A320 DPO

[MD83FO]

How do I know if my A320 is equipped with Descent Profile Optimization?

[Who stole my meds]

What is that??
I fly the 320 and have never heard of it. Best thing would be to descend in accordance with ATC instructions and if the green dot on the side of the altimeter scale is in the middle everything is working as it should.

[Escape Path]

Aircraft configuration summary in the QRH

[Max Angle]

Never heard of it either but here it is:

https://services.airbus.com/upgrade/environment/fuel-efficiency/descent-profile-optimisation-dpo

[OPEN DES]

Negative Idle factor?

[FlightDetent]

@MD83FO: check QRH -> OPS DATA -> Aircraft Configuration Summary

[Sidestick_n_Rudder]

I figured out long time ago, that the Bus Vnav is cr@p and have been doing “DPO” myself for years... :rolleyes:

[Spudder]

Just out of interest, the blue level off arrow when in HDG. Is that computed using the inputted decent winds, current actual wind or still air? Can’t find a reference. Thanks!

[EMIT]

From what I recall of A-320 descent - it is calculated with (increased) idle, as if engine anti-ice is ON all the time - this out of concern by Airbus that they don't want you to have an excess of energy at the bottom of your descent, if they would calculate with minimum idle, and you would need engine anti ice during the descent.
This means that usually you will end up with too little energy at the bottom of your descent and thrust will be added (automatically) if you reach the bottom of the (descent) speed margin.

I gather from the DPO snippet of information, that a new descent profile calculation is invented, where the figures for descent thrust will be more accurate to real world usage of low idle, the margin to cater for excess thrust will not be so large anymore.

In a Boeing, they used to calculate the other way around - real idle as standard, and increased (anti ice) idle below the pilot entered flight level for (expected) anti ice usage.
In the 787 however, VNAV descent now uses slightly more than (real) idle thrust for the whole descent. Now the fanatics on environmental fuel consumption can stay level a bit longer than the VNAV Top of Descent and try to fiddle an idle descent in FLCH.

[Denti]

That explains quite a bit actually, always wondered how the bus handled anti ice, whereas the 737 required the input to correctly calculate VNAV. As the bus is not as aerodynamically clean and descends much better though, i never really cared. It is so damn easy to get it down compared to the 737, i found it always more than easy to get it to where i want it to be.

[pineteam]

I noticed the TOD arrow is usually quite conservative assuming correct winds have been insterted and no anti ice systems used. I usually wait to cross the TOD arrow and when it disappeared and FMA displayed “T/D reached” or “deccelerate” on the older version then only I initiate the descent. It goes immediately to idle thrust slightly faster than the target speed for a little while then usually settle again nicely to the target speed. I love those idle segments.

Just out of interest, the blue level off arrow when in HDG. Is that computed using the inputted decent winds, current actual wind or still air? Can’t find a reference. Thanks!

Good question and I’m not sure either. Would be cool if someone can bring some lights on this one. = )

[Escape Path]

I found it always more than easy to get it to where i want it to be.

*Using a combination of selected modes and speed brakes, depending on the airport. My 2c.

I figured out long time ago, that the Bus Vnav is cr@p
Particularly true for STARs with some amount of constraints.

Just out of interest, the blue level off arrow when in HDG. Is that computed using the inputted decent winds, current actual wind or still air?

Out of pure observation I reckon it's done with current wind + current modes and values selected. I've noticed it's accurate enough whether with descent winds inserted or trip wind inserted in init B.