Airbus reporting CI
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: 43N
Posts: 264
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Our SOP allows us to manage CI (16-120) to achieve an on time arrival. CI 0 is used if fuel is the over riding concern. Airbus reminds us to “SET MANAGED SPEED” at every phase of flight change so operating in SEL seems odd coming from a training department.
If one is crossing the pond at a fixed MACH I get flying selected. In every other situation I don’t understand some companies resistance to employing the aircraft a designed. I guess that makes the world interesting.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: USA
Posts: 2,515
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From an outsider's perspective (non Airbus and non autothrottle pilot), I'd guess "taboo." That uncomfortable feeling in the back of your mind that doing the thing, in light of how it's not usually done, especially with someone else watching, feels wrong to do as if it's against a rule even though no such rule exists (nor is it dictated by any considered prudence.... or even where prudence would say that it's actively counterproductive)
Kind of like how people will leave the FD up when they obviously have no intention of following it, (and there is no FD mode that will make it track what they intend to do) yet it just... feels wrong to turn off.
Kind of like how people will leave the FD up when they obviously have no intention of following it, (and there is no FD mode that will make it track what they intend to do) yet it just... feels wrong to turn off.
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Wanderlust
Posts: 3,406
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
. I just think that the technique mentioned above seems like it'd be a lot easier if you just turned off the AT.
I also disagree with the earlier poster who said that VS is smoother than CLB. That may be a holdover from another type, but my understanding from the latest Safety First article is that the airspeed info is filtered before being sent to the AP, so the pitch response is nice and smooth, even in bumpy air.
I also disagree with the earlier poster who said that VS is smoother than CLB. That may be a holdover from another type, but my understanding from the latest Safety First article is that the airspeed info is filtered before being sent to the AP, so the pitch response is nice and smooth, even in bumpy air.
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Somewhere over the rainbow
Posts: 946
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sonicbum it’s just pilot techniques. As long as your company allows you and it’s not against the manufacturer recommandations where is the issue. Of course you could do the whole flight in managed and autoland. That’s the safest and easiest way.. But we are pilots aren’t we?
Saying that I don’t really think keeping A/Thr off is a good idea as you have no protection against overspeed. It’s easier to just wind up the speed target few knots below Vmax; At least the engines will spool down if you inadvertently fly too fast.
Saying that I don’t really think keeping A/Thr off is a good idea as you have no protection against overspeed. It’s easier to just wind up the speed target few knots below Vmax; At least the engines will spool down if you inadvertently fly too fast.
Last edited by pineteam; 29th Jul 2019 at 11:01. Reason: typo
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: USA
Posts: 2,515
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Check airman, as you can see one person feels VS is better than Climb, you feel it will be even better with ATHR off. It doesn't end there. The tinkering will carry on. But manufacturer who designed the aircraft have more qualified people what do they feel is the most important. If you don't like what they want you to do tell them. As you mentioned about filtering of speed there was no way of knowing that for a line pilot unless the manufacturer told them. So line pilots should follow recommended procedures and not develop their own. Definitely not in Airbus. If you feel something doesn't work or you have better idea than Airbus discuss with them. Toulouse oversees everything from Argentina to Korea(longer way). When someone wants to do it differently in Korea may be someone already had an incident doing it in Argentina. So let them tell you. Every tinkering may not be as dangerous as QZ8501 but better be safe than sorry. There are climb speeds no climb vertical speeds. VS can definitely be used as a short term intervention for whatever but not as a standard practice.
My second point about the filtering was just to point out that the common argument of "OP CLB isn't smooth" is not really true on an A320. I flew an airplane where the equivalent of OP CLB could really get twitchy in bumpy air, but the Airbus AP is a fair bit more sophisticated than that AP.
Personally, I stick to OP CLB and CLB. Easy, smooth, and safe. The odd time it levels off in a 321, I haven't had ATC complain (they're well aware of our climb performance when heavy), and temporarily reducing the mach is my preferred technique.
Only half a speed-brake
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Wanderlust
Posts: 3,406
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think you missed the points I was trying to make
The A340 IMHO is kind of a rollercoaster getting close to max, even opt alt.
Chasing speed by large pitch movements.
V/S of, let's say 500 ft/min, serves the problem.
And yes, my airline likes it
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: USA
Posts: 2,515
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No! I didn't. I am against the whole concept of doing something not written in the book whether pineteam way or your suggested way. All it takes to climb is single push or pull on the button. No need to find a complicated way. The system is supposed to maintaine the speed by varying the pitch and it does so.
My suggested way is with OP CLB. What I'm saying is IF i opted to maintain a specific VS with climb thrust, I'd do it with the AT off. I wouldn't employ pineteam's technique, but it's not against SOP (at my company) and isn't inherently unsafe. I can't criticize him any more than I can criticize somebody for intercepting a localizer in NAV.
In my outfit it's a no no to intercept the LOC in NAV.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: USA
Posts: 2,515
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: USA
Posts: 2,515
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Wanderlust
Posts: 3,406
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ha! What's the reasoning behind that? How do you deal with the fuzzy signal far out? TRK mode?
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Wanderlust
Posts: 3,406
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My suggested way is with OP CLB. What I'm saying is IF i opted to maintain a specific VS with climb thrust, I'd do it with the AT off. I wouldn't employ pineteam's technique, but it's not against SOP (at my company) and isn't inherently unsafe. I can't criticize him any more than I can criticize somebody for intercepting a localizer in NAV.
Last edited by vilas; 30th Jul 2019 at 03:14.
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Somewhere over the rainbow
Posts: 946
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hahaha! I know right! It’s unacceptable to have fun flying nowadays!
Flying the NEO today!! Woop woop!! Fun alert!! xD
Ok nuff off topic for me! CI 25 for us. They don’t monitor it or at least they don’t care if we play with it. I never change it except temporary to check CI 0 to know the VY speed. I’m flying the speed I’m getting paid for cause I’m a good professional
Flying the NEO today!! Woop woop!! Fun alert!! xD
Ok nuff off topic for me! CI 25 for us. They don’t monitor it or at least they don’t care if we play with it. I never change it except temporary to check CI 0 to know the VY speed. I’m flying the speed I’m getting paid for cause I’m a good professional