Flexible FLEX
On post #878.
Pool, obviously, different operators have enabled or disabled available features in the interface of the LPC.
In my outfit, you would get a list of all possible thrust settings, from TOGA down to the max FLEX temp that still provided a safe take-off. Of course, standard procedure was to use the maximum amount of FLEX, but it was possible (and not outright prohibited) to FLEX a little less if you deemed that necessary. Of course, for all the FLEX temps, LPC would list the applicable take-off speeds.
One such an option that may be locked out is the mass and balance module - how many of you guys make a manual loadsheet on the LPC? Some people might argue that it would be much to dangerous to do that, loadsheets should be made by an automated process in which check-in data (from scanned boarding cards) are loaded into the loadsheet program without human interference. Funny though that the error than hides in a simple transcription error of 100 tons. I a pilot makes a transcription error in a manual loadsheet and, for instance, makes an error of 100 passengers, then the mass error would only be 8.800 kg (males) or 7.000 kg (females), or even just 1.500 kg for 100 bags. Not quite such a dramatic error.
Airbusted320
The notion that there is risk involved in viewing different flap settings is wrong. All the solutions that the LPC provides, are valid, that means, safe. If there is risk in "calculating" more than once, then what do you do: always use wet runway, so you don't need to redo the numbers when it starts to rain? Never pick up the most recent ATIS, because you might have to redo the numbers? Not accept LMC's, because the numbers have to be reworked? Not accept a change of runways after you have commenced taxiing?
The safe way is, both pilots must calculate a solution independently and compare their outcomes - they must be identical.
As a commander, you could "experiment" as much as you like, not every experiment has to be double checked by the co-pilot. Only the configuration that you are going to use, will have to be double checked. e.g. Yes, I have checked that intersection, performance from there is not adequate, we will take the full runway length. Because wind is light and variable, I have used 5 knots tail component. Compare outcome, slightly different, oh, I see, you have used take-off mass from the flight plan, actual mass is a little heavier, here check it on the loadsheet. That sort of work.
It's good to see some professional discussion again appearing in this thread.
Reason for edit: typo (forgotten word)
Last edited by EMIT; 21st May 2009 at 19:56.