Side Slip (wing down/cross control) Landing Technique on Airbus (A330)
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Among the Clouds
Posts: 70
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Side Slip (wing down/cross control) Landing Technique on Airbus (A330)
Dear Learned Ones,
I learned that Airbus recommends the crab/decrab at flare method while Boeing does the wing down/cross control side slip method at about 400'.
During conversion from Boeing to Airbus, I was told once by an instructor that the Airbus aircraft will crash if the cross control method of Boeing is used on the Airbus. However he did not explain or elaborate further.
Can someone please give me a technical explanation on this? Your help is very much appreciated.
Many thanks.
ps: someone also told me that the A380 may be able to do the side slip method.
I learned that Airbus recommends the crab/decrab at flare method while Boeing does the wing down/cross control side slip method at about 400'.
During conversion from Boeing to Airbus, I was told once by an instructor that the Airbus aircraft will crash if the cross control method of Boeing is used on the Airbus. However he did not explain or elaborate further.
Can someone please give me a technical explanation on this? Your help is very much appreciated.
Many thanks.
ps: someone also told me that the A380 may be able to do the side slip method.
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Wanderlust
Posts: 3,406
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
titaniumwings
In AB FBW when you move the stick to one side it is rate roll demand so computers will position flight controls to give you that. You are trying to fly straight with wing down so the computers will try to correct that by use of spoilers, aileron and rudder. It may lead to over use of rudder which can have serious consequences. When you are try to do something that is against the design concept the result cannot be predicted.
In AB FBW when you move the stick to one side it is rate roll demand so computers will position flight controls to give you that. You are trying to fly straight with wing down so the computers will try to correct that by use of spoilers, aileron and rudder. It may lead to over use of rudder which can have serious consequences. When you are try to do something that is against the design concept the result cannot be predicted.
That's funny because I've landed the 330 with wing down into wind just like a 777 and it doesn't get confused or crash....
Indeed it's supposed to behave just like a real Aircraft.
Indeed it's supposed to behave just like a real Aircraft.
A330 FCTM---
LATERAL AND DIRECTIONAL CONTROL FINAL APPROACH In crosswind conditions, a crabbed-approach wings-level should be flown with the aircraft (cockpit) positioned on the extended runway centerline until the flare. FLARE The objectives of the lateral and directional control of the aircraft during the flare are: • To land on the centerline, and • to minimize the lateral loads on the main landing gear. The recommended de-crab technique is to use all of the following: • The rudder to align the aircraft with the runway heading during the flare. • The roll control, if needed, to maintain the aircraft on the runway centerline. Any tendency to drift downwind should be counteracted by an appropriate lateral (roll) input on the sidestick. In the case of strong crosswind, in the de-crab phase, the PF should be prepared to add small bank angle into the wind in order to maintain the aircraft on the runway centerline. The aircraft may be landed with a partial de-crab (residual crab angle up to about 5 °) to prevent excessive bank. This technique prevents wingtip (or engine nacelle) strike caused by an excessive bank angle. As a consequence, this may result in touching down with some bank angle into the wind (hence with the upwind landing gear first).
LATERAL AND DIRECTIONAL CONTROL FINAL APPROACH In crosswind conditions, a crabbed-approach wings-level should be flown with the aircraft (cockpit) positioned on the extended runway centerline until the flare. FLARE The objectives of the lateral and directional control of the aircraft during the flare are: • To land on the centerline, and • to minimize the lateral loads on the main landing gear. The recommended de-crab technique is to use all of the following: • The rudder to align the aircraft with the runway heading during the flare. • The roll control, if needed, to maintain the aircraft on the runway centerline. Any tendency to drift downwind should be counteracted by an appropriate lateral (roll) input on the sidestick. In the case of strong crosswind, in the de-crab phase, the PF should be prepared to add small bank angle into the wind in order to maintain the aircraft on the runway centerline. The aircraft may be landed with a partial de-crab (residual crab angle up to about 5 °) to prevent excessive bank. This technique prevents wingtip (or engine nacelle) strike caused by an excessive bank angle. As a consequence, this may result in touching down with some bank angle into the wind (hence with the upwind landing gear first).
So.
In the Flare---
Rudder to align the nose straight down the runway.
Aileron used as required to keep it over the centerline and not drifting downwind and if the xwind is strong enough land on the upwind wheels first. Yep a small gentle sideslip.
Basically like a 777.
You will find that unlike a 777 the Airbus won't require Aileron to keep the wings level while pushing in the rudder during a gentle crosswind, the FBW will do that for you. ( it's supposed to but........)
In the Flare---
Rudder to align the nose straight down the runway.
Aileron used as required to keep it over the centerline and not drifting downwind and if the xwind is strong enough land on the upwind wheels first. Yep a small gentle sideslip.
Basically like a 777.
You will find that unlike a 777 the Airbus won't require Aileron to keep the wings level while pushing in the rudder during a gentle crosswind, the FBW will do that for you. ( it's supposed to but........)
Last edited by ACMS; 8th Nov 2014 at 06:57.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Among the Clouds
Posts: 70
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks a lot for bringing up the points. It is what I had wanted to discuss.
As villas mentioned; the FBW flight computer may introduce an input which is contrary to that of a pilot.
As ACMS mentioned, the comparison I am trying to make is between B777 to A330. Also the part of which it can be flown like any other aircraft may need more thought. But you will be a great person to compare as I believe you have flown both the B777 and A330.
Consider a conventional turn, any aircraft (other than airbus) will require the pilot to hold in the input on the aileron to continue the turn. For airbus just demand a roll rate till the bank angle and release to neutral-this is not conventional.
I believe the B777 sets itself up for sideslip at 400', this can be observed on its autoland.
The A330 has normal lateral law till practically touchdown. Considering the way it coordinates for the turn, it therefore cannot do a wing down at height (400' or higher) like the Boeing.
During flare however, momentarily wing down before the coordinated lateral inputs by the flight computer will result in the wing down touchdown. This is just my interpretation of the normal lateral law.
Please correct my understanding accordingly.
ps: by this theory, with an all engine flameout and still under Normal Law and the engines do not light up, it is not possible to the side slip/ forward slip method to lose height while still maintaining track on finals
As villas mentioned; the FBW flight computer may introduce an input which is contrary to that of a pilot.
As ACMS mentioned, the comparison I am trying to make is between B777 to A330. Also the part of which it can be flown like any other aircraft may need more thought. But you will be a great person to compare as I believe you have flown both the B777 and A330.
Consider a conventional turn, any aircraft (other than airbus) will require the pilot to hold in the input on the aileron to continue the turn. For airbus just demand a roll rate till the bank angle and release to neutral-this is not conventional.
I believe the B777 sets itself up for sideslip at 400', this can be observed on its autoland.
The A330 has normal lateral law till practically touchdown. Considering the way it coordinates for the turn, it therefore cannot do a wing down at height (400' or higher) like the Boeing.
During flare however, momentarily wing down before the coordinated lateral inputs by the flight computer will result in the wing down touchdown. This is just my interpretation of the normal lateral law.
Please correct my understanding accordingly.
ps: by this theory, with an all engine flameout and still under Normal Law and the engines do not light up, it is not possible to the side slip/ forward slip method to lose height while still maintaining track on finals
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Among the Clouds
Posts: 70
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ACMS, can I just check where is this part about the wing will remain level even after you centre the heading with rudder is interpreted from.
It may be the same principle that I use to reason out the above.
Thank you very much.
If you are on a straight and level flight then you put in a rudder input, using the Lateral Normal Law as a guiding principle, what would the aircraft do?
It may be the same principle that I use to reason out the above.
Thank you very much.
If you are on a straight and level flight then you put in a rudder input, using the Lateral Normal Law as a guiding principle, what would the aircraft do?
Last edited by titaniumwings; 8th Nov 2014 at 09:04. Reason: Additional Question
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: B.F.E.
Posts: 228
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I get the opportunity to make crosswind landings in the 330 with anywhere from a 10 to 30 knot direct component fairly regularly so this is my 2 pesos. These are just observations gleaned from drinking myself into an obsessed self-analytical stupor after making a few LEGENDARY "crunch-on" crosswind "arrivals". They have since gotten a bit better. Read on for some ideas; take what you can use and chuck the rest.
In normal law, roll and yaw control remains the same until the main wheel touchdown, at which point lateral control blends down to a direct stick-to-deflection relationship.
Pitch, on the other hand, changes to a direct stick-to-elevator relationship around 100 ft RA. Autotrim also stops, and at 50 feet a slight nose-down moment is applied to get you to pull through in the flare. This all combines to basically make the airplane feel like a Cessna 172 IN PITCH during the flare and touchdown, assuming the autothrust isnt jumping around too much. In roll, if you use a "kick-out in the flare" kind of technique and have a gentle touch on the stick, it also will feel fairly intuitive if you just look out the window and fly it.
Autothrust, however, can really mess up the feel of the flare on a gusty day.
In Normal Law ABOVE 100 ft, the FBW maintains 1 "G" corrected for pitch, regardless of gusts or thrust changes. That does not mean it will necessarily hold the PITCH exactly stable, but the G LOAD; subsequently the pitch stays pretty close. So let's say as you motor down short final, you hit a big old sinker and lose a few knots below Vapp (assume we are below 400 ft so GS Mini has stopped "mini-ing", and above 100 ft so we are still in fully normal Normal). The airplane will hold CLOSE to the current pitch as the FBW applies up elevator to increase "G" against the "sinker". Simultaneously (actually a little after), the A/THR will blast in some power to bring up your speed. This would conventionally cause a non-FBW airplane to pitch UP due to "pitch-power couple", but of course the FBW counters this as well. So to you the airplane's path feels fairly steady, with no input needed on your part except for small little "guiding" touches when the path wanders off as the airplane works to maintain "G".
Now we get into "flare mode", below 100 feet. Remember our PITCH CONTROL ONLY has returned to a DIRECT relationship between stick and elevator, with no autotrim. A/THR, however, is STILL in "SPEED" mode. Let's say you hit that same sinker NOW, at 80 feet. The nose will drop with the "sinker", and you will correct for it. This feels natural and lets us have an intuitive feel for the airplane's energy state just above the ground, where it matters most. However, as the power surges in the "pitch-power couple" is also back with us, and the nose wanders up and down. In a Boeing, we have our hands on the throttles and feel them moving, giving us an instinctive grasp of what the power, and therefore the pitch, will do. On Airbus aircraft that is not the case. You really don't know what the hell the thrust is doing until a split second after it "does", because you are looking out the window and the engines are too far back to hear until they really crank up. So when the autothrust starts jockeying itself in gusty winds just above the flare, a lot of "stick-and-rudder" type pilots will feel just a touch "out of the loop".
So going back to the gusty crosswind landing, if your SOPs allow it, manual thrust is much more intuitive, assuming you have practiced using it. A good technique on the A330-200 is to set the power for around 1.6 ~ 1.7 EPR while all set up and riding down final. Use small power changes (.1 or less) to counter airspeed TRENDS, and allow the exact IAS to wander slightly in the gusts, preferably on the higher side. The autothrust is rough in gusts because it AGGRESSIVELY tries to maintain the EXACT speed at low altitude; maintaining ENERGY STATE is more the name of the game hand flying. It is also MUCH smoother on the passengers' ears (and the neighbors' around the airport).
Most important this puts the pitch-power couple COMPLETELY back in your hands, taking away the variable that seems to destabilize crosswind landings more than any other IMHO.
So we have pitch dealt with. Now the lateral. Roll stays in Normal (roll-rate demand) till the ground. So same as pitch, it will NOT lock in your bank angle, but your RATE. So zero stick deflection equals zero rate. It will try to correct back to zero if it is disturbed, and that correction puts it back more or less where it started, but not always. So there will be some "guiding" to do here as well BUT NOT MUCH. That does mean that as you squeeze out the crab angle with the rudder, it will try to hold zero roll rate. It does a good job of this right up to the point that a gust nails you in the de-crab. NOW, it will zero the roll rate but not always exactly on wings level. This is where we usually start "stirring the pot" and it gets really wonky (like the Lufthansa A320 near-accident a while back). Small, steady motions are the key. Big, steady motions if those don't do it, but above all steady and not jerky. Think Cessna 152 more than Boeing 747. Remember a given lateral stick deflection commands a given roll rate; the airplane may take a moment sorting out how to give that to you, so hold the command STEADY until it either starts moving in the right direction or you are ABSOLUTELY sure that it will not. Let it do the work for you; by getting your control inputs "out of phase" with what the airplane is trying to do for you, the famous "Airbus Hula" will begin and your landing is SHOT.
The secrets of the guys I've seen who do really good crosswind landings mostly involve:
Use manual thrust. Since you are controlling thrust directly now, idle the throttles slowly like you would in a Boeing, to reduce pitching tendencies. Squeeze out the crab as late as possible DURING the flare and not before, to minimize lateral stick corrections. Small, STEADY pressures on the stick; use STEADY, CONSTANT PRESSURES in pitch below 100 ft, with small, STEADY, intermittent pressures in roll that ALWAYS RETURN TO NEUTRAL.
And even then sometime the damn thing just drops like a brick, and lands itself on the wrong wheel while everyone else in the cockpit laughs at you.
Good luck!
In normal law, roll and yaw control remains the same until the main wheel touchdown, at which point lateral control blends down to a direct stick-to-deflection relationship.
Pitch, on the other hand, changes to a direct stick-to-elevator relationship around 100 ft RA. Autotrim also stops, and at 50 feet a slight nose-down moment is applied to get you to pull through in the flare. This all combines to basically make the airplane feel like a Cessna 172 IN PITCH during the flare and touchdown, assuming the autothrust isnt jumping around too much. In roll, if you use a "kick-out in the flare" kind of technique and have a gentle touch on the stick, it also will feel fairly intuitive if you just look out the window and fly it.
Autothrust, however, can really mess up the feel of the flare on a gusty day.
In Normal Law ABOVE 100 ft, the FBW maintains 1 "G" corrected for pitch, regardless of gusts or thrust changes. That does not mean it will necessarily hold the PITCH exactly stable, but the G LOAD; subsequently the pitch stays pretty close. So let's say as you motor down short final, you hit a big old sinker and lose a few knots below Vapp (assume we are below 400 ft so GS Mini has stopped "mini-ing", and above 100 ft so we are still in fully normal Normal). The airplane will hold CLOSE to the current pitch as the FBW applies up elevator to increase "G" against the "sinker". Simultaneously (actually a little after), the A/THR will blast in some power to bring up your speed. This would conventionally cause a non-FBW airplane to pitch UP due to "pitch-power couple", but of course the FBW counters this as well. So to you the airplane's path feels fairly steady, with no input needed on your part except for small little "guiding" touches when the path wanders off as the airplane works to maintain "G".
Now we get into "flare mode", below 100 feet. Remember our PITCH CONTROL ONLY has returned to a DIRECT relationship between stick and elevator, with no autotrim. A/THR, however, is STILL in "SPEED" mode. Let's say you hit that same sinker NOW, at 80 feet. The nose will drop with the "sinker", and you will correct for it. This feels natural and lets us have an intuitive feel for the airplane's energy state just above the ground, where it matters most. However, as the power surges in the "pitch-power couple" is also back with us, and the nose wanders up and down. In a Boeing, we have our hands on the throttles and feel them moving, giving us an instinctive grasp of what the power, and therefore the pitch, will do. On Airbus aircraft that is not the case. You really don't know what the hell the thrust is doing until a split second after it "does", because you are looking out the window and the engines are too far back to hear until they really crank up. So when the autothrust starts jockeying itself in gusty winds just above the flare, a lot of "stick-and-rudder" type pilots will feel just a touch "out of the loop".
So going back to the gusty crosswind landing, if your SOPs allow it, manual thrust is much more intuitive, assuming you have practiced using it. A good technique on the A330-200 is to set the power for around 1.6 ~ 1.7 EPR while all set up and riding down final. Use small power changes (.1 or less) to counter airspeed TRENDS, and allow the exact IAS to wander slightly in the gusts, preferably on the higher side. The autothrust is rough in gusts because it AGGRESSIVELY tries to maintain the EXACT speed at low altitude; maintaining ENERGY STATE is more the name of the game hand flying. It is also MUCH smoother on the passengers' ears (and the neighbors' around the airport).
Most important this puts the pitch-power couple COMPLETELY back in your hands, taking away the variable that seems to destabilize crosswind landings more than any other IMHO.
So we have pitch dealt with. Now the lateral. Roll stays in Normal (roll-rate demand) till the ground. So same as pitch, it will NOT lock in your bank angle, but your RATE. So zero stick deflection equals zero rate. It will try to correct back to zero if it is disturbed, and that correction puts it back more or less where it started, but not always. So there will be some "guiding" to do here as well BUT NOT MUCH. That does mean that as you squeeze out the crab angle with the rudder, it will try to hold zero roll rate. It does a good job of this right up to the point that a gust nails you in the de-crab. NOW, it will zero the roll rate but not always exactly on wings level. This is where we usually start "stirring the pot" and it gets really wonky (like the Lufthansa A320 near-accident a while back). Small, steady motions are the key. Big, steady motions if those don't do it, but above all steady and not jerky. Think Cessna 152 more than Boeing 747. Remember a given lateral stick deflection commands a given roll rate; the airplane may take a moment sorting out how to give that to you, so hold the command STEADY until it either starts moving in the right direction or you are ABSOLUTELY sure that it will not. Let it do the work for you; by getting your control inputs "out of phase" with what the airplane is trying to do for you, the famous "Airbus Hula" will begin and your landing is SHOT.
The secrets of the guys I've seen who do really good crosswind landings mostly involve:
Use manual thrust. Since you are controlling thrust directly now, idle the throttles slowly like you would in a Boeing, to reduce pitching tendencies. Squeeze out the crab as late as possible DURING the flare and not before, to minimize lateral stick corrections. Small, STEADY pressures on the stick; use STEADY, CONSTANT PRESSURES in pitch below 100 ft, with small, STEADY, intermittent pressures in roll that ALWAYS RETURN TO NEUTRAL.
And even then sometime the damn thing just drops like a brick, and lands itself on the wrong wheel while everyone else in the cockpit laughs at you.
Good luck!
Last edited by hikoushi; 8th Nov 2014 at 08:52.
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: N5109.2W10.5
Posts: 720
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
villas,
This Airbus produced document doesn't agree with you.
http://www.skybrary.aero/bookshelf/books/179.pdf
"With higher crosswind (typically above 15 kt to 20 kt crosswind component), a safe crosswind landing requires:
•
− A crabbed-approach, and
− A partial decrab prior to touchdown, using a combination of bank angle and crab angle (achieved by applying cross-controls).
On most Airbus models, this requires touching down with:
− Maximum 5 degrees of crab angle, and
− Maximum 5 degrees of bank angle."
You are trying to fly straight with wing down so the computers will try to correct that by use of spoilers, aileron and rudder. When you are try to do something that is against the design concept the result cannot be predicted.
http://www.skybrary.aero/bookshelf/books/179.pdf
"With higher crosswind (typically above 15 kt to 20 kt crosswind component), a safe crosswind landing requires:
•
− A crabbed-approach, and
− A partial decrab prior to touchdown, using a combination of bank angle and crab angle (achieved by applying cross-controls).
On most Airbus models, this requires touching down with:
− Maximum 5 degrees of crab angle, and
− Maximum 5 degrees of bank angle."
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Among the Clouds
Posts: 70
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
hikoushi,
Great writeup.
Thank you very much for sharing your experience and the enlightenment. Really appreciate it.
Regards.
ps: If you are on a straight and level flight then you put in a rudder input, using the Lateral Normal Law as a guiding principle, what would the aircraft do? TQ.
Great writeup.
Thank you very much for sharing your experience and the enlightenment. Really appreciate it.
Regards.
ps: If you are on a straight and level flight then you put in a rudder input, using the Lateral Normal Law as a guiding principle, what would the aircraft do? TQ.
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Wanderlust
Posts: 3,406
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Goldenrivett
If there was no problem with side slip technique then all that write up was unnecessary, then why not fly wing down cross control like any other aircraft? There is a problem as I mentioned. If you carefully read what you quoted it is applicable in your own words prior to touch down. It does not mean you fly side slip approach and there is a bit of jugglery involved. You fly the crab all the way to flare and when you align the nose down the runway if you start drifting down wind you put on max 5 degrees bank to stop that and if the crosswind is too strong you land with partial drift. I Don't know about 777 but I have flown a lot the 747 and A320 is not flown like that. And I have to disagree with hikoushi about manual thrust in gusty wind. It is exactly opposite of what Airbus recommends. You don't knock out GS Mini and convert AB FBW to Boeing it is not a safe way to fly. It is safer to change your company and fly a Boeing instead.
If there was no problem with side slip technique then all that write up was unnecessary, then why not fly wing down cross control like any other aircraft? There is a problem as I mentioned. If you carefully read what you quoted it is applicable in your own words prior to touch down. It does not mean you fly side slip approach and there is a bit of jugglery involved. You fly the crab all the way to flare and when you align the nose down the runway if you start drifting down wind you put on max 5 degrees bank to stop that and if the crosswind is too strong you land with partial drift. I Don't know about 777 but I have flown a lot the 747 and A320 is not flown like that. And I have to disagree with hikoushi about manual thrust in gusty wind. It is exactly opposite of what Airbus recommends. You don't knock out GS Mini and convert AB FBW to Boeing it is not a safe way to fly. It is safer to change your company and fly a Boeing instead.
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Wanderlust
Posts: 3,406
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ACM, goldenrivette
Your post 3 and 4 are contradictory. In post 4 FCTM extract does not tell you to use side slip technique. You only use roll to stop the drift after flair and in that you may keep some crab and some bank in very strong crosswind. It is done prior to touch down and not in approach.
Your post 3 and 4 are contradictory. In post 4 FCTM extract does not tell you to use side slip technique. You only use roll to stop the drift after flair and in that you may keep some crab and some bank in very strong crosswind. It is done prior to touch down and not in approach.
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Wanderlust
Posts: 3,406
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
titaniumwings
Your post 6 is correct except all engine flame out part. I don't know what you mean by that. Any way with all engine flame out you do not remain in normal law. With both AC busses and G+Y knocked out you are in alternate law.
Your post 6 is correct except all engine flame out part. I don't know what you mean by that. Any way with all engine flame out you do not remain in normal law. With both AC busses and G+Y knocked out you are in alternate law.
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Wanderlust
Posts: 3,406
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
titaniumwings
It is not that you cannot side slip the Airbus but you should not. And I see that you are obsessed with side slip for loosing height. This is very dangerous as it may cause brake up of the tail plain. Use of too much and rapid rudder input caused fatal accident of A300 in New York. It is not to be done.
It is not that you cannot side slip the Airbus but you should not. And I see that you are obsessed with side slip for loosing height. This is very dangerous as it may cause brake up of the tail plain. Use of too much and rapid rudder input caused fatal accident of A300 in New York. It is not to be done.
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: East Sussex
Age: 86
Posts: 276
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I trained in Canada where they taught the wing down technique. When I got back to the UK I was made to use the crab technique by RAF QFIs. I continued with the latter until I got to ETPS and subsequently onto B Sqn at A&AEE. During my time there I did a considerable amount of work on landing techniques where I was given carte blanche to try what I liked. My findings were conclusive - wing down is far superior. OK, so you land on one wheel, but you are still, in fact, still partially wing bourne at this time. Advantages are as follows: the fine judgement on when to kick off drift is very difficult to get right and, if you don't, the ac will land with crab on which can significantly stress some ac. In strong, gusty X winds, with wing down, you land with the control deflections which are exactly what you want for the roll out which prevents the arm and leg blurr that usually follows a crab touch down. It is easy to land without drift because the instant of touchdown is not critical and so is a much smoother. I have used this technique with ac ranging fom Slingsby T67s through to VC10s taking Comet and Lancaster en route. The only ac not suitable for this treatment are things like 747s A340 and B52. Incidentally, I have fair experience on both A320 and B737. There is no mystery - they both handle like normal ac. In fact I found the A320 a little nicer to handle manually than its rival. (Retire to WWll bunker at the end of my garden). As you may appreciate this is a big hobby-horse for me, but I do wish the RAF had been broad minded enough in times past to get away from sacred cows and try different techniques.
p.s. I never ground looped a Harvard and so have disproved the old saying "There are those who have ground looped a Harvard and those who havn't yet"
p.s. I never ground looped a Harvard and so have disproved the old saying "There are those who have ground looped a Harvard and those who havn't yet"
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: East Sussex
Age: 86
Posts: 276
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Vilas.
The A300 accident was caused by more than simple unidirectional rudder movement. There were at least three rudder pulses, each one reinforcing the previous one. The ac didn't have a chance.
The A300 accident was caused by more than simple unidirectional rudder movement. There were at least three rudder pulses, each one reinforcing the previous one. The ac didn't have a chance.
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Wanderlust
Posts: 3,406
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
pontifex
I am aware of the reasons for that crash and after that Airbus has made a video presentation on use of rudder in transport aeroplanes. The point I am making is in Passenger jets you do not use manoeuvres like sever side slip to loose height.
I am aware of the reasons for that crash and after that Airbus has made a video presentation on use of rudder in transport aeroplanes. The point I am making is in Passenger jets you do not use manoeuvres like sever side slip to loose height.
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Glorious West Sussex
Age: 76
Posts: 1,020
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
titanium wings
In Normal Law side stick neutral the a/c will try to maintain zero roll rate. If you apply the rudder slowly the bank angle will not change much; if you boot the rudder the FBW cannot cope and the aircraft will roll initially then stabilise provided you maintain constant rudder deflection.
You can fly a side slip in an airbus the same way as any other aircraft... Rudder in the opposite direction to the bank angle, and fly the required attitude.
ps: If you are on a straight and level flight then you put in a rudder input, using the Lateral Normal Law as a guiding principle, what would the aircraft do? TQ.
You can fly a side slip in an airbus the same way as any other aircraft... Rudder in the opposite direction to the bank angle, and fly the required attitude.