A320 vs 319&321 autoland limitation FCOM notes
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 32
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A320 vs 319&321 autoland limitation FCOM notes
There is this reference in our company's SOPs on CAT 2/3 procedures which are extracts from the FCOMs which are bugging me because there is a statement which is applicable for the 319/321 but is missing for the 320. To be specific here is the statement pasted :
''During automatic rollout with one engine inoperative or one thrust reverser inoperative, the flight crew can use the remaining thrust reverser, provided that: Only IDLE reverse thrust is used''
the above statement is valid for the A319 and A321 . the same statement is missing for the A320 ( in every revision )
So i take it that on automatic roll-out with a 320 you can use the remaining reverser in full reverse. but if the assumption is correct , it doesn't make sense for the 320 to be exempted from this restriction.
Anyone happen to came across the explanation ?
''During automatic rollout with one engine inoperative or one thrust reverser inoperative, the flight crew can use the remaining thrust reverser, provided that: Only IDLE reverse thrust is used''
the above statement is valid for the A319 and A321 . the same statement is missing for the A320 ( in every revision )
So i take it that on automatic roll-out with a 320 you can use the remaining reverser in full reverse. but if the assumption is correct , it doesn't make sense for the 320 to be exempted from this restriction.
Anyone happen to came across the explanation ?
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: My views - Not my employer!
Posts: 1,031
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I recon -
Simply cost of testing vs benefit.
Max autoland capability single engine is cat 3A. Hence you can autoland it and then manually control the roll out. As such if you NEED to use full reverse, you can do so without any penalty on minimum RVR.
If you don't need to use full reverse then you can leave in the autopilot for the roll out.
As there is no operational benefit to Airbus certifying the rollout with full reverse why would they? Hence the limitation which they probably did test with the A320.
***Only my best guess though!***
Simply cost of testing vs benefit.
Max autoland capability single engine is cat 3A. Hence you can autoland it and then manually control the roll out. As such if you NEED to use full reverse, you can do so without any penalty on minimum RVR.
If you don't need to use full reverse then you can leave in the autopilot for the roll out.
As there is no operational benefit to Airbus certifying the rollout with full reverse why would they? Hence the limitation which they probably did test with the A320.
***Only my best guess though!***
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 32
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
i wouldn't think that certifying the A319/321 in those conditions that much of a big deal . if the 320 can do it most certainly goes that the 321 can do it as well . (the roll out guidance system will move the rudder to try to keep the aircraft on center line as it tracks the localizer signal. if the 320's rudder can oppose the asymmetric reverse then it should be even easier for the 321 whose moment arm is longer , therefore more effective rudder )
