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

A320 G+B hydraulic failure

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

A320 G+B hydraulic failure

Old 24th Jan 2024, 12:59
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jan 2024
Location: United Arab Emirates
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Grrr A320 G+B hydraulic failure

How is it better to put gear down at 200kts rather than after flaps 3 in the case of G+B hydraulic failure?, because how I see it is putting gear down after flaps 3 we will go into direct law after being trimmed by the THS, whereas configuring after 200kts with gear down means we will have to manually trim the aircraft each time for each flap.
7600pilot is offline  
Old 24th Jan 2024, 19:52
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Scotland
Posts: 891
Received 6 Likes on 2 Posts
There is no official Airbus source doc on this one but it’s due to the aircraft handling qualities in that configuration in Alternate law below 200 kts being determined by Airbus Flight Test to be sub-optimal and wishing to get the aircraft into Direct Law to avoid flying in alternate law in that speed/configuration regime.
Jwscud is offline  
Old 25th Jan 2024, 16:32
  #3 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jan 2024
Location: United Arab Emirates
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Doesn’t make a lot of sense, but I guess since they tested it has to be the safest option. Thank you
7600pilot is offline  
Old 25th Jan 2024, 18:55
  #4 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2022
Location: Italy
Posts: 170
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I suppose because there is only one elevator remaining and you have more control in direct law.
enzino is offline  
Old 28th Jan 2024, 10:09
  #5 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Location, Location
Posts: 733
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by 7600pilot
How is it better to put gear down at 200kts rather than after flaps 3 in the case of G+B hydraulic failure?, because how I see it is putting gear down after flaps 3 we will go into direct law after being trimmed by the THS, whereas configuring after 200kts with gear down means we will have to manually trim the aircraft each time for each flap.
"Extend the landing gear at 200 kt to revert sooner in direct law. This provides, below 200 kt, a better pitch control than in alternate law with one elevator lost and all slats lost."

The above is the Level 2 note pulled straight from the A320/321 FCOM.
Mr Good Cat is offline  
Old 28th Jan 2024, 10:53
  #6 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Europe
Posts: 3,037
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
What exactly is the problem with manually trimming the aircraft from 200kts down to Vapp? None whatsoever for a half competent pilot!

I think you are confusing this scenario with the G+Y failure where there is actually a very good reason to be in trim before you lower the landing gear. With no G+Y pressure you loose the stabilizer trim so you want the side stick to be centered at Vapp before lowering the gear and activating direct law.
PENKO is offline  
Old 28th Jan 2024, 12:25
  #7 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Wanderlust
Posts: 3,403
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by 7600pilot
How is it better to put gear down at 200kts rather than after flaps 3 in the case of G+B hydraulic failure?, because how I see it is putting gear down after flaps 3 we will go into direct law after being trimmed by the THS, whereas configuring after 200kts with gear down means we will have to manually trim the aircraft each time for each flap.
In B+G elevator trim is available so trimming in direct law is not an issue unlike G+Y where stab is frozen at last position and you want elevators at Vapp. So you get to Vapp then put gear down. Here there's different problem.
Lowering gear creates lot of drag. With B+G only half elevator is available so it has to move double the amount to create required g. Also elevator movement is restricted to prevent damage from hitting stops. Higher speed creates more aerodynamic force makes half elevator more effective. Lower speed requires large stick movement in pitch which triggers stall warning.

Last edited by vilas; 29th Jan 2024 at 06:56.
vilas is offline  
Old 29th Jan 2024, 16:19
  #8 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2023
Location: Aachen
Posts: 34
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by vilas
Also elevator movement is restricted to prevent damage from hitting stops.
Elevator travel is restricted with speed in single elevator operation: Simmilar to rudder travel limiting. Max authority is regained at 130knts. Doesn't matter if in direct law or alternate... Problem here are high torques at the rear of the aircraft...
Sim25 is offline  
Old 29th Jan 2024, 18:03
  #9 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Up north
Posts: 1,657
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by PENKO
What exactly is the problem with manually trimming the aircraft from 200kts down to Vapp? None whatsoever for a half competent pilot!

I think you are confusing this scenario with the G+Y failure where there is actually a very good reason to be in trim before you lower the landing gear. With no G+Y pressure you loose the stabilizer trim so you want the side stick to be centered at Vapp before lowering the gear and activating direct law.
Yes, but as quoted already above the FCOM clearly states “Extend the landing gear at 200 kt to revert sooner in direct law. This provides, below 200 kt, a better pitch control than in alternate law with one elevator lost and all slats lost.” for G+Y SYS LO PR.
In this case you want to “revert sooner to direct law” for increased pitch stability.

In the case of G+Y, as you stated, you delay gear extension in order to keep auto-trim, through the elevators in ALT law, until you are fully configured (F3) and at Vapp and then put the gear down, revert to direct law and lose auto-trim.

Two different procedures for two different reasons.

CP



CaptainProp is offline  
Old 30th Jan 2024, 09:32
  #10 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Europe
Posts: 3,037
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
CaptainProp, what are you trying to say? I don’t think we disagree..
PENKO is offline  
Old 30th Jan 2024, 19:06
  #11 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Up north
Posts: 1,657
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Ah that could very well be I guess my point was, there are good reasons for both of these procedures.

CP
CaptainProp is offline  
Old 31st Jan 2024, 16:22
  #12 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Wanderlust
Posts: 3,403
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I forgot to mention that in G+B the available half elevator being one side of longitudinal axis when applied imparts rotary motion. In alternate law side stick commands g which indirectly deflects the elevator it's difficult to accurately anticipate this effect. By moving to direct law pilot directly moves elevator so is in better position to judge and control this torsional effect. That's why it's recommended to move to direct law early. Actually even in G+Y also, flap3 is not important because you only have slat which doesn't have 3 position but getting speed to Vapp before gear is important because that positions the elevator for Vapp with stick neutral.
vilas is offline  
Old 2nd Feb 2024, 15:33
  #13 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jan 2024
Location: United Arab Emirates
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Thank you guys for the explanation. Makes much more sense now.
7600pilot is offline  
Old 14th Feb 2024, 15:48
  #14 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Old europe
Posts: 22
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Also a good reference is FCTM PR-AEP-HYD P1 to P4.
CHAPARRAL is offline  
Old 7th Mar 2024, 11:59
  #15 (permalink)  
RMC
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Sutton
Posts: 560
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Interesting excercise in the sim. In reality the hydraulic system is the most reliable on the aircraft. Complete Failure of one system is incredibly rare failure of two at the same time is only likely to happen with a catastrophic/ uncontained engine failure. Out of interest, how many have lost one hyd system (and what caused it)?
RMC is offline  
Old 7th Mar 2024, 12:24
  #16 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: lgw
Posts: 173
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Lost blue in the cruise with pump failure, lost all green fluid on undercarriage retraction through failure of a seal on undercarriage retraction system. So it does happen.
factanonverba is offline  
Old 7th Mar 2024, 14:15
  #17 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Village of Santo Poco
Posts: 869
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by RMC
Interesting excercise in the sim. In reality the hydraulic system is the most reliable on the aircraft. Complete Failure of one system is incredibly rare failure of two at the same time is only likely to happen with a catastrophic/ uncontained engine failure. Out of interest, how many have lost one hyd system (and what caused it)?
I lost the blue system once, due to a leak that MX was unable to find. 10+ years on the A320 now.
Amadis of Gaul is offline  
Old 7th Mar 2024, 14:16
  #18 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Bed
Posts: 336
Received 8 Likes on 5 Posts
Blue system. Leak inside the pump itself and slowly lost contents. Turned it off and had sufficient for landing
sangiovese. is offline  
Old 7th Mar 2024, 15:04
  #19 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Dorset UK
Age: 70
Posts: 1,895
Likes: 0
Received 15 Likes on 12 Posts
Earlier airbus, A300, similar systems. Had Yellow system Servo Jam warning, so selected Servos off, then had Green Hyd Lo and turned off both pumps. Landed with Blue for Flying Controls, gear Free Fall, still had flaps and slats, braking was on alternate but still with anti-skid, no steering so we stopped on the runway and got towed to stand. Cargo ops. so no big deal really.
Two hours later, hyd leak fixed, (filter seal), servo fault was some computer glitch that re-set, then we were on our way again.
dixi188 is offline  
Old 7th Mar 2024, 18:35
  #20 (permalink)  
RMC
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Sutton
Posts: 560
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
My bad, should have said A320 onwards. Airbus had to massively improve its “Mean Time Between Failures” with FBW even the way the pipes were joined was revolutionised (Permaswage joints rather than nut and union). During manufacture we proof pressure tested all Airbus hydraulic systems to 5,200 PSIG and only once in ten years had a leak ( which coincidentally was what A of G has had in service) Looking at the experienced posters above can we agree an A320 and subs a single system is unlikely to fail more than once every ten years)?
RMC 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


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

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.