a small question.....an unfortunately not only one......

ELEC EMER CONF with gen 1 off/inop and engine 2 inop: flaps are not working...
Same configuration but with gen 2 inop/off and engine 1 inop: flaps are working.
Do you know why this difference??
Thanks
Michelda

[hetfield]

Good morning,

I'm not current on 330, flew A300 for some years.

I guess in emer elc config only SFCC1 is working.
What about hyd systems with one eng inop on 330? Do you still have all three?
Which hyd system drives the flaps?

Maybe there you will find the answer....

[spannersatcx]

They will once you select land recovery.

[michelda]

What does it mean??
In both situation you have to push the land recovery pb.
Anyway thanks
Michelda

[fantom]

Ah...the magic Land Recovery button.

[JABBARA]

I may have an answer, if you explain how did you come this conclusion?

[michelda]

Hi Jabarra

I have read from 3.02.24.....

[JABBARA]

Still I did not understand how did you concluded from 3.02.24, but probabaly I missed some text.

Anyway you are right, and I tried to explain in the following figure

http://i1222.photobucket.com/albums/dd499/Jabbara1/PagesfromA330FCOM326IOCR.jpg?t=1294003663

[michelda]

I found this information in emer conf 03.02.24 ( note at the end of procedure)
Your answer can be correct, but in this case what happen in case of eng 1 fault and idg 2 inop???
Thanks for your answer
Michelda

[JABBARA]

but in this case what happen in case of eng 1 fault and idg 2 inop???


Obviously Flaps and Slats work but at half speed.

Normally FCOM 3.02 pages does not specify the combined failures, but ECAM does. That`s why ECAM steps always reliable at very complex cases resulted from combined failures, which normally pilot cannot do simply as reading from FCOm 3.02.

That`s whay I am interested how did you come to this conclusion as simply reading FCOM 3.02.24 pages.
Can you specify the page no please 3.02.24 P??, pin point please.

ADDED LATER: Disregard my question I found it at 3.02.24 P11. Thanks

[hetfield]

@JABBARA


#8
Thx, that's what I meant. Same architecture as A300.

[Brain Potter]

I agree with the above comments that with GEN 1 inop and ENG 2 failed; the aircraft will be in EMER ELEC CONFIG with flaps inop.

However, the QRH Summary for EMER ELEC CONFIG assumes that flaps will be available. It gives a VAPP of VREF+5 using FLAP3 with associated landing distances (a factor of 1.2 on a dry runway). I think that with flaps at 0, the delta VREF should be 30 knots with a landing distance factor 1.6 dry. Bearing in mind that the QRH summary is intended to provide the information to apply the landing distance procedure, obviating the need to refer to QRH 2.40, then it appears that the pilots could be led into making an approach 25 knots too slow.

Any thoughts?

[JABBARA]

Brain Potter, a good point you noticed.

A quick answer which comes to my mind

Quote from my post
That`s why ECAM steps always reliable at very complex cases resulted from combined failures, which normally pilot cannot do simply as reading from FCOm 3.02

In your scenario, probably
FCTL FLAPS FAULT/LOCKED
ECAM willl also display, so when calculating Vapp you have to consider its effect as well.

But in any case, since the Vls always represents actual configuration, on the final if you see a Vapp above Vls your speed calculation is correct. If not, this means your speed calculation is wrong. Then simply fly a speed above Vls.