John Farley's new book
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: BOURNEMOUTH
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
QUOTE: John is giving a lecture to the Gosport Aviation Society on 21st April 09. The Society meet at Stubbington Snooker Club in Stubbington, Hants and is easy to find from M27 Junction 9.
Thanks Paul, that's a much nearer venue. Do I need to reserve a place there or can I just turn up?
Is there a link with any more info, in case it's cancelled or amended, please?
Phil.
Thanks Paul, that's a much nearer venue. Do I need to reserve a place there or can I just turn up?
Is there a link with any more info, in case it's cancelled or amended, please?
Phil.
Phil,
the group do not have a website as such but I am in regular contact with their meetings organiser who keeps me informed. If you join the group you get a regular newsletter which gives details of their speakers etc and they do get some very good ones. If you would like to let me have your email address I will sent you a copy of the latest one which has details of who to contact.
the group do not have a website as such but I am in regular contact with their meetings organiser who keeps me informed. If you join the group you get a regular newsletter which gives details of their speakers etc and they do get some very good ones. If you would like to let me have your email address I will sent you a copy of the latest one which has details of who to contact.
Unimpressed with Flyer Shop.
I ordered and paid for a signed hardback on Wednesday, £35.45 delivered.
Service wonderful as it arrived today, unfortunately it arrived as an unsigned softback at a price difference of about 13 quid. Confirmed with bank that full amount paid out.
A shame as it was for a Christmas gift (OK for me I freely admit.)
I'm awaiting their response to my very polite e-mail as they can't be got today by phone.
Will keep you advised.
Doc C
Service wonderful as it arrived today, unfortunately it arrived as an unsigned softback at a price difference of about 13 quid. Confirmed with bank that full amount paid out.
A shame as it was for a Christmas gift (OK for me I freely admit.)
I'm awaiting their response to my very polite e-mail as they can't be got today by phone.
Will keep you advised.
Doc C
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Sunrise Senior Living
Posts: 1,338
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ordered mine on Wed night via the 'Flyer' website and it appeared this morning. Great service!
Unfortunately, Mrs mcdhu nicked it for the Santa ritual!
Cheers mcdhu
Unfortunately, Mrs mcdhu nicked it for the Santa ritual!
Cheers mcdhu
Per Ardua ad Astraeus
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 18,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Huzzah! SWMBO finally released it to F C and I started reading last night. What a start to an RAF flying career, arranging your own posting to a Hunter squadron! I like it
- if only.......
Mrs B has just told me she is in the middle of a sequel called 'A View from the Hoover'.
- if only.......Mrs B has just told me she is in the middle of a sequel called 'A View from the Hoover'.
Last edited by BOAC; 26th Dec 2008 at 14:30.
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Sunrise Senior Living
Posts: 1,338
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
John gives a nice and simple exposition on climb speeds for jet ac which I (think I) understand. But can anyone - and I guess I hope JF reads this - explain why, in the normal course of events (A320 Series, crz around FL350+, CI 12, mid weight) the climb IAS/Mach will be roughly 285/.77 with the usual crossover level around FL300 and yet on the short flights LGW/LTN/STN to AMS/CDG which are capped at FL230 the climb IAS is high - 300ish which converts to the climb/crz Mach of .65ish at around FL180 so you end up cruising at a ridiculous IAS of around 250-260. I understand why the ac wants to cruise at such a low IAS, but why does the FMGC want to climb at such a high IAS which it then drags back using Mach No to the required low value.
A good read!
Cheers
mcdhu
A good read!
Cheers
mcdhu
Do a Hover - it avoids G
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Chichester West Sussex UK
Age: 91
Posts: 2,206
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks for the kind words chaps. I have stayed away up to now 'cos of advertising rules.
mcdhu
Sorry - I have no experience of your FMGC (or anything like it!) so can only guess. From a common sense point of view I wonder if these programmes try to minimise time to destination if you stop them going to the FL that would be their normal choice?
I have a mate who would prob know the answer but he is out of contact for a couple of weeks.
JF
mcdhu
Sorry - I have no experience of your FMGC (or anything like it!) so can only guess. From a common sense point of view I wonder if these programmes try to minimise time to destination if you stop them going to the FL that would be their normal choice?
I have a mate who would prob know the answer but he is out of contact for a couple of weeks.
JF
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Sunrise Senior Living
Posts: 1,338
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thank you very much, JF. If you could ask your mate and post the answer here, I would be very grateful. In the meantime, I'll post the conundrum in the Techlog and see what drops out.
Cheers
mcdhu
Cheers
mcdhu
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: United States
Age: 52
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Is anyone aware of any booksellers in North America carrying the book? I understand I can have it shipped from the U.K., but just wanted to avoid the shipping time and expense as I am readying to leave for an overseas assignment.
It sounds like a great read.
Thanks,
Cretan
It sounds like a great read.
Thanks,
Cretan
Partial answer for ARXN
ARXN, in reply to your last question in post 34, yes he was involved in the accident with Sea Harrier XZ438 on May 17, 1982. Lost on departure from the ski jump at Yeovilton due to fuel inbalance, namly one external wing tank being full, the other not. Externals were the large 330 gallon "ferry" tanks being trialed to get the aircraft to Ascension.
I have no information on your earlier questions regarding the low level training.
John, thank you for the book- this thread reminded me to order today.
I have no information on your earlier questions regarding the low level training.
John, thank you for the book- this thread reminded me to order today.
Do a Hover - it avoids G
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Chichester West Sussex UK
Age: 91
Posts: 2,206
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
mcdhu
Sorry for the delay - my mate is back but he has computer probs and all his A320 system stuff is on it - so give us another day or three
Regards
JF
Sorry for the delay - my mate is back but he has computer probs and all his A320 system stuff is on it - so give us another day or three
Regards
JF
Do a Hover - it avoids G
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Chichester West Sussex UK
Age: 91
Posts: 2,206
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
mcdhu
Well my mate is up and running and his view is that the speeds chosen by the system were driven by the Cost Index (CI) input.
If you want more detail I quote from his to me:
Hope this helps.
Regards
JF
Well my mate is up and running and his view is that the speeds chosen by the system were driven by the Cost Index (CI) input.
If you want more detail I quote from his to me:
You asked about the CI on an Airbus.
It is a complex subject and I would not claim to be an expert. Many pilots believe that they understand the process but then find that they cannot explain an observation, such as the one you asked about, because there is more to it than appears in the FCOM.
The primary and essential goal of the cost index is trip cost, or mission optimisation, and not speed control. It is a flexible tool to control fuel burn and trip time or a trade off between the two where the cost of time in the air against the fuel cost is a complex equation. The CI has aspects that assist airlines to optimise their operations to any number of factors including aircraft leasing and maintenance costs, or even flight crew costs. Therefore it is not just about speed or fuel flow during any phase of flight although short term changes to CI are often used when short term changes in the price of fuel are experienced.
For a given sector minimum trip cost is achieved by adopting operational speeds that properly proportion fuel and time related costs for a given CI. The IAS/IMN speed target will depend on a number of factors including the Take Off Mass, OAT and actual wind, and it will compensate for fluctuations in wind or differences between pre-flight inserted forecast winds and actual wind measured in flight. When the CI is low the initial flight profile will relate to best achievable rate of climb, and takes into account a calculated cross over altitude (IAS to IMN) usually between FL230 and FL270.
Cruise level optimisation is another CI factor but where a level is held down for operational reasons the lower the FL the lower the economic IMN, and the lower the aircraft gross mass the lower the economic IMN. These two factors probably come into play on a short sector where operationally it may not be best to plan to fly at a maximum achievable level from purely a performance point of view. ATC, SIDs, airways and STARSs (plus some crafty planning to avoid traffic) might all dictate a lower best altitude to fly. Such lower cruise levels may appear to confuse the CI process, but it still works effectively, even when the selected level is right from a performance point of view as well.
On the other hand it is not perfect and occasionally anomalies are evident, but when a profile is observed regularly it is doing it right even though the reasons may not be obvious.
It is a complex subject and I would not claim to be an expert. Many pilots believe that they understand the process but then find that they cannot explain an observation, such as the one you asked about, because there is more to it than appears in the FCOM.
The primary and essential goal of the cost index is trip cost, or mission optimisation, and not speed control. It is a flexible tool to control fuel burn and trip time or a trade off between the two where the cost of time in the air against the fuel cost is a complex equation. The CI has aspects that assist airlines to optimise their operations to any number of factors including aircraft leasing and maintenance costs, or even flight crew costs. Therefore it is not just about speed or fuel flow during any phase of flight although short term changes to CI are often used when short term changes in the price of fuel are experienced.
For a given sector minimum trip cost is achieved by adopting operational speeds that properly proportion fuel and time related costs for a given CI. The IAS/IMN speed target will depend on a number of factors including the Take Off Mass, OAT and actual wind, and it will compensate for fluctuations in wind or differences between pre-flight inserted forecast winds and actual wind measured in flight. When the CI is low the initial flight profile will relate to best achievable rate of climb, and takes into account a calculated cross over altitude (IAS to IMN) usually between FL230 and FL270.
Cruise level optimisation is another CI factor but where a level is held down for operational reasons the lower the FL the lower the economic IMN, and the lower the aircraft gross mass the lower the economic IMN. These two factors probably come into play on a short sector where operationally it may not be best to plan to fly at a maximum achievable level from purely a performance point of view. ATC, SIDs, airways and STARSs (plus some crafty planning to avoid traffic) might all dictate a lower best altitude to fly. Such lower cruise levels may appear to confuse the CI process, but it still works effectively, even when the selected level is right from a performance point of view as well.
On the other hand it is not perfect and occasionally anomalies are evident, but when a profile is observed regularly it is doing it right even though the reasons may not be obvious.
Regards
JF
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: australia
Posts: 106
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Climb speed
I must confess that I have no experience of the A320 FMGC; however, the CI calculation for the A330/A340 FMGC, pre 'Pegasus II' FMGC, does indeed drive the climb speed schedule. Most organizations, and I am being a bit liberal here so I stand to be corrected, find the inclusion of 'crew costs' into the CI calculation to be troublesome. It really is a flight time/ fuel cost/ maintenance cost algorithim situation and if the truth be told, most probably requires a 'variable CI' during flight to trully optimize the flight profile and this is taking no allowance of the costs of missed connections if the flight is late arriving (but arriving economically!) for those operators who utilize a hub and spoke principle. As for the FMC calculations themselves, the A3xx aeroplanes climb at the 'climb speed schedule' and then after the aeroplane enters the 'ALT CRZ', they transition into the cruise IMN/IAS required. On flight test with the B7xx aeroplanes with the FMC made by 'H'; the aircraft will transition into the cruise IMN late in the climb and, generally, do not go below the CI derived IMN/IAS. Airbus aircraft, again twin aisle, have a different Minimum time in the Cruise compared to Boeing aircraft. Without looking at my notes, AI = 1 minute in the cruise/ BAC = 3'?
Actus
Actus