Embraer to introduce 'automatic take-off' for E2s
 

"FARNBOROUGH—Embraer is introducing an automatic takeoff function onto its E2 family of passenger jets, leading to much-enhanced range capabilities from short runways. The function, called Embraer Enhanced Takeoff System (E2ET), will be available from the fourth quarter of 2025 and will also be available for retrofit on aircraft that have already been delivered, the OEM revealed July 23 at the Farnborough Airshow."

https://aviationweek.com/shownews/fa...offs-e2-family

"Range/Payload improvements from challenging airports
Embraer also unveiled its E2 Enhanced Take Off System for the first time. This automatic take off system produces a more precise and efficient rotation moment and flight trajectory, reducing the required field length and pilot workload; meaning more payload and more range from challenging airports. This gives the E2 best in class performance from airports like London City, Florence, and Santos Dumont. Adding 350NM in range from LCY for example."

https://embraer.com/global/en/news?s...al-e-jet-range

Interesting one... are human pilots so inefficient ? Or more to the point do they need bigger safety margins than robots ?

I used to employ automatic takeoff in the Boeings I flew. It was even voice activated!!

All I had to say was “your leg” and sit back and enjoy the ride :ok:

What about the "Voice Activated Auto Throttle".

Did anyone else see the graph by them?

https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachmen...883041cb53ec&=

And it probably won't sell one more of those in the US, which is their biggest problem since they didn't consider scope clauses when updating the E-Jets...

What can go wrong, can go.........

Take off is primarily an an energy management exercise and an engine failure at V1 is the critcal take off weight determing factor for a given runway.

I'm guessing the software is optimised to reach screen height at exactly at V2, where the speed there is usually a bit higher, and saves some distance in that way.

but i'm guessing that if one of the engines fails within the critical window it won't be the automation that has to save the day???

And then ATC says “Stop climb 5000’”. That’ll be some bunt.

Gosh.. imagine if this existed in the real world. Like for example the F/A-18. What a disaster that has been. YouTube is available for the doubters.

Christ on a bike… are you even vaguely aware of what modern airliners do? The ignorance on here astounds me on a daily basis.

The A319/20/21/30/40/350/80 will climb away single engine with or without auto yaw compensation and achieve all required gradients.

Similarly the 777/787 will also automatically provide yaw assistance.

Read a f@&king book

Ah yes, the totally unexpected stop at 5,000ft. What a bunt. Do you fly fast jets? Must be great fun!

It must be a blast for engineers and developers to play with aircraft these days. Less so for those who went the more analogue way and became "pilots"... If this is to come true, I pressume the automatic take off will be mandated or else it will invalidate your take off performance figures. Better fire those test pilots as well who consistently failed to optimize their rotation!!

350nm at 5kg per mile. It must increase the RTOW by 1750kg. I know an extra 1750kg would have helped me at times!

FFS half roll and pull the nose down to level will ya!! Hate the bunting that goes on these days. :}

The slide @ #5 suggests that the performance improvement comes from a reduced distance in achieving the screen height (35 ft).

Assuming that the physical aircraft / engines are unchanged, then this difference is between manual and automatic flight.
A further assumption is that the idealised flightpath was achieved in testing, validating theory; thus the published performance (manual flight) would involve a certification margin over the ideal - for consistency in manual fight - for 'all' pilots and circumstance.

What is, where does this margin appear in certification requirements?
What is the basis for performance benefit from automatic flight. (N.B. autoland distances are longer than for manual flight)

The sales-speak refers to difficult airports. If the performance limit is due to near obstacles vice screen height, then again how can automation claim a benefit over manual flight - height over obstacle etc.

There is performance benefit for automatic approaches, reduced obstacle free zones, e.g. all weather ops, or en-route navigation, but none AFAIR for takeoff (excepting claims for autobrake performance - reaction time and consistency).

The F15 Ababil demonstrated this at Fairford and Farnborough this week. It was quite impressive. I don't know if it complied with Noise Abatement criteria though.

The A340 and A380 will do that single engine ? Blimey !

I know they are good.....I didn't realise they were that good !

Airbus had a new A330 crash at TLS out of a demo climb too steep.
https://www.baaa-acro.com/crash/cras...louse-7-killed

Wouldn't steep performance climbs eat into safety margins? Trading safety for performance as the new way to go? How about systems, electrical or software hiccups and suddenly having to hand fly these things?

It wasn't that it was too steep, they stuffed up the modes and having one of the engines pulled back to idle after takeoff (test flight) didn't help. It was a crew ballsup that caused that one.