And on a lighter note - A340s....grrr
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Southampton
Posts: 99
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And on a lighter note - A340s....grrr
Following my first ATCO posting in the Pilot's forum - here's me second!!
London terminal control ATCO person - working on the south side of Heathrow. Now I'm sure the A340 pilots among you may well love the plane - but from a purely professional point of view, I'm not particularly endeared to it.
Firstly it joins the exclusive club populated previously by the 747-100 alone of climbing solely due to the curvature of the earth. And secondly, some airlines SOP of flying at around 160knts until passing 4-5000' (and therefore half an hour into the flight) causes havoc with departure separations. Where 2 minutes would normally be perfectly acceptable we need a generous 3.
(This problem is exacerbated by the noise restriction whereby we can't issue a heading to get the a/c out of the ruddy way until it's passed 4000'.)
I'm not trying to change the world here just help my own understanding (and hopefully yours!) and maybe answer any odd questions you may be asked shortly after departure such as 'are you ACTUALLY climbing?' or 'what is your current speed and what are you accelerating to?' or 'are your wheels still on the ground?' etc.....
I'm a little curious about the differences between airlines too. Virgin bods - you seem to fly around the 210knts after departure whereas the Sri Lankan guy I spoke to last night managed about 155.
I would be pleased to here your points of view, it just seems so odd when after FL100ish it performs very similarly to a big 74 with 'normal' speed and climb rates.
Oh yes, just one more thing - I can't help but wonder how it'd cope with an engine failure at MTOW. No doubt the fuzzy logic would take over and all would be fine. I watched a prog on Disc Wings showing how an A340 responded to GPWS warning - if only you could climb like that every time!!
Take care one and all, speak to you sometime soon! (Tonight even...)
London terminal control ATCO person - working on the south side of Heathrow. Now I'm sure the A340 pilots among you may well love the plane - but from a purely professional point of view, I'm not particularly endeared to it.
Firstly it joins the exclusive club populated previously by the 747-100 alone of climbing solely due to the curvature of the earth. And secondly, some airlines SOP of flying at around 160knts until passing 4-5000' (and therefore half an hour into the flight) causes havoc with departure separations. Where 2 minutes would normally be perfectly acceptable we need a generous 3.
(This problem is exacerbated by the noise restriction whereby we can't issue a heading to get the a/c out of the ruddy way until it's passed 4000'.)
I'm not trying to change the world here just help my own understanding (and hopefully yours!) and maybe answer any odd questions you may be asked shortly after departure such as 'are you ACTUALLY climbing?' or 'what is your current speed and what are you accelerating to?' or 'are your wheels still on the ground?' etc.....
I'm a little curious about the differences between airlines too. Virgin bods - you seem to fly around the 210knts after departure whereas the Sri Lankan guy I spoke to last night managed about 155.
I would be pleased to here your points of view, it just seems so odd when after FL100ish it performs very similarly to a big 74 with 'normal' speed and climb rates.
Oh yes, just one more thing - I can't help but wonder how it'd cope with an engine failure at MTOW. No doubt the fuzzy logic would take over and all would be fine. I watched a prog on Disc Wings showing how an A340 responded to GPWS warning - if only you could climb like that every time!!
Take care one and all, speak to you sometime soon! (Tonight even...)
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Hotels anywhere
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi there,
I will try and answer your question as best I can.
Out of London on our usual Midhurst departure, there is a note on the Jepp plate concerning a gradient until 4000 ft. Instead of accelerating earlier, our company prefers to to continue the climb at V2+10, as per the performance until 4000ft before automatically going into CLIMB mode and accelerating. Begining the acceleration phase at an earlier altitude brings you closer to the noise monitoring equipment, thus an earlier triggering of the "bells" exists.
On all occasions, on departure, we realise that we are slow in the climb or to acclerate, but we feel we are not breaking any laid out/chartered rules. Should you require earlier acceleration, you may inform the crew out of, say 3000ft "continue acceleration" or "no speed restriction". Secondly, we never want to block the frequecy asking about acceleration at an earlier level. Usually the greendot speed (best lift/drag) at 270 tons is about 272 kts indicated and this is where the A340 would be best to climb at below 10000ft. After 10000, the climb speed/mach differs from company to company, due to the different Cost Index selection. CI-50 is different to CI-80 or CI-100 of another company. VA, Sri Lankan and other operators use different Cost Indexes which differ the performance of the A340, from each other. Technique is also different in various companies. Even the old VOR approach is done different in A340's between companies too. Some do fully mananged, other do fully selected whilst we are familar with managed lateral, but selected vertical. That's 3 different ways for 3 different airlines in just a VOR approach.
Further more, the A340 climbs very well with an engine out as it is only on 75% thrust when compared to say an A330 at 50% thrust with one out. I would prefer the 3 engine climb.
I hope this helps and I am open to learn more from the next guy, in the posts.
I will try and answer your question as best I can.
Out of London on our usual Midhurst departure, there is a note on the Jepp plate concerning a gradient until 4000 ft. Instead of accelerating earlier, our company prefers to to continue the climb at V2+10, as per the performance until 4000ft before automatically going into CLIMB mode and accelerating. Begining the acceleration phase at an earlier altitude brings you closer to the noise monitoring equipment, thus an earlier triggering of the "bells" exists.
On all occasions, on departure, we realise that we are slow in the climb or to acclerate, but we feel we are not breaking any laid out/chartered rules. Should you require earlier acceleration, you may inform the crew out of, say 3000ft "continue acceleration" or "no speed restriction". Secondly, we never want to block the frequecy asking about acceleration at an earlier level. Usually the greendot speed (best lift/drag) at 270 tons is about 272 kts indicated and this is where the A340 would be best to climb at below 10000ft. After 10000, the climb speed/mach differs from company to company, due to the different Cost Index selection. CI-50 is different to CI-80 or CI-100 of another company. VA, Sri Lankan and other operators use different Cost Indexes which differ the performance of the A340, from each other. Technique is also different in various companies. Even the old VOR approach is done different in A340's between companies too. Some do fully mananged, other do fully selected whilst we are familar with managed lateral, but selected vertical. That's 3 different ways for 3 different airlines in just a VOR approach.
Further more, the A340 climbs very well with an engine out as it is only on 75% thrust when compared to say an A330 at 50% thrust with one out. I would prefer the 3 engine climb.
I hope this helps and I am open to learn more from the next guy, in the posts.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Southampton
Posts: 99
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Danke!
Thank you for your reply WAWN (presumably a VIR chap (or indeed chapess...))
I was hoping for the odd serious reply and it's a 100% record so far!
On a slight tangent I know the old Fam flight's are starting to come back, although not, to my knowledge, on long haul A340, but this would be a typical case where so much could be learnt on both sides. Economics aside, we'd both benefit I'm sure.
You are absolutely correct that by flying at V2+10 you aren't contravening any rules, and I didn't mean to imply that you were - it's just a little different from 'the norm'.
In an effort to reinforce, I have taken to saying 'high speed is approved' rather than no speed restriction to Sri Lankan's in particular as they seem to actually slow down if you say 'no speed'.
To further my theme of improved understanding (surely a good thing), on the MID departure the 3000' restriction is to actually keep you inside controlled airspace, the 4000' restirctions provides procedural (1000') separation from Gatwick SAM and KENET departures (not forgetting the Non-Standard Wodley's for any Chanex bods!) and finally the 6000' separates from KK inbounds downwind.
Just out of interested what kind of N1 figure do you use in the climb?
I was hoping for the odd serious reply and it's a 100% record so far!
On a slight tangent I know the old Fam flight's are starting to come back, although not, to my knowledge, on long haul A340, but this would be a typical case where so much could be learnt on both sides. Economics aside, we'd both benefit I'm sure.
You are absolutely correct that by flying at V2+10 you aren't contravening any rules, and I didn't mean to imply that you were - it's just a little different from 'the norm'.
In an effort to reinforce, I have taken to saying 'high speed is approved' rather than no speed restriction to Sri Lankan's in particular as they seem to actually slow down if you say 'no speed'.
To further my theme of improved understanding (surely a good thing), on the MID departure the 3000' restriction is to actually keep you inside controlled airspace, the 4000' restirctions provides procedural (1000') separation from Gatwick SAM and KENET departures (not forgetting the Non-Standard Wodley's for any Chanex bods!) and finally the 6000' separates from KK inbounds downwind.
Just out of interested what kind of N1 figure do you use in the climb?
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Hotels anywhere
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Climb thrust setting is determined by computers and differs for many reasons, based on many factors and the pilot has no say in the automation mode of the N1 setting. This climb setting continuously varies with altitude, temperature, etc... For the pilot, he just puts the thrust levers into the climb detent when the FMA (flight mode annunciator), on the the top lines of the PFD (primary flight display), calls for it.
No, I am not with Virgin, but rather another longhaul operator.
I cannot understand why a particular airline might be slowing down. If anything it should increase, although slowly and rate of climb will degrade while the aircraft lowers the nose to accelerate, from around 10 degrees in climb to around 7*-8* for acceleration.
No, I am not with Virgin, but rather another longhaul operator.
I cannot understand why a particular airline might be slowing down. If anything it should increase, although slowly and rate of climb will degrade while the aircraft lowers the nose to accelerate, from around 10 degrees in climb to around 7*-8* for acceleration.
Join Date: Jan 1999
Posts: 41
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A340
The A340 will climb from lift off to 1500' AAL at V2 to V2+10 then automatically command an acceleration to 250 Kts or min drag speed (if higher) {about 270 kts at max AUW}at 1500' AAL then climb at this to 10,000' when it will accel to climb speed (~300 Kts/.8) You can frig the system to climb at any speed you like for noise abatement and/or performance. At VAA we do the auto speed schedule to at least 4000' to make the min gradient then accel if there is "no speed restriction" The ac doesn't accel and climb very well-especially the -300. Occasionally we do the early part of the climb at 190 with flap 1 -rather than completing the acceleration then climbing- if required to make a ht constraint. All this is do-able at MTOW on 3 engines without selecting full power-although I might! I know that many people moan about Airbus climb performance-especially the -300, but the ac is optimised for the cruise when an over powered ac is less efficient.
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Far Away
Posts: 158
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Evening.All pretty much covered by previous posts.I fly the 343 for M Rats,and the engines are running at full tilt,on take off,which always gets my attention,they are older machines,though.Im still amazed they run so close to the limit,but they do the job.
That said,the V2+15ktsto 1500,rarely proves a problem, we need to climb at 250 kts plus,in order to achieve the "green dot" spd,and that results in an auto flao retract,its the next bit,where climb is less responsive,once up there its a nice ship though,and usually the engines have cooled down.
The 345,is however rather more lively,fitted with Rollers X4.
Nice work as always,in London ATC.
Cheers,QB
Couldonlyaffordafiver
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: The Twilight Zone near 30W
Posts: 1,934
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wow. On the 777, we can make 320kts within about three minutes of Aa and then climb at close to 2000fpm at max weight. I guess it shows the excess power requirement for a twin in order to make the single engine climb gradients. How does the A330 compare?
We can generally derate at max weight as well!
We can generally derate at max weight as well!
Join Date: May 2003
Location: London
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well done CT...nice to have a chuckle on here.
But, I gather, from friends in Toulouse that there is far worse than the 340 to come..... the dreaded 380! It has not been designed to go up, down or sideways, but go very fast on the ground.
For obvious reasons, it has been nick-named the ''Ostrich'' by people in the know, at the factory!!
But, I gather, from friends in Toulouse that there is far worse than the 340 to come..... the dreaded 380! It has not been designed to go up, down or sideways, but go very fast on the ground.
For obvious reasons, it has been nick-named the ''Ostrich'' by people in the know, at the factory!!
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Jeddah, Saudi Arabia
Age: 59
Posts: 30
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A330/340
Hi all
I have read thru the comments on climb rates and speeds, which is very interresting, from a pilots point of view. Over the past 18 months, I have flown several times between Johannesburg, Dubai and Jeddah.
The experience has been varied. Flying in the B777 (cattle class) is an absolute pleasure - enough leg room, etc and a very stable flight, even when flying thru clouds or landing/taking off in rain.
The airbus flights have been extremely uncomfortable, both in terms of cabin arrangement and aircraft operation. In November, the landing at JIA was the worst I have ever experienced, with the A340-300 pitching, yawing and rolling, engines accelerating and deccelerating. It was one of those 1 approach & 4 landing efforts.
As a result of these experiences, I am NOT an airbus fan.
I am an aircraft mechanic, and have grown to respect the ruggedness and fly-ability of Boeing aircraft.
I have read thru the comments on climb rates and speeds, which is very interresting, from a pilots point of view. Over the past 18 months, I have flown several times between Johannesburg, Dubai and Jeddah.
The experience has been varied. Flying in the B777 (cattle class) is an absolute pleasure - enough leg room, etc and a very stable flight, even when flying thru clouds or landing/taking off in rain.
The airbus flights have been extremely uncomfortable, both in terms of cabin arrangement and aircraft operation. In November, the landing at JIA was the worst I have ever experienced, with the A340-300 pitching, yawing and rolling, engines accelerating and deccelerating. It was one of those 1 approach & 4 landing efforts.
As a result of these experiences, I am NOT an airbus fan.
I am an aircraft mechanic, and have grown to respect the ruggedness and fly-ability of Boeing aircraft.
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 114
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
757 VERSUS AIRBUS
From my personal experience as a passenger only, the shortest take offs and steepest climbs that I have experienced are on the Boeing 757, perhaps due to the load factor and typical routes.
I oft recall departing the relatively short runway at GLA on a short hop to LHR or PMI or ALC, and the darned 757 would appear to hardly get enough revs up, but alas, off into the sky it went like a rocket and climbing ferociously. I was always left with the feeling that the take off run hadn't been completed properly!!
Lovely aircraft in all respects. Do those of you who pilot it like it too??
I often fly as pax on 340 and 330 too, so only too well know what the original poster is referring to.
I oft recall departing the relatively short runway at GLA on a short hop to LHR or PMI or ALC, and the darned 757 would appear to hardly get enough revs up, but alas, off into the sky it went like a rocket and climbing ferociously. I was always left with the feeling that the take off run hadn't been completed properly!!
Lovely aircraft in all respects. Do those of you who pilot it like it too??
I often fly as pax on 340 and 330 too, so only too well know what the original poster is referring to.
Join Date: Dec 1997
Location: Suffolk UK
Posts: 4,927
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There is a world of difference between the A340-200/300 and the A340-500/600. The smaller aircraft, even with the C4 engines, is far from overpowered! The 346 on two is probably not far short of the B777 on one, which gives an idea of the increased performance of the newer aircraft - and it's over 100 tonnes heavier than the 'little' one! Those non-pilots reading this should bear in mind that, because of our route structure, we are nearly always operating close to our maximum take-off weight, unlike short-haul 757s!
VAA, at LHR, always accelerates at 1500' AAL to 250kts/min safe, as per the published procedures. Even in a C2- powered A343, this technique will nearly always achieve the published minimum climb gradients up to 4000', so I've no idea why WAWN's company climbs at V2+10 to 4000'. This may be the very problem (and company) that Cartman's Twin is referring to. On the very rare occasions when the C2 A343 can't make the gradient at 250kts, we limit the acceleration to 190kts until the kit confirms that the constraints can be met, as Spocla says. This normally means accelerating to 250 at around 2800ft - and we would normally tell ATC if a late acceleration is required.
Once the 250kt speed restriction is lifted by ATC, and we are sure we'll make both the SID track and climb requirements, we accelerate to our normal climb speed - approx 300 in the A343, or 320 in the A346.
As for famils, I have carried at least 3 Swanwick ATCOs on flights in the last two or three months, so they are definitely back on - and on the 340 (and we don't do anything other than long haul)!
VAA, at LHR, always accelerates at 1500' AAL to 250kts/min safe, as per the published procedures. Even in a C2- powered A343, this technique will nearly always achieve the published minimum climb gradients up to 4000', so I've no idea why WAWN's company climbs at V2+10 to 4000'. This may be the very problem (and company) that Cartman's Twin is referring to. On the very rare occasions when the C2 A343 can't make the gradient at 250kts, we limit the acceleration to 190kts until the kit confirms that the constraints can be met, as Spocla says. This normally means accelerating to 250 at around 2800ft - and we would normally tell ATC if a late acceleration is required.
Once the 250kt speed restriction is lifted by ATC, and we are sure we'll make both the SID track and climb requirements, we accelerate to our normal climb speed - approx 300 in the A343, or 320 in the A346.
As for famils, I have carried at least 3 Swanwick ATCOs on flights in the last two or three months, so they are definitely back on - and on the 340 (and we don't do anything other than long haul)!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Southampton
Posts: 99
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The saga continues...
Thank you for all your replies so far. There is obviously a huge variation between airlines and how they meet (or not!) the departure requirements.
A few points I'd like to make. Generally we anticipate all jet a/c to accelerate to 250kts after departure, not withstanding those lovely British 146....., and A340s! The speed limit on departure is just that - a maximum (not to be exceeded like the one on the M25...!) and there's no restriction on flying slower. The problem was that the Towers use 'Speed Tables' to determine departure separations, and the A340 is officially in the same League as B744 etc. Even taking the sprightly VAA boys doing 250 kts, a B744 accelerates faster and will catch you unless we're careful!
Trying to second guess an A340's speed on departure only tends to result in an embarrassing situation so most controllers I know just wait and see what you do! I'm glad that the boys (and girls) at Heathrow have got the idea now and use 'common sense' departure separations behind A340s.
The 340-6's do perform (in ATC terms only I hasten to add!) much better than the 'Shorter, Slower, Less Far' variants! And I will quite happily wait until after I retire (32 years away...) for the A380.
If My OpenFly is correct:
>> ..... the dreaded 380! It has not been designed to go up, down or sideways, but go very fast on the ground.
May I suggest that it's best suited to following the new, freshly widened M25 round to Dover then using the cliffs to effect a take-off! No conflict with Gatwick traffic apart from passengers using the M23...
Regarding the A330, I'm sad to say it doesn't perform anywhere near as well as the B777, but again I guess this comes back to the business of accountants. Boeing like to provide a bit more welly! The A330 is far more efficient, and shares climb performance as well as it's wings with it's elder brother.
A few points I'd like to make. Generally we anticipate all jet a/c to accelerate to 250kts after departure, not withstanding those lovely British 146....., and A340s! The speed limit on departure is just that - a maximum (not to be exceeded like the one on the M25...!) and there's no restriction on flying slower. The problem was that the Towers use 'Speed Tables' to determine departure separations, and the A340 is officially in the same League as B744 etc. Even taking the sprightly VAA boys doing 250 kts, a B744 accelerates faster and will catch you unless we're careful!
Trying to second guess an A340's speed on departure only tends to result in an embarrassing situation so most controllers I know just wait and see what you do! I'm glad that the boys (and girls) at Heathrow have got the idea now and use 'common sense' departure separations behind A340s.
The 340-6's do perform (in ATC terms only I hasten to add!) much better than the 'Shorter, Slower, Less Far' variants! And I will quite happily wait until after I retire (32 years away...) for the A380.
If My OpenFly is correct:
>> ..... the dreaded 380! It has not been designed to go up, down or sideways, but go very fast on the ground.
May I suggest that it's best suited to following the new, freshly widened M25 round to Dover then using the cliffs to effect a take-off! No conflict with Gatwick traffic apart from passengers using the M23...
Regarding the A330, I'm sad to say it doesn't perform anywhere near as well as the B777, but again I guess this comes back to the business of accountants. Boeing like to provide a bit more welly! The A330 is far more efficient, and shares climb performance as well as it's wings with it's elder brother.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Southampton
Posts: 99
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Oh yes, the exception to the Airbus/Boeing debate is of course the 319.
Whilst everything A321 and above appears in the 'dismal' category, the A319 is most people's favourite. 4-6000' minute - we'll have some of that. If only it could teach it's elder brothers...
Mind you my elder brother doesn't listen to a
word anyone says....
Whilst everything A321 and above appears in the 'dismal' category, the A319 is most people's favourite. 4-6000' minute - we'll have some of that. If only it could teach it's elder brothers...
Mind you my elder brother doesn't listen to a
word anyone says....
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: earth
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
speed + roc LHR
Have read this thread with interest and also fly 340-300
I am pro the 340 - no problem with eng out and climb - I have found that a lot of crew/airlines fly the 340 too slowly
Out of LHR...
- try accel at 3000 agl and cancel speed - a/c will do great.
At moment we accell at 4000 ft baro to climb schedule of approx 300 ias if speeds cancelled.(depending on weight and cost index)
Just for interest have also tried accell at 1500 agl to green dot - about 270ias then accell again at 4000ft to climb speed of about 300 and also coped ok but bit risky as may "ring bells " if you do not fly accurately. (Tried this number years ago during trials)
I too, have noticed from a crew point of view, large differences in operating procedures but, as mentioned before, believe that we are being too conservative with speed and therefore fly the aircraft too slowly - hence messing around ATC.
I have flown 747 and find the 340 more friendly and nicer to fly - not knocking 747 as I did enjoy the aircraft but experienced Capt on the 340 can really make it "Sing"
I am pro the 340 - no problem with eng out and climb - I have found that a lot of crew/airlines fly the 340 too slowly
Out of LHR...
- try accel at 3000 agl and cancel speed - a/c will do great.
At moment we accell at 4000 ft baro to climb schedule of approx 300 ias if speeds cancelled.(depending on weight and cost index)
Just for interest have also tried accell at 1500 agl to green dot - about 270ias then accell again at 4000ft to climb speed of about 300 and also coped ok but bit risky as may "ring bells " if you do not fly accurately. (Tried this number years ago during trials)
I too, have noticed from a crew point of view, large differences in operating procedures but, as mentioned before, believe that we are being too conservative with speed and therefore fly the aircraft too slowly - hence messing around ATC.
I have flown 747 and find the 340 more friendly and nicer to fly - not knocking 747 as I did enjoy the aircraft but experienced Capt on the 340 can really make it "Sing"
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Southampton
Posts: 99
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
'Fraid I'm no relation to 747Focal - or at least not to my knowledge. Family tree gets a bit woolly after by 17 Uncles and 53 Nephews. Or at least that's how it feels buying Xmas presents for the lot of 'em!
I was very interested by Maybee's post. I found it hard to believe that the huge variation was down to SOPs alone - a bit of finesse helps it would appear! Next time I'm faced with a sluggish 340 I shall pass on your advice - just give it some welly old boy!!!!!
Just to add some straightness to the record I dont hold anything personally against Airbus, my only point is that from an ATCO's perspective they CAN present a challenge! I flew on a 330 to Cuba recently and slept well even though suffering the ill effects of food poisoning (apologies to anyone else on the flight...).
I was very interested by Maybee's post. I found it hard to believe that the huge variation was down to SOPs alone - a bit of finesse helps it would appear! Next time I'm faced with a sluggish 340 I shall pass on your advice - just give it some welly old boy!!!!!
Just to add some straightness to the record I dont hold anything personally against Airbus, my only point is that from an ATCO's perspective they CAN present a challenge! I flew on a 330 to Cuba recently and slept well even though suffering the ill effects of food poisoning (apologies to anyone else on the flight...).
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Adelaide - Sth Australia
Posts: 32
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As a very nervous flyer that comes to this site to help overcome my anxiety through education and better understanding and would like to make a request.
I got pretty uncomfortable on a QF 747 evening flight out of Heathrow when all of a sudden the plane pulls back on the power, levels out and crawls along just after take off....to be fair I crapped myself!
Not a word from the flight deck, so I'm left to my own imagination and feeling very anxious to say the least. Then after a short time, full power again and me still worried until I had a chance to talk with the cabin crew.
I now know why this happened but I'd just like to ask you guys up front to maybe say a few words prior to depature about this proceedure to avoid excessive engine noise on takeoff. I am sure there are some PAX like me who don't know about this and would be put at ease....on the other hand maybe you guys get a chuckle at our expense.
Regards
wrxflame
I got pretty uncomfortable on a QF 747 evening flight out of Heathrow when all of a sudden the plane pulls back on the power, levels out and crawls along just after take off....to be fair I crapped myself!
Not a word from the flight deck, so I'm left to my own imagination and feeling very anxious to say the least. Then after a short time, full power again and me still worried until I had a chance to talk with the cabin crew.
I now know why this happened but I'd just like to ask you guys up front to maybe say a few words prior to depature about this proceedure to avoid excessive engine noise on takeoff. I am sure there are some PAX like me who don't know about this and would be put at ease....on the other hand maybe you guys get a chuckle at our expense.
Regards
wrxflame
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Southampton
Posts: 99
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hello WRX!
I'm sure you'll receive a few responses from the front desk boys n gals in due course, but before they point the finger I'd suggest that it can often be down to ATC.
There are several factors affecting the flight shortly after departure. Once they've wrestled the beast of the black-top they have to cpmply with minimum climb gradient requirements for noise/terrain clearance whilst also minimising noise produced by the aircraft! Once they get to between 3 and 6000' their levelling off/sporadic climb is down to ATC.
We give climb to an a/c as soon as possible but due to the conflicting traffic this can, unfortunately, be rather eratic step-climbs of 1000' at a time. This happens especially in the evening when the long haul departures come lumbering out of Heathrow and Gatwick. We do what we can to minimise these but sometimes it's inevitable, we'd much rather your departure climbed continuously and got 'out of our hair' as soon as possible.
I'm sure you'll get more responses but there's a starter for 10!
I'm sure you'll receive a few responses from the front desk boys n gals in due course, but before they point the finger I'd suggest that it can often be down to ATC.
There are several factors affecting the flight shortly after departure. Once they've wrestled the beast of the black-top they have to cpmply with minimum climb gradient requirements for noise/terrain clearance whilst also minimising noise produced by the aircraft! Once they get to between 3 and 6000' their levelling off/sporadic climb is down to ATC.
We give climb to an a/c as soon as possible but due to the conflicting traffic this can, unfortunately, be rather eratic step-climbs of 1000' at a time. This happens especially in the evening when the long haul departures come lumbering out of Heathrow and Gatwick. We do what we can to minimise these but sometimes it's inevitable, we'd much rather your departure climbed continuously and got 'out of our hair' as soon as possible.
I'm sure you'll get more responses but there's a starter for 10!
Join Date: Dec 1997
Location: Suffolk UK
Posts: 4,927
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
wrxflame, I'm sorry, but there just isn't time to explain the various noise and attitude changes that will occur in the minutes after take off - the guys up front are busy!
As you may have gathered in this thread, what happens is that the aircraft uses a high (not necessarily maximum) power setting to achieve the take off and a relatively steep but slow early climb to a procedurally-determined gate height (1500 feet at Heathrow for most aircraft). At that point, the power is reduced to a more neighbour-and-engine-friendly level, and the aircraft is accelerated to the ATC speed limit (250kts or minimum safe speed, whichever is greater) while the high-lift devices are retracted into the wing. As you can imagine, achieving that acceleration on reduced power means a significant attitude and noise change, which can feel like the aircraft is actually descending!
ATC may then require us to level while still maintaining that relatively-slow 250kts; another power reduction and a further lowering of the nose is then required. The next clearance will be to a higher altitude, so the power will be returned to its climb setting (which is quite high), and the aircraft will be rotated to a climb attitude. This transition from level flight to a climb and back to level flight may happen several times at busy periods, and explains the strange noises and attitude changes you experience.
The human body was not designed to operate in three dimensions, and the inner ear (your main motion sensor when sight is not available) is easily fooled into convincing your brain that certain things are happening to your body that actually are not. Being in the passenger compartment of an airliner is an ideal environment for these false sensations to be experienced! Please understand that we don't make any of these manouevres for our amusement, or to discomfit passengers.
As you may have gathered in this thread, what happens is that the aircraft uses a high (not necessarily maximum) power setting to achieve the take off and a relatively steep but slow early climb to a procedurally-determined gate height (1500 feet at Heathrow for most aircraft). At that point, the power is reduced to a more neighbour-and-engine-friendly level, and the aircraft is accelerated to the ATC speed limit (250kts or minimum safe speed, whichever is greater) while the high-lift devices are retracted into the wing. As you can imagine, achieving that acceleration on reduced power means a significant attitude and noise change, which can feel like the aircraft is actually descending!
ATC may then require us to level while still maintaining that relatively-slow 250kts; another power reduction and a further lowering of the nose is then required. The next clearance will be to a higher altitude, so the power will be returned to its climb setting (which is quite high), and the aircraft will be rotated to a climb attitude. This transition from level flight to a climb and back to level flight may happen several times at busy periods, and explains the strange noises and attitude changes you experience.
The human body was not designed to operate in three dimensions, and the inner ear (your main motion sensor when sight is not available) is easily fooled into convincing your brain that certain things are happening to your body that actually are not. Being in the passenger compartment of an airliner is an ideal environment for these false sensations to be experienced! Please understand that we don't make any of these manouevres for our amusement, or to discomfit passengers.