B737NG FMC TRIM VS LOADSHEET TRIM
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: 36,000'
Posts: 176
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
B737NG FMC TRIM VS LOADSHEET TRIM
what would be the maximum discrepancy allowed between the TRIM value generated by the FMC when compared to Computerised / manual Load sheet?
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: I wouldn't know.
Posts: 4,499
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hmm, do you get a calculated trim value with your loadsheet? Ours just had a CG value which we entered into the FMC and then we used the trim value from the FMC. So there was no discrepancy at all.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: 36,000'
Posts: 176
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
We get a calculated value on the load sheet. Which we compare with the value calculated by the FMC. Just wanted to check, if there is recommended max discrepancy value mentioned by Boeing.
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: bkk
Posts: 285
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There should be only a minor difference.However it also depends upon the software of the Computerised LS.Some versions calculate the SLIGHTLY INCREASED nose up trim correction for reduced thrust settings (assumed temp), which can be around 1 unit nose up correction for a fully derated thrust setting.Others dont make this correction leading to a difference in STAB TRIM setting, in this case you should apply the correction yourself, and the only place you can find a reference to this might be a table in the Weight and Balance Manual.Obviously if you use full thrust then no correction might be required.....Peter.
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: I wouldn't know.
Posts: 4,499
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If i recall correctly there was a difference in trim settings depending on chosen flap setting. Do you tell your loadsheet provider which flap setting you use? The OPT can chose the optimal flap setting for you as far as i know. The software we used before the OPT certainly did, so we knew which flap setting we were going to use only after the final performance calculation was done.
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: West
Posts: 399
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm not sure how this value was determined to be satisfactory, but our operation has the following guidance:
"The FMS computed value may be used in lieu of the
WDR value if the difference is 0.75 or less."
"The FMS computed value may be used in lieu of the
WDR value if the difference is 0.75 or less."
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Australia
Age: 46
Posts: 83
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If i recall correctly there was a difference in trim settings depending on chosen flap setting. Do you tell your loadsheet provider which flap setting you use? The OPT can chose the optimal flap setting for you as far as i know. The software we used before the OPT certainly did, so we knew which flap setting we were going to use only after the final performance calculation was done.
It's rare to see it more than 0.1 units out, but near impossible to trim to that accuracy anyway.
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: bkk
Posts: 285
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To be absolutely 100% correct in all cases, the full CG calculation should always be made of course, however on two types I have conducted extensive base training/circuits on , using a default figure of 2 units NU stab trim (767) or 4 units NU stab trim (757) has always produced an in-trim airplane for the take off phase 99.9% of the time.Actually 100% of the time.PETER
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: FL410
Posts: 860
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Our loadsheets cover all flap settings. There's a trim setting for 26K Flap 1-5, then another from 10-25 (from memory there's only two divisions), and then the same for 24K.
Manual load sheets in FCOM tables give corrections to a uncorrected trim in a more basic manner, thus are not as accurate but well within tolerance limits, thus used, a simplified method.
It would be much more "messy" for Boeing to publish in AFM a large correction table which is then to be used by airlines listing each thrust and flap setting combination rather then to average several similar approximations into a single value when possible thus minimising pilot correction values listed on loadsheet for simplicity.
The FMC and OPT however are not restricted by such limitation and thus provide excellent indication of trim usually within 0.1 of each other as they use a digital file containing all corrective values.
