Airbus touch-and-go
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Italy
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Airbus touch-and-go
Perhaps this has already been discussed in the forums in this secion, but some keyword searches didn't help, so here it is a question for Airbus drivers ...
Which is the best way to manage touch-and-go training, pattern work, and the like, in an Airbus?
I have been told there are ways (or need) to configure the FMGC for that, but I am wondering if this kind of exercises are done with some level of automation, or only by hand flying (I understand this is an hands-on kind of training, but I am wondering about a more or less side-role of automation in it). This may refer primarily to the managed speed during the approach phase, the automation of which, I think, needs to be reset each time.
Do airlines have specific SOPs for this kind of training work?
Thanks!
Which is the best way to manage touch-and-go training, pattern work, and the like, in an Airbus?
I have been told there are ways (or need) to configure the FMGC for that, but I am wondering if this kind of exercises are done with some level of automation, or only by hand flying (I understand this is an hands-on kind of training, but I am wondering about a more or less side-role of automation in it). This may refer primarily to the managed speed during the approach phase, the automation of which, I think, needs to be reset each time.
Do airlines have specific SOPs for this kind of training work?
Thanks!
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Italy
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Airbus touch-and-go - update
It is interesting to note that more than 800 people read my request, and no one felt like commenting.
Perhaps I should add that once a year I run, at the Sapienza University of Rome (Engineering faculty), a seminar about avionics evolution and the role of automation. Last year we compared Boeing and Airbus philosophies and a number of issues were discussed.
The most interesting aspect is how the added automation actually adds to the workload of the pilot in situations where you would expect the same workload to be less (training of course reduce that). As automation is based on an operational paradigm, the need to learn that paradigm is now part of a pilot background. By highlighting these issues we hope to have engineering students that "thinks" avionics with a better grasp of the operational issues and the implications that any design choice carry with itself in the real world.
This said, it is interesting to analyze automation in borderline situation, like the touch and go scenario where the same sequence, approach, land, go-around, climb, approach ... is repeated more times.
At least two different AOM does not provide any info about that, so I was wondering about other sources of information on this. I wouldn't be surprised if that scenario is only managed in full manual, or at least Selected, modes only, but perhaps this is not the case.
Thanks again in advance for any contributions.
Perhaps I should add that once a year I run, at the Sapienza University of Rome (Engineering faculty), a seminar about avionics evolution and the role of automation. Last year we compared Boeing and Airbus philosophies and a number of issues were discussed.
The most interesting aspect is how the added automation actually adds to the workload of the pilot in situations where you would expect the same workload to be less (training of course reduce that). As automation is based on an operational paradigm, the need to learn that paradigm is now part of a pilot background. By highlighting these issues we hope to have engineering students that "thinks" avionics with a better grasp of the operational issues and the implications that any design choice carry with itself in the real world.
This said, it is interesting to analyze automation in borderline situation, like the touch and go scenario where the same sequence, approach, land, go-around, climb, approach ... is repeated more times.
At least two different AOM does not provide any info about that, so I was wondering about other sources of information on this. I wouldn't be surprised if that scenario is only managed in full manual, or at least Selected, modes only, but perhaps this is not the case.
Thanks again in advance for any contributions.
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Earth
Posts: 275
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I believe most of the automation, in any airliner, is not used to things such as touch and gos. Because what is the point if you are going to use the autopilot.
It will be like in any other aircraft. Take off, circuit, land, firewall the throttles again and off you go.
It will be like in any other aircraft. Take off, circuit, land, firewall the throttles again and off you go.
dsky:
The drill used for circuit training was as follows:
a) programme MCDU with departure runway + landing runway
b) on final the spoilers are NOT armed ie. abnormal ECAM chechlist.
c) after touchdown, pilot flying maintains the centreline and prepares to "spool-up" the engines while the trainer selects Conf2 and checks the trim into the green band.
d) when configured and above Vmcg order Max Thrust
e) rotate aircraft on command
f) after selection of gear up - use selected speed on the FCU and ACTIVATE APP
and switch off Flight Directors to force SPEED mode on the AUTOTHRUST
g) aircraft flown by raw data onto the downwind leg.
Repeat as necessary!
As you can see there is very little "heads down" required for the exercise.
The drill used for circuit training was as follows:
a) programme MCDU with departure runway + landing runway
b) on final the spoilers are NOT armed ie. abnormal ECAM chechlist.
c) after touchdown, pilot flying maintains the centreline and prepares to "spool-up" the engines while the trainer selects Conf2 and checks the trim into the green band.
d) when configured and above Vmcg order Max Thrust
e) rotate aircraft on command
f) after selection of gear up - use selected speed on the FCU and ACTIVATE APP
and switch off Flight Directors to force SPEED mode on the AUTOTHRUST
g) aircraft flown by raw data onto the downwind leg.
Repeat as necessary!
As you can see there is very little "heads down" required for the exercise.
