Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Flight Deck Forums > Tech Log
Reload this Page >

737 Autobrake

Wikiposts
Search
Tech Log The very best in practical technical discussion on the web

737 Autobrake

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 27th Nov 2018, 13:58
  #21 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 265
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I think the OP’s point will be familiar to many NG operators.

Autobrake 3 is often not quite sufficient, and Autobrake MAX is around DOUBLE Autobrake 3 and is quite unfriendly to the pax if not needed.

It would be nice if Boeing had implemented an Autobrake 4 on the 737NG.

But they couldn’t. For the same reason they couldn’t implement a lot of other nice things. Ask the FAA.
Derfred is offline  
Old 28th Nov 2018, 01:24
  #22 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Texas
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
At my company (SWA) we are not authorized to use AB1, not sure why. Also if we're using AB we have to use at least the minimum that provides a positive stopping margin based on landing performance data. So in some cases, KMDW in the summer for example, even dry the numbers will require AB Max which discourages most people from using them. I would think it would be prudent to use 3 or even 2 so there's no delay in applying brakes but without the aggressiveness of Max. Since 1 is so tame why not just make 1 equal to what 2 is now, same for 2 equal to current 3, have 3 be somewhere between current 3 and Max, and keep Max where it is now?
Sig229 is offline  
Old 28th Nov 2018, 07:48
  #23 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: The middle
Posts: 567
Likes: 0
Received 10 Likes on 4 Posts
Originally Posted by Sig229
At my company (SWA) we are not authorized to use AB1, not sure why. Also if we're using AB we have to use at least the minimum that provides a positive stopping margin based on landing performance data. So in some cases, KMDW in the summer for example, even dry the numbers will require AB Max which discourages most people from using them. I would think it would be prudent to use 3 or even 2 so there's no delay in applying brakes but without the aggressiveness of Max. Since 1 is so tame why not just make 1 equal to what 2 is now, same for 2 equal to current 3, have 3 be somewhere between current 3 and Max, and keep Max where it is now?
Auto brake one is such a low retardation that it is achieved by cycling the brakes on and off, which reduces the life of carbon brakes. Probably the reason they don’t want you to use it.

Despite my having unnecessarily being accused of some sort of “automation dependency” or similar rubbish by an earlier poster, if you only need auto rake one you may as well go with manual braking, or even no braking and reverse and just roll to a halt if the runway is long enough. Apparently, according to the same previous poster their is no need for professional pilots to refer to the brake cooling schedules, even if you have short turn arounds, as long as you have massaged your ego by turning the automatics off, so that should be no problem.
excrab is offline  
Old 28th Nov 2018, 13:11
  #24 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Australia
Posts: 4,188
Likes: 0
Received 14 Likes on 5 Posts
as long as you have massaged your ego by turning the automatics off, so that should be no problem.
Puerile attempt at humour..
Centaurus is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.