Early flaps retraction by British Airways 747 /777
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: australia
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Early flaps retraction by British Airways 747 /777
My apologies for this probably being in the wrong Forum or thread.
I live about 7 miles West of Kingsford Smith Intl, Sydney, OZ.
The major World airlines fly over my house as they head West. 747s and 777s belonging to the major airlines still have their flaps down as they climb out. All except for British Airways whose wings are clean by the time they reach me. Qantas and Singapore in particular are still winding them in for quite a while as they head West. The BA aircraft are noticably lower and seem to be much faster but that may be the effect of their being lower.
I always thought that there were standard operating proceedures for these types of aircraft. This isn't a complaint, just an intriguing observation, but I've been observing this for at least two years
I live about 7 miles West of Kingsford Smith Intl, Sydney, OZ.
The major World airlines fly over my house as they head West. 747s and 777s belonging to the major airlines still have their flaps down as they climb out. All except for British Airways whose wings are clean by the time they reach me. Qantas and Singapore in particular are still winding them in for quite a while as they head West. The BA aircraft are noticably lower and seem to be much faster but that may be the effect of their being lower.
I always thought that there were standard operating proceedures for these types of aircraft. This isn't a complaint, just an intriguing observation, but I've been observing this for at least two years
Hardly Never Not Unwilling
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: USA
Posts: 481
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Each airline develops its own noise abatement departure profiles which are then approved by the national aviation authority.
An accelerated flap retraction profile, which is generally not noise abated but more fuel efficient, allows the aircraft to accelerate to flap retraction speed, possibly as low as 200 feet AGL, get the flaps up, then fly clean at a higher climbout speed.
Most airline noise abatement profiles, however, have the aircraft climb under max lift so as to get them to 3,000 feet AGL as close in to the airport as possible, then accelerate to flap retraction speed.
Your community may have worked with BA to develop a noise abatement regime allowing the accelerated flap retraction schedule while the other airlines are flying their standard noise abatement profile. I could see that being the case if the most sensitive areas are not close to the airport but several miles out, where the accelerated profile would actually put the aircraft at a higher altitude, thus making less noise, than the standard max climb noise abatement profile.
Cheers,
An accelerated flap retraction profile, which is generally not noise abated but more fuel efficient, allows the aircraft to accelerate to flap retraction speed, possibly as low as 200 feet AGL, get the flaps up, then fly clean at a higher climbout speed.
Most airline noise abatement profiles, however, have the aircraft climb under max lift so as to get them to 3,000 feet AGL as close in to the airport as possible, then accelerate to flap retraction speed.
Your community may have worked with BA to develop a noise abatement regime allowing the accelerated flap retraction schedule while the other airlines are flying their standard noise abatement profile. I could see that being the case if the most sensitive areas are not close to the airport but several miles out, where the accelerated profile would actually put the aircraft at a higher altitude, thus making less noise, than the standard max climb noise abatement profile.
Cheers,
Join Date: May 2001
Location: A few degrees South
Posts: 809
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
flaps
Because the slots between the wing and the flaps and slats create noise, my company decided not to use those things at all. So we do not use these procedures. Our planes are clean at all times and thus also for the environnement. Hope this explains.
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Seattle
Posts: 3,196
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Each airline develops its own noise abatement departure profiles which are then approved by the national aviation authority.
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: London, UK
Posts: 50
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As a 777 driver for BA I can assure you that the flap retraction schedule we use out of Sydney is exactly the same as anywhere else.
We accelerate at 1000' above ground level from V2+15 (approx) to 250knots.
We could be retracting earlier than other aircraft as we are carrying a relatively light fuel load for Singapore and so will reach 1000' sooner and accelerate better. Plus the climb gradient on a 2 engine aircraft is much better than a 4 engine one (because of engine failure considerations).
Hope this helps....
Rgds,
SR
We accelerate at 1000' above ground level from V2+15 (approx) to 250knots.
We could be retracting earlier than other aircraft as we are carrying a relatively light fuel load for Singapore and so will reach 1000' sooner and accelerate better. Plus the climb gradient on a 2 engine aircraft is much better than a 4 engine one (because of engine failure considerations).
Hope this helps....
Rgds,
SR
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Arizona USA
Posts: 8,571
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
An accelerated flap retraction profile, which is generally not noise abated but more fuel efficient, allows the aircraft to accelerate to flap retraction speed, possibly as low as 200 feet AGL, get the flaps up, then fly clean at a higher climbout speed.
200 feet?
I'll tell you what, if this 200 feet nonsense was tried at any airline where I have worked, the offending Commander, upon return to base, would be severely drawn and quartered in the staff parking lot.
With no tea and biscuits.
Our planes are clean at all times and thus also for the environnement
My company cleans up at 1500ft AAL on a normal departure and 3000ft on a noise abatement departure unless an airfield has more restrictive procedures.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: australia
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks, SR and others. You sure get the facts here ! It's not only the 777s from BA, the 747s are the same. The Qantas and Singapore 747s all have the flaps down for much much longer and are noticably higher and all heading West (I live at Concord). The first time I noticed this was when a BA 747 came over clean, low and very fast (and noisy. but I love it. The trucks going past my front door are much noisier. I don't know what all the aviation noise fuss is about )
Virgin A340s also still have the flaps down.
Now, where do I make a post about a Qantas 747 with what looked like a fire blackened No 3 engine ? I'll have to dig my diary out for the details. Met with a wall of silence at the time, but having discovered this site it sure looks like the place to air it. Just need to know where to post the details.
Fred
Virgin A340s also still have the flaps down.
Now, where do I make a post about a Qantas 747 with what looked like a fire blackened No 3 engine ? I'll have to dig my diary out for the details. Met with a wall of silence at the time, but having discovered this site it sure looks like the place to air it. Just need to know where to post the details.
Fred
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: England
Posts: 1,050
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BA generally fly a standard profile regardless of published noise abatement, so I presume their perf department liaises with the appropriate aerodrome or gedulatory authorities to aggree the deviation from published procedure.
Certainly when I went from flying an RJ around europe for Cityflyer, we used the published profiles, with a wide variety of thrust reduction and acceleration schedules. Assimilated by BA and retrained to fly the 737, I then went back to the same airfields and ignored the local profiles at all of them.
pb
Certainly when I went from flying an RJ around europe for Cityflyer, we used the published profiles, with a wide variety of thrust reduction and acceleration schedules. Assimilated by BA and retrained to fly the 737, I then went back to the same airfields and ignored the local profiles at all of them.
pb
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: London
Posts: 260
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Has BA changed the procedure on the -400's again - when I left the fleet we staggered up to 4000' certainly ex LHR before cleaning up and I seem to remember this was going to be implemented worldwide so has somebody ie new manager - seen the light and its back to 1000' for clean up??
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: on the golf course (Covid permitting)
Posts: 2,131
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The procedure on the -400 at BA falls into one of 2 categories:
1. Ex LHR and certain other stations as notified on passing 1000ft agl we accelerate to Flap 10 speed and then select Flap 10 and full climb power. We maintain this config and speed until a specified altitude (4000 ft at LHR) at which point we continue the clean up as normal. When clean we usually select CLB 1.
2. An non-notified stations, at 1000ft agl we commence an acceleration to clean, taking flaps on schedule, with Climb power (usually CLB 1) being scheduled on achieving Flaps 5.
HTH - can't comment on YSSY as haven't been there for ages
1. Ex LHR and certain other stations as notified on passing 1000ft agl we accelerate to Flap 10 speed and then select Flap 10 and full climb power. We maintain this config and speed until a specified altitude (4000 ft at LHR) at which point we continue the clean up as normal. When clean we usually select CLB 1.
2. An non-notified stations, at 1000ft agl we commence an acceleration to clean, taking flaps on schedule, with Climb power (usually CLB 1) being scheduled on achieving Flaps 5.
HTH - can't comment on YSSY as haven't been there for ages
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: australia
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yesterday a Singapore 747 -400 flew over low and clean and fast. That's a first. Qantas are still slow and dirty, although a Jet Star subsidiary A320 was also low, clean and fast. Maybe it's spreading.
Anybody like to help me with my previous request as to where I should post my sighting of a Qantas 747 with a blackened No3 Engine nacelle ? It seems to have met with the same silence I got when I tried to report it on the day !
Fred
Anybody like to help me with my previous request as to where I should post my sighting of a Qantas 747 with a blackened No3 Engine nacelle ? It seems to have met with the same silence I got when I tried to report it on the day !
Fred
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Honolulu
Posts: 197
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Our company (74 classic) uses either ICAO/NADP 1 which is climb at v2 +10 up to 3000' then pitch to 500 fpm climb rate and retract flaps on schedule. Climb thrust is set at 1,000' or 1500 if specified by airport procedure. Flaps 10 is normal flaps 20 if field length restricted.
The ICAO (NADP) 2 procedure is climb at v2 +10 up to 1,000' then pitch over to a 500 fpm climb and set climb thrust when selecting flaps 5.
The ICAO (NADP) 2 procedure is climb at v2 +10 up to 1,000' then pitch over to a 500 fpm climb and set climb thrust when selecting flaps 5.
Warning Toxic!
Disgusted of Tunbridge
Disgusted of Tunbridge
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Hampshire, UK
Posts: 4,011
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Define what you allege is 'the ICAO' norm? If you are going to make an allegation that BA is operating out of ICAO recommended operating procedures, you should back it up. Perhaps you would also explain why not retracting flaps until 3000' is such a good idea? Why do you need flap above 1000'? My standard procedure is to retract as quickly as possible above 1000'. This is vastly safer, especially in a twin where in an engine failure situation you need to get clean as quickly as possible, or a longhaul heavy with engine out climb problems.
Flying old fashioned dinosaur procedures like not cleaning up at all until 3000' makes the area noise problem slightly worse. Better to be over and away as quickly as possible.
Flying old fashioned dinosaur procedures like not cleaning up at all until 3000' makes the area noise problem slightly worse. Better to be over and away as quickly as possible.
Ease the hostility my friend, that is why I wrote that I was being "just curious". I have a lot of respect to the attention to detail in the BA operations manual (as far as I have seen).
If an airport specifies that noise procedure A is to be flown, accellerating at 3000' then that is exactly what we do at my airline. From this thread I understand that BA does not do this. I am just curious why.
Mind you, a lot of airports specifically state ICAO procedure A as the norm for noise abatement so I think that is enough backup!
If an airport specifies that noise procedure A is to be flown, accellerating at 3000' then that is exactly what we do at my airline. From this thread I understand that BA does not do this. I am just curious why.
Mind you, a lot of airports specifically state ICAO procedure A as the norm for noise abatement so I think that is enough backup!
According to the Jeppesen Manual, noise abatement section for YSSY, there is no requirement for an ICAO 'A' departure from any of the runways if your aircraft has engines with a by-pass ratio of 3.5 or better.
(Jeppesen YSSY page 10.4A)
QANTAS, and maybe other airlines choose to fly an ICAO 'A' but it is not required. That's why some airlines are fast and clean and others are not.
On further investigation I just noticed this para in the Aussie AIP Noise Abatement Section for YSSY.
Page 1
Para 1.2 Jet noise abatement climb procedures apply for the following runways,
Runway 16R 2300-6000 HR local time.
Runways 34L & 34R at other times.
So according to the local rulebook it is required.
Regards,
BH.
(Jeppesen YSSY page 10.4A)
QANTAS, and maybe other airlines choose to fly an ICAO 'A' but it is not required. That's why some airlines are fast and clean and others are not.
On further investigation I just noticed this para in the Aussie AIP Noise Abatement Section for YSSY.
Page 1
Para 1.2 Jet noise abatement climb procedures apply for the following runways,
Runway 16R 2300-6000 HR local time.
Runways 34L & 34R at other times.
So according to the local rulebook it is required.
Regards,
BH.
Warning Toxic!
Disgusted of Tunbridge
Disgusted of Tunbridge
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Hampshire, UK
Posts: 4,011
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No reference is made in BA to Jeppesen/Aerad or any other source for noise abatement procedures apart from the specific runway BA Performance Manual Take-off procedures. All special noise abatement procedures are incorporated there. I can't remember what the procedure is, therefore, for SYD 34 for instance, but if a 3000' cleanup is required, a 3000' clean up it will be. I think I recall doing 3000' clean ups on this runway. Both pilots check this manual on every take-off, or when ACARS is in use, printed instructions will be sent to the aircraft with the take-off figures.
As that is the case, I'm sorry, but if it is required and the observer thinks he has observed otherwise, he is simply mistaken.
As that is the case, I'm sorry, but if it is required and the observer thinks he has observed otherwise, he is simply mistaken.