Hi
tildeleb,
I've the opposite problem to yours: am not an engineer. As a long-retired A320 driver, I'm not going to comment on any comparisons with LH44 at the moment, as my own manuals for FBW F/CTL logics are obsolete. We had (and still have) one or two threads running on it. Recommend
this one in particular if you have the time and patience...
Just want to look at your Q4 now.
Is there an engineering definition for "spooled-up"? We certainly used the term on the JT3D, "standing-up" the throttle and waiting for the engine to "stabilize" before opening the thrust lever at the beginning of the take-off run. On a FADEC-controlled CFM-56 this has not normally been necessary, and the smooth modulation of N1 acceleration tends to mask hesitation, that might otherwise be apparent, at any particular RPM.
The graph of typical thrust-versus-time during acceleration, provided by IGh, is very interesting. But it presents a problem for us pilots: we do not have a thrust gauge, as such. Being stuck with N1 (or EPR) as our prime indicator of thrust makes comparison with the graph difficult, if not impossible. For example: would half the N1 RPM deliver a quarter of the thrust? Experience suggests less, but it's not something that we are made aware of.
How does one avoid low thrust, when stabilised at VAPP in the landing configuration? On most jet airliners, all we can do is to select the maximum slats/flaps, avoid getting above the "glide-slope" (a misleading term), and avoid strong tailwinds. Use of speedbrakes (airbrakes) is effectively prohibited on final approach on most of the A320 family (A318s with "steep-approach" capability being an exception). Few other types allow it, although the F28 /F100 and BAe146/AvroRJ routinely use their tail-mounted airbrakes, I believe.
Chris