A320f low-cost operations with no BRK FANS
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Having a margarita on the beach
Posts: 2,423
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A320f low-cost operations with no BRK FANS
Hi peeps,
looking for some feedback from low cost / quick turn arounds operator during daily ops with no brake fans, especially summer time criticalities and recommended best practices.
Thanks !
looking for some feedback from low cost / quick turn arounds operator during daily ops with no brake fans, especially summer time criticalities and recommended best practices.
Thanks !
MEL Ops procedures 32-07-01 has some very conservative brake cooling graphs.
Plan on using Full Flap, and Full Reverse if you are trying to keep the temperatures down.
Plan on using Full Flap, and Full Reverse if you are trying to keep the temperatures down.
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Mordor
Posts: 336
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have flown ops like that and very rarely had any issues. 30 minute turnarounds are normally sufficient to cool the brakes below 300deg for takeoff. No special procedures required unless heavy/tailwind etc.
One only had to be careful in high temps/long taxi out/ downhill taxi. Places that could cause problems were eg. MAD (long taxi, hot) and LJU (long-ish downhill taxi out, requiring several brake applications on the way).
All in all, however, non-issue in 95% cases.
One only had to be careful in high temps/long taxi out/ downhill taxi. Places that could cause problems were eg. MAD (long taxi, hot) and LJU (long-ish downhill taxi out, requiring several brake applications on the way).
All in all, however, non-issue in 95% cases.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Having a margarita on the beach
Posts: 2,423
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have flown ops like that and very rarely had any issues. 30 minute turnarounds are normally sufficient to cool the brakes below 300deg for takeoff. No special procedures required unless heavy/tailwind etc.
One only had to be careful in high temps/long taxi out/ downhill taxi. Places that could cause problems were eg. MAD (long taxi, hot) and LJU (long-ish downhill taxi out, requiring several brake applications on the way).
All in all, however, non-issue in 95% cases.
One only had to be careful in high temps/long taxi out/ downhill taxi. Places that could cause problems were eg. MAD (long taxi, hot) and LJU (long-ish downhill taxi out, requiring several brake applications on the way).
All in all, however, non-issue in 95% cases.
Only half a speed-brake
CFM I do not find that much difference, for IAE it is seriously noticeable. So non-issue, even the REV seem to give more pull. Would definitely not bother SETO for brake temps, but admittedly I have never been trained to like the procedure anyway.
Dropping the gear early to increase cooling before landing? No. Just good taxi planning and gentle footwork. Alternating L/R brake use is not worth mentioning to you, neither is the V(lo)ret trap.
Personal habit is no ABRK and then MAN only below 100 kts, one good squeeze down to vacating speed. Have no way of knowing the benefit, if any.
Somewhat contrary to the above: Out of HRG at OAT 36+ where the taxi is long, leaving the stand above 240° would be a dead end unless seriously windy. From close to 300 the brakes would cool down only very reluctantly when stopped. The lower fuel weight will be your advantage.
Dropping the gear early to increase cooling before landing? No. Just good taxi planning and gentle footwork. Alternating L/R brake use is not worth mentioning to you, neither is the V(lo)ret trap.
Personal habit is no ABRK and then MAN only below 100 kts, one good squeeze down to vacating speed. Have no way of knowing the benefit, if any.
Somewhat contrary to the above: Out of HRG at OAT 36+ where the taxi is long, leaving the stand above 240° would be a dead end unless seriously windy. From close to 300 the brakes would cool down only very reluctantly when stopped. The lower fuel weight will be your advantage.
Last edited by FlightDetent; 8th Jun 2019 at 17:44.
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: in the sky allways
Posts: 65
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If it's a CFM it's rarely a problem because the engine idle is low and one does not have to use the brakes often unlike the IAE.... in any case land using Max reverse so that 30 min ground tome is good enough..if it's a short sector leave the gear down for a few minutes and take it down early if required...piece of cake
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Mordor
Posts: 336
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Done that with IAE engines and LO BRK/idle REV normally did the trick - unless there was significant tailwind, or other considerations.
MED BRK normally require MAX Rev, but again, if the airplane is light, and/or there is some headwind, one could get away with Idle REV.
One thing to to remember is keep the parking brake released on turnaround, even if there’s no Brakes Hot ECAM - it helps cool the brakes. All in all, non-event.
Actually found out that brake brake temp was a bigger issue on the A333, even though the turnaround times are longer. At high landing weights and/or with tailwind, the brakes can get hot and take much longer to cool - guess the heat sink is larger.
As a side note, I have recently moved from the Bus to the 787 and fly both 788 and 789. On the 788 the brake temps tend to get high and full reverse is normally needed to keep them reasonable. OTOH, on the 789, even though it’s heavier and has even higher approach speeds, the brake temps rarely budge at all - when we got the first -9, we suspected the brake temp indicators were inop
Apparently, however, the -9 was ordered with a different type of brakes...
BTW, does any one know how Boeing brake temp scale translates to actual temperatures? i.e. if the gauge shows eg. 5.0, how many degrees is it?
MED BRK normally require MAX Rev, but again, if the airplane is light, and/or there is some headwind, one could get away with Idle REV.
One thing to to remember is keep the parking brake released on turnaround, even if there’s no Brakes Hot ECAM - it helps cool the brakes. All in all, non-event.
Actually found out that brake brake temp was a bigger issue on the A333, even though the turnaround times are longer. At high landing weights and/or with tailwind, the brakes can get hot and take much longer to cool - guess the heat sink is larger.
As a side note, I have recently moved from the Bus to the 787 and fly both 788 and 789. On the 788 the brake temps tend to get high and full reverse is normally needed to keep them reasonable. OTOH, on the 789, even though it’s heavier and has even higher approach speeds, the brake temps rarely budge at all - when we got the first -9, we suspected the brake temp indicators were inop
Apparently, however, the -9 was ordered with a different type of brakes...BTW, does any one know how Boeing brake temp scale translates to actual temperatures? i.e. if the gauge shows eg. 5.0, how many degrees is it?
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Somewhere over the rainbow
Posts: 946
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Talking about brake fans:
Did you guys notice that on the NEO, they removed the recommendations to delay the use of brake fans selection to 5 min after landing.
Now it’s written:
This is from FCOM-PRO-NOR-SOP-AFTER LANDING.
But only applicable to the NEOs... But I’m pretty sure it’s the exact same brakes as the CEOs.
I noticed the NEOs FCOM has some little extra notes that the CEOs don’t have.
Like the RCDR GND CTL pb-sw that revert to AUTO in the case of electrical transient between EXT PWR and APU GEN is applicable to CEOs and NEOs but on the CEOs FCOM no mention about it.
Did you guys notice that on the NEO, they removed the recommendations to delay the use of brake fans selection to 5 min after landing.
Now it’s written:
Brake fans selection may be performed once the aircraft has cleared the runway.
Reason for change:
Removal of the recommendation to delay the selection of the brake fans. Delaying selection of the brake fans after landing has not proved to efficiently prevent brake oxidation. Furthermore, the removal of this recommendation provides flexibility for the flight crew to manage brake temperature.
Removal of the recommendation to delay the selection of the brake fans. Delaying selection of the brake fans after landing has not proved to efficiently prevent brake oxidation. Furthermore, the removal of this recommendation provides flexibility for the flight crew to manage brake temperature.
But only applicable to the NEOs... But I’m pretty sure it’s the exact same brakes as the CEOs.
I noticed the NEOs FCOM has some little extra notes that the CEOs don’t have.
Like the RCDR GND CTL pb-sw that revert to AUTO in the case of electrical transient between EXT PWR and APU GEN is applicable to CEOs and NEOs but on the CEOs FCOM no mention about it.
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Canada
Posts: 612
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
With regard to braking techniques, there are a few choices. Would like to know if anyone here could shed light on their effect on temperature
1. Brake pressure vs Length of application
One could use lighter but longer braking applications vs. shorter but harder braking to slow down to the same speed
2. Higer vs Lower Max Taxi speed:
One could limit max taxi speed below max so that braking is more frequent but potentially with shorter applications with less force
3. Limiting minimum taxi speed
After reaching max taxi speed one could choose to use frequent light braking to slow down less than one normally would overall effect is less braking time but more frequent applications
Overall it seems that the choice comes down to shorter more frequent braking vs. Longer less frequent braking and which one is better for reducing brake energy
1. Brake pressure vs Length of application
One could use lighter but longer braking applications vs. shorter but harder braking to slow down to the same speed
2. Higer vs Lower Max Taxi speed:
One could limit max taxi speed below max so that braking is more frequent but potentially with shorter applications with less force
3. Limiting minimum taxi speed
After reaching max taxi speed one could choose to use frequent light braking to slow down less than one normally would overall effect is less braking time but more frequent applications
Overall it seems that the choice comes down to shorter more frequent braking vs. Longer less frequent braking and which one is better for reducing brake energy
Last edited by Airmann; 10th Jun 2019 at 11:07.
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: hot tub
Posts: 311
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Asia
Age: 49
Posts: 524
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I had no issues with 30 min turnarounds
The impact of one engine taxi is very noticeable on brake temp, also on fuel and time savings, letting go of engineer sooner,
I always check which brake is hotter before i use the brakes and keep them equilized.
most literature points to brake fans being detrimental to brake wear, it is disconcerting to come to the ramp and everyone has those noisy fans on with passengers walking around. I only use them on taxi out.
The impact of one engine taxi is very noticeable on brake temp, also on fuel and time savings, letting go of engineer sooner,
I always check which brake is hotter before i use the brakes and keep them equilized.
most literature points to brake fans being detrimental to brake wear, it is disconcerting to come to the ramp and everyone has those noisy fans on with passengers walking around. I only use them on taxi out.
Join Date: May 2018
Location: Germany
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Talking about brake fans:
Did you guys notice that on the NEO, they removed the recommendations to delay the use of brake fans selection to 5 min after landing.
Now it’s written:
This is from FCOM-PRO-NOR-SOP-AFTER LANDING.
But only applicable to the NEOs... But I’m pretty sure it’s the exact same brakes as the CEOs.
I noticed the NEOs FCOM has some little extra notes that the CEOs don’t have.
Like the RCDR GND CTL pb-sw that revert to AUTO in the case of electrical transient between EXT PWR and APU GEN is applicable to CEOs and NEOs but on the CEOs FCOM no mention about it.
Did you guys notice that on the NEO, they removed the recommendations to delay the use of brake fans selection to 5 min after landing.
Now it’s written:
This is from FCOM-PRO-NOR-SOP-AFTER LANDING.
But only applicable to the NEOs... But I’m pretty sure it’s the exact same brakes as the CEOs.
I noticed the NEOs FCOM has some little extra notes that the CEOs don’t have.
Like the RCDR GND CTL pb-sw that revert to AUTO in the case of electrical transient between EXT PWR and APU GEN is applicable to CEOs and NEOs but on the CEOs FCOM no mention about it.
Pineteam, is that original AI content or from your outfit's FCOM version? I looked it up but didn't find that the 5 minutes have been removed...also the explanation doesn't sound much like Airbus...
Do you have more info?
