PPRuNe Forums - View Single Post - Emirates emergency landing in JNB
View Single Post
Old 4th Jun 2004, 08:13
  #180 (permalink)  
NigelOnDraft
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 2,044
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
FS...

It might sound "confusing", or "strange", but as others' have said, works well in practice.

There is absolutely no chance of confusion to anyone who has been trained on the system, and knows what it represents. To someone not trained on the system, and/or in basic "Instrument Flying" skills (the IF Take-Off being a most basic manoeuvre IMHO), possible potential for confusion.

Why is it needed? Main reasons:
1. For the PNF to see what is happening. I mainly use it in crosswinds, to ensure the PF is applying the correct aileron (or rather, not applying the incorrect aileron), and the correct elevator during the early part of the roll (on the A32x series, you start with 1/2 down elevator, and then remove this between 80K & 100K).
2. For the PF to make some of these control movements. With a Control Wheel, you can describe the deflections in terms of stick position e.g. on the 757, the aileron deflection can be decribed in terms of the trim scale on top of the wheel. Not possible with a sidestick, and the indicator on the screen works very well as a substitute (e.g. for a X-Wind, use up to 1/2 white cross width).
3. As you get airborne in an Airbus, the effects of the sidestick alter. During the TO Roll, stick input directly demands control stick deflection. Shortly after takeoff new "laws" blend in e.g. lateral input demands roll rate. So any aileron put in during the TO Roll has to be removed, since it is now asking for something else. And also the need for the white cross, since sidestick input can be correlated to what you see happening with the attitude.
4. It does not need much aft stick in the A32x to rotate. However, the Airbus article mentioned 2/3 aft stick required to "initiate" rotation in the A330/340. I've forgotten my A340 days, but the only way for PNF to judge if this is applied, and then backed off as the 3d/s get going is an eye on the white cross, whilst of course monitoring primarily the attitude as the "performance instrument".

It might be worth holding back into reading too much into this. Let's see what the pilot and/or EK have to say (if anything). This is Airbus' first statement in a potential PR battle with EK a la AA in New York. If the "white cross" caused genuine problems, then we would have seen lots of similar incidents?

Last edited by NigelOnDraft; 4th Jun 2004 at 10:08.
NigelOnDraft is offline