closing the thrust levers too quickly at high altitude?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: sa
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
closing the thrust levers too quickly at high altitude?
Hello,
some time ago I had a captain complaining that I closed the thrust levers too quickly at relatively high altitude [3 seconds maybe - 25000ft - 737 NG - cfm 56-7].
Never found any limitation or best practice about this topic in the manuals...And I think that the eec would regulate the fuel flow to allow the engine to stay within acceptable parameters!
Excluding pax comfort and just from a technical point of view: do you have anything to share guys?
ps: think the last time you did the emergency descent in the sim.. were you gentle with the thrust levers?
some time ago I had a captain complaining that I closed the thrust levers too quickly at relatively high altitude [3 seconds maybe - 25000ft - 737 NG - cfm 56-7].
Never found any limitation or best practice about this topic in the manuals...And I think that the eec would regulate the fuel flow to allow the engine to stay within acceptable parameters!
Excluding pax comfort and just from a technical point of view: do you have anything to share guys?
ps: think the last time you did the emergency descent in the sim.. were you gentle with the thrust levers?
Some years ago CFM came and gave a presentation to the trainers and tech pilots where I work, the advice they gave was that under normal circumstances the thrust levers should be moved at a rate no quicker than the auto throttle system moves them.
I have had DEEC engines surge with over-enthusiastic thrust lever closures at altitude.
The surge resulted in a BANG as the engine slowed.
Do you really want to be telling the FADEC "This is an emergency! I need minimum power as soon as you can do it!" - or do you want to ease the thrust lever back, effectively telling the FADEC "Hey, relax dude - this is a normal deceleration for descent."
Do you want to be training yourself to only be able to fly FADEC engines? .. or would you like to train yourself proper piloting techniques, so that you aren't reliant on computers correcting your poor flying?
(For those not as old as I am, DEEC = Digital Electronic Engine Control, a digital computer linked to a basic Mechanical Fuel Control - a "poor man's FADEC")
The surge resulted in a BANG as the engine slowed.
Do you really want to be telling the FADEC "This is an emergency! I need minimum power as soon as you can do it!" - or do you want to ease the thrust lever back, effectively telling the FADEC "Hey, relax dude - this is a normal deceleration for descent."
Do you want to be training yourself to only be able to fly FADEC engines? .. or would you like to train yourself proper piloting techniques, so that you aren't reliant on computers correcting your poor flying?
(For those not as old as I am, DEEC = Digital Electronic Engine Control, a digital computer linked to a basic Mechanical Fuel Control - a "poor man's FADEC")
Last edited by Checkboard; 10th Aug 2012 at 18:06.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: sa
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Do you want to be training yourself to only be able to fly FADEC engines? .. or would you like to train yourself proper piloting techniques, so that you aren't reliant on computers correcting your poor flying?
But I was trying to understand if there was also any technical limitation involved.
From the responses it seems to be allowed with no restrictions, even if it's not advisable in normal ops.. thanks guys!
I always tried to look after the engine as best I could, and that meant the power reduction to idle at TOPD was done quite slowly to let the temperatures change nice & smoothly.
It won't hurt the engine by chopping the throttle to idle but it can't help the longevity of them. (if that makes sense)
Same deal for when I used to fly little turboprops around - when taxiing in after landing I'd try to keep the power changes to a minimum so as to keep the temps as low as possible for as long as possible before shutdown.
It won't hurt the engine by chopping the throttle to idle but it can't help the longevity of them. (if that makes sense)
Same deal for when I used to fly little turboprops around - when taxiing in after landing I'd try to keep the power changes to a minimum so as to keep the temps as low as possible for as long as possible before shutdown.
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,186
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
But I was trying to understand if there was also any technical limitation involved.
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Home soon
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I remember my old Boeing instructor from Seattle saying at the flare he wanted a sharp cut and hear the sound of metal hitting metal as the thrust levers hit the stops. None of this slow cut business which only extended float and made no difference to engine handling.
However since the thrust lever angle being already low entering the flare area,a standard continuous reduction in thrust or an abrupt will achieve the same.
No need of slamming banging i think.
Any engine manufacturer that makes an engine today had better be sure it is impervious to throttle jams.
I don't mind an overt recommendation from an installer either way in a quest to fly the aircraft most effieciently, but if the engine breaks the engine guy is going to have to fix it.
It's not in the interest of safety to have pilots having these kind of questions in-flight
I don't mind an overt recommendation from an installer either way in a quest to fly the aircraft most effieciently, but if the engine breaks the engine guy is going to have to fix it.
It's not in the interest of safety to have pilots having these kind of questions in-flight
Facts are another matter. In a car if you wish to slow down you simply lift your foot from the accelerator pedal. There is no question if this should be done slowly and deliberately in order to let the engine revs run down for perceived `good` engine handling.
It's not about worrying about the mechanical parts so much as it is about controlling the high pressures within the engine, and preventing reverse flow under rapid deceleration, and possible flameout.
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Another airport hotel
Posts: 181
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I was told in early training it was to avoid shock cooling of the engine typically at TOD at high altitude. However, I thought this was piston engine stuff (cyliner damage, etc.)
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: In a far better place
Posts: 2,480
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No problems for the motors as the EECs take care of scheduling fuel inputs to the HMFC. However the PSRVs may not react to fast thrust changes thus causing bumps and discomfort.
Join Date: Jun 2000
Posts: 471
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Early on in my career I was told the very same thing ref thrust lever closing at altitude. The Instructor pilot explained that with the decrease in RPM also comes a change in exit guide vane angle so as to keep undisturbed flow thru the core. These were PW4056's and I think the FEGV's were scheduled with fuel muscle (happy to stand corrected) and were more suseptable to surging at alt than the RB211's that we also operated.
Perhaps this is where your answer lies.
Rgds
Perhaps this is where your answer lies.
Rgds
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: bumf*ck, idaho
Posts: 447
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What about a ULR flight where the engines have been stable at 750 odd degrees for 16 hours and thrust levers are abruptly closed...? That can't be good for any metal in my view.
me thinks that too much is being made of metal temperature changes.
These engines are tested within this environment (snap decels) and mostly vetted. The metal temp doesn't change as nearly as fast as the gas temp and the engine parts most susceptible to these gas temp changes are designed to be mostly impervious by virtue of not continuous hoops
These engines are tested within this environment (snap decels) and mostly vetted. The metal temp doesn't change as nearly as fast as the gas temp and the engine parts most susceptible to these gas temp changes are designed to be mostly impervious by virtue of not continuous hoops
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: In t'sky
Posts: 575
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
On the 737NG just because you command the engines to do something, does not mean they will respond instantly. You will see the "command sector" on the DU to reflect your input and the EEC's will then control the thrust retardation to avoid shock cooling or other unwanted consequences.
As the other posters allude, it is not a good habit to get into. I can't think of ANY situation where you would need to slam home the throttle levers, rather than slowly bringing them back. One day you will fly a type which may not have such good protection and it's good to learn sound operating practice now rather than later!
P.S. Apologies for thread bump didn't realise this was two weeks old!
As the other posters allude, it is not a good habit to get into. I can't think of ANY situation where you would need to slam home the throttle levers, rather than slowly bringing them back. One day you will fly a type which may not have such good protection and it's good to learn sound operating practice now rather than later!
P.S. Apologies for thread bump didn't realise this was two weeks old!
Last edited by MrHorgy; 27th Aug 2012 at 21:38. Reason: apologies..