Bae 146 / Avro RJ banshee flap extension noise
Rebel PPRuNer
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Toronto, Canada (formerly EICK)
Age: 51
Posts: 2,834
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Capt Claret said:
The RJX didn't seem to be having problems becoming certified, just becoming sold...
I'd be really interested to know if the 146 was to be newly certified in 2004, would certification be granted, given said noise, and not withstanding some of the other design characteristics of the 146.
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: IO83VI
Posts: 127
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As mentioned earlier the 1-11 did have a terrible howl as the flaps were moved, didn't matter which way, but it was really subdued inside the cabin. Outside it was a totally different game, I used to live just about where they would typically go from flaps in to the first detent - you didn't have to look to see what was overhead !
Bottums Up
MarkD
Do you know if the RJX was certified as a new type or a variant of an existing type?
As I understand it the Fokker 50 was certified as an F27-(insert variant no) so that it didn't need duplicated controls of more recent types, say DH8.
And, was the RJX certified? I thought that the RJX project was cancelled prior to the certification trials being completed.
Do you know if the RJX was certified as a new type or a variant of an existing type?
As I understand it the Fokker 50 was certified as an F27-(insert variant no) so that it didn't need duplicated controls of more recent types, say DH8.
And, was the RJX certified? I thought that the RJX project was cancelled prior to the certification trials being completed.
The 146 has many idiosyncracies; not just the 'smelly socks' interior caused by the oily pressurisation system, but also that "OWWWWHOOOOOOOO" noise during flap travel....
But it's much comfier for SLF than the god-awful CRJ toothpaste tube!
But it's much comfier for SLF than the god-awful CRJ toothpaste tube!
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Costa Del Solent
Posts: 409
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The 146 has many idiosyncracies; not just the 'smelly socks' interior caused by the oily pressurisation system, but also that "OWWWWHOOOOOOOO" noise during flap travel....
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Cheshire, UK
Age: 61
Posts: 173
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The RJX was going to be certificated as a variant (it was also going to have a common type rating with the RJ). The certification was never finished although most of the trials, certainly on the RJX100, were completed.
Many attempts were made to cure the "flap-hoot" but most were at best partially successful. I believe it was thought to be caused by reverse flow around the underside of the exposed part of the wing when the flaps were travelling through 12deg on their to 18deg.
When I started working with the 146 I was told the aircraft was so quiet, you could hear the flaps being retracted after take-off. Wow! I thought, not realizing that it was the flaps that were noisier than the engines for the wrong reasons!
JT
Many attempts were made to cure the "flap-hoot" but most were at best partially successful. I believe it was thought to be caused by reverse flow around the underside of the exposed part of the wing when the flaps were travelling through 12deg on their to 18deg.
When I started working with the 146 I was told the aircraft was so quiet, you could hear the flaps being retracted after take-off. Wow! I thought, not realizing that it was the flaps that were noisier than the engines for the wrong reasons!
JT
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Crinkley Bottom
Posts: 108
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Added to say that the RJX/Avro RJ/146 were all going to be covered under the same type rating with justr a differences course to convert between each. Had a look inside on one of the RJX prototypes and the overhead panel is very much like the 146 with the avionics and the engine instruments a step up from the RJ.
Last edited by Mr R Sole; 14th Sep 2005 at 23:51.
