easyJet Toughbooks. What do easy have these loaded with?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Playing Golf!
Age: 46
Posts: 1,037
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
easyJet Toughbooks. What do easy have these loaded with?
What do easy have these loaded with?
Just W&B + T/O and Landing perf? Or a whole host of applications.
If your doing the loadsheet on the laptop what method of transmision of said loadsheet is being employed.
PT6A
Just W&B + T/O and Landing perf? Or a whole host of applications.
If your doing the loadsheet on the laptop what method of transmision of said loadsheet is being employed.
PT6A
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 341
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Laptops run Windows XP with the Airbus FOVE including eMEL, FCOM etc. and have the Ops Manuals suite in .pdf format.
The 'transmission' of the loadsheet is a bit more old fashioned; Dispatcher writes the loading form, PNF completes the form with the data from the laptop, PF checks it then reads out the numbers to the PNF to type into the MCDU.
The 'transmission' of the loadsheet is a bit more old fashioned; Dispatcher writes the loading form, PNF completes the form with the data from the laptop, PF checks it then reads out the numbers to the PNF to type into the MCDU.
PNF completes the form with the data from the laptop, PF checks it then reads out the numbers to the PNF to type into the MCDU.
Don't just say that, explain yourself showing where exactly easyJet procedures (Airbus procedures) are wrong. I'm not saying I disagree with you, just asking what exactly you are saying.
Penko, I was asking a question. I have no idea what Easyjet's procedures are. That's why I asked. If you are with Easyjet and use laptops in the cockpit, then you should be aware of what happened at MEL and how your procedures would trap such a mistake.
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: right here
Posts: 342
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
no offence to easyjet or someone else
my outfit is also going thru the inital stages of no-paper-cockpit ops and if one guy holds the paper and the other the laptop and you're (as always) under time pressure the safety situation "does not improve".
in regards to above posted: one guy READS the numbers to the other who then hacks them into the box... what a small glitch in the numbers could do....
you have to take the time and double-check the numbers.
in regards to above posted: one guy READS the numbers to the other who then hacks them into the box... what a small glitch in the numbers could do....
you have to take the time and double-check the numbers.
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Sunrise Senior Living
Posts: 1,338
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
.............a couple of worthwhile checks are made.
First, the PF, during his loading of the FMGC, will enter the forecast ZFW from the OFP (aka CFP) and fuel. Thus, when the actual ZFW is entered in the time honoured fashion, a comparison will be made and, if there is a signifcant difference, it will be investigated. The resultant GW is also compared between mcdu and FMGC.
Second, the PNF inserts the performance data as read out by the PF from the LPC (aka laptop) after which green dot speed (aka min clean) is read back from the mcdu by the PNF and is checked against the LPC value by the PF thus insuring that the LPC GW is the same as or similar to the inserted GW.
As the EK MEL event shows, mistakes can and will happen. All we can do is to make our SOPs as straightforward as we can while building in checks and balances - and then ensuring that the SOPs are strictly adhered to. As for the rest........it's what we get paid for!!
mcdhu
First, the PF, during his loading of the FMGC, will enter the forecast ZFW from the OFP (aka CFP) and fuel. Thus, when the actual ZFW is entered in the time honoured fashion, a comparison will be made and, if there is a signifcant difference, it will be investigated. The resultant GW is also compared between mcdu and FMGC.
Second, the PNF inserts the performance data as read out by the PF from the LPC (aka laptop) after which green dot speed (aka min clean) is read back from the mcdu by the PNF and is checked against the LPC value by the PF thus insuring that the LPC GW is the same as or similar to the inserted GW.
As the EK MEL event shows, mistakes can and will happen. All we can do is to make our SOPs as straightforward as we can while building in checks and balances - and then ensuring that the SOPs are strictly adhered to. As for the rest........it's what we get paid for!!
mcdhu
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Arizona USA
Posts: 8,571
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I truly have to laugh at all this paperless FD nonsense.
Laptops...,garbage in, garbage out, and it will allow future MEL incidents, without a doubt, especially if the crew is rushed.
Fortunately, many of these flights are short (under three hours, for example) so the airplane is not that heavy, and the runways are long...thus mitigating the circumstances, somewhat.
We still do it the old fashioned way.
The professional Flight Engineer does the performance data, and checked by the First Officer...and then by the Captain (provided of course that said Captain has stopped smoking his Havana and sipping his coffee).
Laptops...,garbage in, garbage out, and it will allow future MEL incidents, without a doubt, especially if the crew is rushed.
Fortunately, many of these flights are short (under three hours, for example) so the airplane is not that heavy, and the runways are long...thus mitigating the circumstances, somewhat.
We still do it the old fashioned way.
The professional Flight Engineer does the performance data, and checked by the First Officer...and then by the Captain (provided of course that said Captain has stopped smoking his Havana and sipping his coffee).
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Sunrise Senior Living
Posts: 1,338
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
411A - laugh as you undoubtedly already are, but you should be aware that, of our 500 routes in Europe, a significant number pose differing performance problems which the laptops help us to 'optimise'.
Furthermore, let's not forget about the EGT margins - don't you care about those either?
Oh - and nobody ever made a mistake with the old 'D' and 'X' graphs then?
Nice quip about the cuban though!!
Cheers
mcdhu
Furthermore, let's not forget about the EGT margins - don't you care about those either?
Oh - and nobody ever made a mistake with the old 'D' and 'X' graphs then?
Nice quip about the cuban though!!
Cheers
mcdhu
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: right here
Posts: 342
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
actually all you would have to do is implement a function so the hardware checks the TOW you enter against the est TOW in the OFP. if it's out of margin X you get a warning.
our TO-perf soft gives a pop-up for TOWs below MZFW e.g. or disables the assumed-temp option for contaminated rwys....
our TO-perf soft gives a pop-up for TOWs below MZFW e.g. or disables the assumed-temp option for contaminated rwys....
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: N/A
Posts: 167
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Old geezer
You would do well (and we would benefit) if you were to follow your own advice - please make all future PPRUNE contributions by hand written letter only.
By all means continue with as many cigars as you can manage in a day - my sympathies to your FO who must be choking on all the smug that surrounds you.
You would do well (and we would benefit) if you were to follow your own advice - please make all future PPRUNE contributions by hand written letter only.
By all means continue with as many cigars as you can manage in a day - my sympathies to your FO who must be choking on all the smug that surrounds you.
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Arizona USA
Posts: 8,571
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Oh - and nobody ever made a mistake with the old 'D' and 'X' graphs then?
However, we use individual specific runway analysis charts, optimized for the most favorable flap/slat setting and thrust.
All that is needed is to be able to read same...not a difficult task.
About the cuban...I am surrounded by smokers, so....I join in, and have done so for many years.
Cigars only, however.
All in the FD, of course.
The CC usually retreat to the lower galley.
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Sunrise Senior Living
Posts: 1,338
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
411A -
Yes, I remember those too - RTOTs we called them. They were fine as far as they went, but, as I'm sure you are aware, the Laptop does so much more and much more quickly such as App/Clb gradients when you suddenly need them, contaminated R/w perf which, I recall, was fun with RTOTs. And all this with accuracy that means your assumed temp is always as high as possible for engine life.
I would not try to teach you perf - I suspect we are of similar ages and have both been through the dark ages of performance to where we are now. The laptop has its merits as long as it is treated as a tool to which slavish obedience is not necessarily the right answer. Eg you don't have to accept its offering of the optimum flap setting, you can tell it what to do, but to do that you need a fundamental understanding which has sometimes faded in some folks !!
On the smoking front, in the C!30 in days gone by, the FD was the only place where smoking was allowed and so there was a constant queue of grunts/squaddies/sailors/airmen waiting their turn for a FD 'visit'!! After 7hrs+ it did get a bit much.
Cheers
mcdhu
Yes, I remember those too - RTOTs we called them. They were fine as far as they went, but, as I'm sure you are aware, the Laptop does so much more and much more quickly such as App/Clb gradients when you suddenly need them, contaminated R/w perf which, I recall, was fun with RTOTs. And all this with accuracy that means your assumed temp is always as high as possible for engine life.
I would not try to teach you perf - I suspect we are of similar ages and have both been through the dark ages of performance to where we are now. The laptop has its merits as long as it is treated as a tool to which slavish obedience is not necessarily the right answer. Eg you don't have to accept its offering of the optimum flap setting, you can tell it what to do, but to do that you need a fundamental understanding which has sometimes faded in some folks !!
On the smoking front, in the C!30 in days gone by, the FD was the only place where smoking was allowed and so there was a constant queue of grunts/squaddies/sailors/airmen waiting their turn for a FD 'visit'!! After 7hrs+ it did get a bit much.
Cheers
mcdhu
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Arizona USA
Posts: 8,571
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The laptop has its merits as long as it is treated as a tool to which slavish obedience is not necessarily the right answer.
Nope, it is not, in some cases....as the folks in MEL found out.
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: USA
Posts: 242
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
...so reading between the lines this Toughbook sounds like a tool that might well be used to remove ALL paper from the F/D at some point in the future? Be cheaper than a class II EFB! 
Moderator
Laptops are fine and the ToughBook is fine - I use one for FDR downloads and analysis.
Comments -
(a) there is no a priori salvation arising from the purgatory of running AFM calculations manually (although those of us who are proficient in the skill possibly do tend to have a lend of ourselves from time to time ... as they say, legends in our own minds)
far more importantly,
(b) the laptop can do the optimisation but how do the Disciples of the Laptop satisfy themselves that the obstacle data (outside the aerodrome survey areas) is kosher ? For, if it's not, then all the laptop is doing is processing GIGO to a much higher level of accuracy that we can do with the AFM charts ... but highly accurate garbage is still, nonetheless, garbage.
Comments -
(a) there is no a priori salvation arising from the purgatory of running AFM calculations manually (although those of us who are proficient in the skill possibly do tend to have a lend of ourselves from time to time ... as they say, legends in our own minds)
far more importantly,
(b) the laptop can do the optimisation but how do the Disciples of the Laptop satisfy themselves that the obstacle data (outside the aerodrome survey areas) is kosher ? For, if it's not, then all the laptop is doing is processing GIGO to a much higher level of accuracy that we can do with the AFM charts ... but highly accurate garbage is still, nonetheless, garbage.
