[A320/330] Rejected takeoff above 100 kt

[sonicbum]

Hello folks,

for the A320, above 100 kt, some of the reasons that should lead to a RTO are include 5 amber cautions, 1 related to FCTL (sidestick fault) and 4 related to ENG. For the A330 the FCOM mentions "all cautions" related to ENG or FCTL. Is there any particular reason for that ? As far as I could see the A320 and A330 have almost the same inhibition of cautions in phase 4 (high energy) related to ENG and F/CTL.

Cheers.

[Willie Nelson]

While it is not specifically stated, a rejected takeoff should be conducted for any caution that you receive while above 100 knots during takeoff.

Cautions such as "Flex temperature not set" should have been addressed in the low speed regime.

The difference between the 330 and 320 RTO discussion in FCOM (not being one to fly the 330 myself) might be due to the 330 being designed and built later and therefore possibly missing out on some of the "franglish" translations that went somewhat awry on the 320.

There are quite a few "franglish" misinterpretations that have never been addressed in the FCOM, however the whole point of the inhibition phase is that if you cannot see it at that time then it is not considered a priority in regards safety of flight.

Hope that helps.

[sonicbum]

Hi Willie,

thanks for your input, that was my idea as well

Cheers.

[old rope]

Spot on Willie, the only alerts you will hear above 100kts are those that will affect the aircrafts ability to fly. Many significant failures are inhibited above 80kts (dual hydraulic, emerg elec cofig) because these most likely will affect stopping ability.

As a basic principle I follow your advise, ANY alerts above 100 - STOP. But then the converse applies also, after 100, if there is no ecam, no matter what you are sensing, it is probably best to continue the take off as your ability to stop the aircraft may be degraded.

My personal guidelines only, each must make his own position known clearly to himself

[safelife]

The other way round might be the easier approach.
You might not want to abort for that NAV FM/GPS POS DISAGREE.
Every other caution will likely call for an abortion.

[old rope]

Hi Safelife, i think you will find the position disagree ecam is inhibited during phase 4, that being 80kts to lift off.

The items listed by Airbus to stop for are pretty well the only Ecams you will see above 80kts, the intent being to make decision making an easier process. As I mentioned in my earlier post, it is surprising just how many significant failures are inhibited during phase 4 and/or phase 5 simply because they don't prevent the aircraft from flying, but they could prevent the aircraft from stopping in the required distance.

Again, this is my personal take on the process, your company SOPs and Training Dept may offer differing advice

Cheers

[sonicbum]

Thanks to all of you for your inputs which make great sense A little doubt again : as old rope says many significant failures that could affect your ability to stop in the high energy regime are inhibited, like the emer elec conf. I had it once in the sim, during the takeoff roll, set up as loss of AC BUS 1 and 2 simultaneously around 110 kt (V1 was around 130 kt ) with a wet runway. Master warning sounded and I instinctively thought about engine fire and rejected... guess what I barely made it. With a higher takeoff weight and closer to V1 in such a situation one would easily end up stoping abeam the supermarket nearby the airport. As per the FCOM the warning should be inhibited in phase 4, is it a SIM glitch ?

[Rocket3837]

Sonicbum

As per FCOM the warning is inhibited in phase 4 but what made you reject the takeoff could be the sudden loss of instruments and lights and other things. Then as the aircraft decelerates below 80 kts it re-enters flight phase 3 where the warning is not inhibited and thus appears on ECAM.

I can remember doing the same fault in the sim some time ago which resulted in RTO and the warning was on ECAM - speed V1-10.

I think I will do it again on next opportunity. Thanks

[Metro man]

Side stick failure will display on the ECAM but not give an aural warning which could be interesting when it comes to rotation.

[Denti]

Yup, one of the more interesting scenarios in the SIM. However, it was kinda interesting that the cross on the PFD still moved, just not the plane, simulator glitch?

[sonicbum]

Hi gents and thanks a lot for your feedback. I'm pretty sure that I rejected because of a master warning at that time but that was a long time back and probably that couldn't be the case. Good point to try it again

[vilas]

Side stick failure or not if at second rotate call PF does not rotate PNF should take over with announcement and do it as a crew incapacitation case. On PF's part if unable to rotate he should hand over controls.

[hawk37]

I would be really interested to know, as a non airline pilot, whether Airbus says you should abort up to V1 for an engine fire indication or thrust reverser unlock indication. This would be without any noticeable yaw, the scenario I thinking here is for a false indication.

Sorry for the thread drift

Do you abort?

[old rope]

Surprisingly Rev Unlock is inhibited from 80kts till lift off. So the instant the mains leave the ground the crew will get a very attention getting ECAM at a very attention getting part of the flight!!!

As for the false fire warning....there is no such thing as a false fire warning, they are taken as very real fire warnings until somebody with a big hose in hand tells you otherwise. So the short answer is you STOP

[MD83FO]

Please correct me,

Above 100 kt, the FCOM wants us to reject for:

Any Red ECAM

(not inhibited)
ENG 1 (2) FIRE
APU FIRE
CONFIG SLATS (FLAPS) NOT IN TO CONFIG
CONFIG SPD BRK NOT RETRACTED
CONFIG PITCH TRIM NOT IN TO RANGE
CONFIG RUD TRIM NOT IN TO RANGE
CONFIG L ( R) SIDESTICK FAULT (by takeover)
L + R ELEVATOR FAULT
CONFIG PARK BRK ON
ENG DUAL FAILURE


and these Cautions:

(not inhibited)
L ( R) SIDESTICK FAULT
ENG 1 (2) FAIL
ENG 1 (2) REVERSER FAULT (Inhibited in my FCOM)
ENG 1 (2) REVERSE UNLOCKED (if thrust set to idle)
ENG THR LEVER FAULT (resolver fault)

these are the remaining Cautions that are not inhibited and are not mentioned.

DUAL INPUT every 5 seconds(aural)
FWC 1 + 2 FAULT(no warning)
ENG 1 (2) SHUT DOWN(master or fire pushbutton off)

why is the FCOM punctual about rejecting for specific warnings after 100 kt when any warning will do?


good day colleagues.

[Goldenrivett]

In summary this tells us that any warning or caution above 100 kt warrants and RTO.

Not necessarily.
e.g. Engine Low Oil Pressure is only inhibited in phases 1 and 10.
see page 8 of http://www.skybrary.aero/bookshelf/books/197.pdf

"It is strongly recommended that recurrent training program, upgrading to Captain
course and Line Oriented Flight Training (LOFT) scenarios, also include simulator
exercises that require the flight crew to detect and identify abnormal situations that are
not the result of a clear and distinct loss of thrust, such as:
Engine stall accompanied with loud bang (without loss of thrust)
Tire burst
Traffic conflicts (“Abort” ATC instruction)
Engine oil low pressure close to V1.

The following items should be discussed during recurrent training:
Nose gear vibration, opening of a sliding window, … should not lead to rejecting
a takeoff at high speeds (above 100 kt)"

Please see Fig 2 on Page 6.
It's not all black and white.

[FlightDetent]

Hi everyone;

I see the quote about low oil pressure is verbatim from Airbus material. In my experience they have been often mis-interpreted, mis-understood many times too, but rarely, if ever(!), wrong. How do you feel about this one?

As a pilot, should you see an oil problem on the indicator approaching V1, is that a reason to reject?