SATA brand new A320 ; hard landing in Lisbon
CONF iture;
Yes, I recall the Bulletin.
My comment re manuals was in reference to present-day publications, a number of which I surveyed and reported on and included an acknowledgement that the procedure has it's problems as per Chris' comments. Some of them referenced the procedure, some didn't, so likely your last statement from the FCOM is the preferred response.
The first time we have heard about that procedure was in 2004, I believe.
It was the subject of a FCOM BULLETIN called AIRCRAFT HANDLING IN FINAL APPROACH
The interesting part is, that procedure has proved to have more drawbacks than advantages, so, as discretely as it could be I must say, Airbus has decided in 2009 to not recommend to use this procedure any longer.
If the A/THR performance is not satisfactory, the flight crew should take over and control the thrust manually.
It was the subject of a FCOM BULLETIN called AIRCRAFT HANDLING IN FINAL APPROACH
The interesting part is, that procedure has proved to have more drawbacks than advantages, so, as discretely as it could be I must say, Airbus has decided in 2009 to not recommend to use this procedure any longer.
If the A/THR performance is not satisfactory, the flight crew should take over and control the thrust manually.
My comment re manuals was in reference to present-day publications, a number of which I surveyed and reported on and included an acknowledgement that the procedure has it's problems as per Chris' comments. Some of them referenced the procedure, some didn't, so likely your last statement from the FCOM is the preferred response.
Originally Posted by PJ2
On the contrary, the procedure works well
Personally, I have never had to chance to check how it works: I have never been allowed to use ATHR with manual flight or to autoland unless flying actual or practice CAT II/III ILS. It's a company restriction I was quite comfortable with.
Clandestino;
Thanks for the clarification - I agree with your comments completely: In the flare is too late to add energy without risking other untoward outcomes. The response can be quite aggressive.
I like the two mandates your company requires. I can recall a few times when my F/O disconnected the autothrust but left the autopilot engaged. THAT didn't last long.
PJ2
Thanks for the clarification - I agree with your comments completely: In the flare is too late to add energy without risking other untoward outcomes. The response can be quite aggressive.
I like the two mandates your company requires. I can recall a few times when my F/O disconnected the autothrust but left the autopilot engaged. THAT didn't last long.
PJ2
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: W of 30W
Posts: 1,916
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
those who need to review this history can check the testimony of Yannick Malinge before the Brazilian parliament in August 2007 - but one does need to be able to read Portuguese).
Would you have a link for that, I would be very interested to read what he had to say.
I would make a great effort to introduce more automatics and the pilot-plus-large-dog concept of crew.
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Bielefeld, Germany
Posts: 955
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by PBL
those who need to review this history can check the testimony of Yannick Malinge before the Brazilian parliament in August 2007
Originally Posted by CONFiture
Would you have a link for that, I would be very interested to read what he had to say.
Originally Posted by PBL
I would make a great effort to introduce more automatics and the pilot-plus-large-dog concept of crew.
Originally Posted by CONFiture
Can I see some contradiction in your argumentation as you acknowledge more automatics bring more possible situations, known or still unknown, but in the meantime you see more automatics as the ultimate solution ... !?
PBL
This thread shows up the gulf between those who advocate more automation and those who take a somewhat different view. Some operators are now apparently banning hand flying!
The Airbus A320 autothrust is reasonably ok for most normal ops where the wind is not too strong. However it is slow to respond to speed loss - just observe how it allows the speed to decay below target in an Open Descent. The non- moving levers don't help the pilot's intuitive assessment of what it is doing and have been at least slightly implicated in a number of incidents and accidents.
However, it is what it is and pilots and operators have to find a modus operandi that works for them. Personally I want pilots to be both able to use the automatics and to be able to comfortably hand-fly the a/c with or without the autothrust. I find that even the modern young computer-game ones actually enjoy doing it as soon as they get some practice.
So let's use all our resources, both automatic and human, and try to ensure we keep both in tip-top condition!
The Airbus A320 autothrust is reasonably ok for most normal ops where the wind is not too strong. However it is slow to respond to speed loss - just observe how it allows the speed to decay below target in an Open Descent. The non- moving levers don't help the pilot's intuitive assessment of what it is doing and have been at least slightly implicated in a number of incidents and accidents.
However, it is what it is and pilots and operators have to find a modus operandi that works for them. Personally I want pilots to be both able to use the automatics and to be able to comfortably hand-fly the a/c with or without the autothrust. I find that even the modern young computer-game ones actually enjoy doing it as soon as they get some practice.
So let's use all our resources, both automatic and human, and try to ensure we keep both in tip-top condition!
Last edited by johannschmith; 27th Mar 2011 at 10:32. Reason: Spelling
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Manchester, UK
Age: 38
Posts: 128
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Airbus A320 autothrust is reasonably ok for most normal ops where the wind is not too strong. However it is slow to respond to speed loss - just observe how it allows the speed to decay below target in an Open Descent.
I agree that the A320 can be a bit thick when it comes to speed control in open descent, particularly at higher altitudes with an increasing headwind. There's a tedious inevitability about the way the speed ticks towards MMO with no response from the aeroplane to pitch up and arrest it, yet when you do intervene manually it's a tiny input to sort it out.
My experience is that the autothrust on approach is very capable and I can only think of a couple of occasions where I've disconnected it on the grounds of not being happy about how it's managing the power.
Having said that, our fleet is entirely CFM. Having only flown an IAE equipped 320 once (and floated down the runway during the flare), I wonder if the engines have slightly more inertia when it comes to spooling up or down, which would give the impression of autothrust being slow.
So let's use all our resources, both automatic and human, and try to ensure we keep both in tip-top condition!
Fine, if the airlines want to continue that way but at least give pilots a chance to gain manual flying skills (including no autothrottle and no flight director) by ensuring that 50 percent of each simulator session is raw data manual flight. Not 90 percent automatics as it is now.
