PPRuNe Forums

PPRuNe Forums (https://www.pprune.org/)
-   Tech Log (https://www.pprune.org/tech-log-15/)
-   -   Airbus oldy now a 737 newby………help! (https://www.pprune.org/tech-log/643430-airbus-oldy-now-737-newby-help.html)

oicur12.again 15th Nov 2021 17:03


Originally Posted by Denti (Post 11138824)
We had an auto callout of V1 on our 737s. It started at roughly V1 -3 kts so that it was finished by V1. Never heard that on the A320 though, is it available there as well?

Pretty much standard fit on late build 320/330, at least the ones I have flown. I suspect many operators dont pin the auto callout for various reasons. Fear of change is a big one!


Originally Posted by Uplinker (Post 11138924)
Doors with automatic girt bar engagement that does not require physically reaching down and clipping the girt bar in and out of brackets on the floor.

I must admit this is one of the more surprising things about the lack of progress made by Boeing when producing the 737.


Originally Posted by FlightDetent (Post 11139060)
This so-far unnamed operator sounds like a bunch of bright minds who might insist on blanking the VNAV button, dis-allowing the use of auto-throttle, requiring round dials on NG to mimic TOS., and brutalize the anabolic MAX into operation with no differences training

Mmmm, sounds like an accurate description of WN. No, we are not that bad but there is a definite distrust of automation and in several cases clearly the result of habits formed while operating older gen jets.


Originally Posted by Alt Flieger (Post 11139358)
Its really not that hard unless your brain has been completely fried by Airbus.

If you are really lucky you will have an NG with a HUD. Embrace it if you do. Best thing since sliced bread !

We have completed our sim portion and I must say in the final session or two, we really started to act like Boeing pilots. I was a little concerned that I would not be able to adapt to the different thinking and hand flying skills required to make the change however it turns out it was all still there.

Intellectually I frown at the 737, its sad that a few large operators have been so instrumental in holding Boeing back from employing technology they clearly have (787,777)

BUT, I am very happy that I have made the change and I cant wait to fly it.

oicur12.again 22nd Nov 2021 18:20

Hi all,

I was wondering if any pilots out there expert in ETOPS could provide some guidance regarding ETOPS diversion policy.

My previous type listed several system failures that would preclude flight beyond the ETOPS entry point.

I have not found a similar list of systems in any of our Boeing manuals.

For example, a generator failure in flight does not require you to land at the nearest suitable airport. You can continue trucking along the country for the entire flight.

However, you cannot be dispatched with this same failure on an ETOPS flight. Its a pretty obvious example and I think we all know what to do in this particular circumstance.

But, for lesser systems that are not so obvious, does Boeing provide guidance as to whether proceeding into an ETOPS area should or should not occur?

Cheers in advance

Roj approved 22nd Nov 2021 19:16

G’day oicur,

EDTO (ETOPS) is a planning exercise in probability and risk management written specifically by your company and aircraft type.

So, pre flight, if you already have failures, ie: Generator U/S, then you are already at a reduced redundancy point. The same for the weather/aerodrome, any issues pre flight can count them out.

Once airborne in a serviceable aircraft, with good enough weather, and enough approach aids, the probability of a failure that requires a diversion, ie: Land ASAP/ Land at nearest suitable, is considered using all the data collected over the years of previous operations.

For example, you are approaching you ETOPS entry point, you lose a GEN, start the APU, and continue. The probability of losing another GEN is extremely low.

So from my time on the 787, if it’s “Land at Nearest Suitable” in RED, then it’s time to divert, if it’s in Amber, continue.

I hope that helps.

Matey 22nd Nov 2021 22:21

When I flew the 767 on ETOPS you could dispatch with a generator u/s ( engine driven or APU) with a reduction from 180 minutes to 120 minutes

oicur12.again 12th Jul 2022 21:02

hi all,

I would like to throw another question to the experts.

Flap Maneuvering Speed according to my company manuals (completely bastardized and no FCTM provided) is based upon aircraft weight and I assume the weight is from the data entered into the FMC.

Therefore, incorrect data entry would result in incorrect Flap Maneuver Speeds displayed on the speed tape after takeoff?

Therefore, an incorrect data entry would be evidenced by a reduced margin between Flap Maneuver Speed and Minimum Maneuver Speed?

Or am I barking up the wrong tree? Possibly in the wrong forrest?

Cheers for now.

Xhorst 13th Jul 2022 02:34

Both flap manoeuvring speed (1,5,15 etc) and minimum manoeuvring speed (amber band) are calculated by the FMC.

Therefore, an incorrect ZFW entry or a faulty fuel quantity input would cause both of these indications to be incorrect.

The stick shaker warning (red blocks) is not FMC generated - it comes from the SMYD unit using various sensory and configuration inputs, so it would still be correct.

ScepticalOptomist 13th Jul 2022 09:40


Originally Posted by oicur12.again (Post 11145773)
Hi all,

I was wondering if any pilots out there expert in ETOPS could provide some guidance regarding ETOPS diversion policy.

My previous type listed several system failures that would preclude flight beyond the ETOPS entry point.

I have not found a similar list of systems in any of our Boeing manuals.

For example, a generator failure in flight does not require you to land at the nearest suitable airport. You can continue trucking along the country for the entire flight.

However, you cannot be dispatched with this same failure on an ETOPS flight. Its a pretty obvious example and I think we all know what to do in this particular circumstance.

But, for lesser systems that are not so obvious, does Boeing provide guidance as to whether proceeding into an ETOPS area should or should not occur?

Cheers in advance

Probably varies a little by type, however our company manuals state:

“any critical system failure precludes ETOPS operations and requires a diversion if within the ETOPS segment.

Critical system failure is:
- an engine failure
- only two AC power sources remaining
- hydraulic system failure that seriously restricts the operation of the aircraft.”

This has basically been the same across all twin jets I’ve flown with ETOPS capability.

Hope this helps!

ImbracableCrunk 13th Jul 2022 15:42


Originally Posted by Xhorst (Post 11260605)
Both flap manoeuvring speed (1,5,15 etc) and minimum manoeuvring speed (amber band) are calculated by the FMC.

Therefore, an incorrect ZFW entry or a faulty fuel quantity input would cause both of these indications to be incorrect.

The stick shaker warning (red blocks) is not FMC generated - it comes from the SMYD unit using various sensory and configuration inputs, so it would still be correct.

I believe Vmvr is a SMYD function, not an FMC function.

oicur12.again 13th Jul 2022 23:17


Originally Posted by ScepticalOptomist (Post 11260774)
Probably varies a little by type, however our company manuals state:

“any critical system failure precludes ETOPS operations and requires a diversion if within the ETOPS segment.

Critical system failure is:
- an engine failure
- only two AC power sources remaining
- hydraulic system failure that seriously restricts the operation of the aircraft.”

This has basically been the same across all twin jets I’ve flown with ETOPS capability.

Hope this helps!

Indeed, thanks for the input

oicur12.again 13th Jul 2022 23:18


Originally Posted by ImbracableCrunk (Post 11260986)
I believe Vmvr is a SMYD function, not an FMC function.

Yes I found a small reference in our manual that mentions this and is why I assume that an FMC data entry error will not effect Vmvr?

Cheers for any guidance


All times are GMT. The time now is 08:19.


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