Iberia´s New Invention: Vls+5 Performance Charts
Thread Starter
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
From: Valencia
Iberia´s New Invention: Vls+5 Performance Charts
I have heard that Iberia has implemented a new VLS+5 landing performance charts for landing weight calculation in high airports in their A340 fleet, and it reduces around 10.000 - 20.000 the landing weight of the previous charts.
I´m an airbus sticker in another spanish airline and I´m anoyed. I have always believed that the charts that we normaly use are VLS+5 not VLS. Anyone with knowlege in Airbus performance know something about this?
The normal charts that we use in the A320/330/340 are VLS+5 or VLS?
That means that Iberia is going to use VLS+10 without knowing it?
Thanks.
I´m an airbus sticker in another spanish airline and I´m anoyed. I have always believed that the charts that we normaly use are VLS+5 not VLS. Anyone with knowlege in Airbus performance know something about this?
The normal charts that we use in the A320/330/340 are VLS+5 or VLS?
That means that Iberia is going to use VLS+10 without knowing it?
Thanks.
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 91
Likes: 0
From: Germany
Airbus has always been giving landing distances under the assumption, that you are touching down with Vls, at least for the A319/A320/A321 which I'm flying. Operating this way wouldn't be the wisest choice under most conditions, so my airline has defined Vapp = Vls + 5.
As long as we are not operating into lilmiting fields we even add an increment to Vapp if th FAC calculates a heavier aircraft than on the loadsheet in order to restore the 5 Kt between the FAC-calculated Vls and the FMGC-calculated (based on Loadsheetdata) Vapp.
Unfortunately there are no performance chart available for Vls +5, hoever 10% will do the trick, as is noted below 'per 5kt speed increment (and no failure) add 10%).
That the landing distance tables don't state the assumptions under which they are are calculated is a shame. Even the 'Performance' section in our OM-B only states 'Landings Distances are calculated using a speed 1.23 times the stall speed'. Under Speeds and Definitions you can look up, that this is Vls.
Safe Flying, MAX
As long as we are not operating into lilmiting fields we even add an increment to Vapp if th FAC calculates a heavier aircraft than on the loadsheet in order to restore the 5 Kt between the FAC-calculated Vls and the FMGC-calculated (based on Loadsheetdata) Vapp.
Unfortunately there are no performance chart available for Vls +5, hoever 10% will do the trick, as is noted below 'per 5kt speed increment (and no failure) add 10%).
That the landing distance tables don't state the assumptions under which they are are calculated is a shame. Even the 'Performance' section in our OM-B only states 'Landings Distances are calculated using a speed 1.23 times the stall speed'. Under Speeds and Definitions you can look up, that this is Vls.
Safe Flying, MAX
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 339
Likes: 0
From: way down south
330/340 have 'Autoland landing distance' charts in the QRH which would take care of the extra 5kts. Also it is a limitation that unless the landing is to be carried without A/thrust then the min speed is VLS+5. So I guess that Iberia will be doing all their landings now with manual thrust!
Joined: Mar 1999
Posts: 991
Likes: 128
From: big green wheely bin
Airbus landing distance charts are based on touching down at VLS. In the Corrections section at the bottom of the page it says to add 8% for a 5kt speed increment, so VLS+5.
I imagine the percentage increase changes with MSN.
I imagine the percentage increase changes with MSN.
