I have recently moved from A330 to 787 and didn’t notice much difference. I feel equally knackered at the end of a longhaul flight...Jump to post
I am wondering if they have to increase the thrust for that. Is it declared how they managed to get such a boast? I think current thrust should be just enough, at least for airports close to Sea Level and long runways. Funny enough, current 789 FCOM performance data is already published for weights...Jump to post
Well yes and no. The crosswind limits are so that it is But that having been said, I've seen the requirements when Airbus hired pilots for the Beluga fleet. They are extremely high. Think it was a minimum of 10.000 hours, plus a lot of extras. Actually, there were advertising for pilots a couple of...Jump to post
Thanks for the data. My concern all along was the assumed 40t payload when comparing the 789 vs the A359. To me, a much more realistic payload comparison would be in the 30-35t range. This would generally include full pax and bags and a few tons of cargo. On ULH sectors i would think cargo is much ...Jump to post
Definitely not a technical thing. I guess there’s just not many 787s in Europe. Mainline carriers are BA, AF and LO. DY and VS have them too, but they generally fly transatlantic routes. LO does WAW-SIN, WAW-NRT and occasionally WAW-DPS on the 788. Norwegian did LGW-SIN, but I guess they dropped itJump to post
trex8 wrote:So from the FG article the cockpit layout of the neo and ceo are identical?
40 T payload is indeed on the high side for ULR flights. If anyone’s interested, here’s trip fuel burn data for [email protected] 25T payload, which is more or less what QF9/10 carries. Incidentally, 25T is also where the 789 becomes fuel volume limited. At higher ranges/lower payloads it will run out of fuel vo...Jump to post
If the issue is the alternate airports, this is troubling and does indicate performance issues with the 350. BNE and MEL are approximately 1 hour away from SYD - that’s not very close, but not very far either for an alternate. I reckon, the A350 needs around 5 tons of alternate fuel + approx 4t of f...Jump to post
FWIW, as a new PPL, I was able to quite decently fly a 767 simulator. The flying part isn’t that different from a small plane, you just need to be a bit smoother on the controls. This was however under supervision of a qualified pilot and after several hours on the jumpseat observing - so I kinda kn...Jump to post
It’s really hard to give a single meaningful number for range, as it depends on many factors, like payload, tank configuration, MTOW, winds. The longest flight an A321 NEO non LR has successfully operated was KEF-LAX by WOW with up to 200 PAX and 2 ACT’s. If the winds were unfavorable though, they n...Jump to post
AFAIK it is a bit of a problem, as there’s an unexpected glitch affecting the planes that were powered down during the rollover. On some frames the date remains stuck in the year 99 affecting things like Nav DB validity, CPDLC and even WX radar - they are all fed by GPS clock and reportedly there’s ...Jump to post
The high force is there to prevent pilot from breaking up the airplane at high speed due to excessive control deflections - so you can’t just switch it off.
Airbus airplanes have no force feedback, but they have load factor protection in their FBW system instead.
Same here. Unfortunately, there’s very few beacons outside of the US and visually identifying the airport at night can be tricky, especially if you don’t know where to look fo it. I have always wondered why such a simple and cheap solution as the beacon wasn’t adapted as a worldwide standard... So, ...Jump to post
Thanks for posting this. I was about to ask, "has anyone thought of alternating the brakes applied?" Yup, it’s a pretty neat solution and a relatively simple one. Mind you, 787 brakes are all electric. I wonder if alternating brakes could easily be introduced on a traditional hydraulic br...Jump to post
Boeing has come with an interesting solution to reduce brake wear on the 787. If brakes pedals are pressed below certain speed during taxi (30 or 70 Kt depending if it’s -8 or -9), only two out of four brakes on each bogie activate. On a subsequent pedal application they alternate, ie the other two ...Jump to post
Thanks, googled it. So, basically Bendix Compass was an un-slaved DG with latitude correction, which could be used to maintain a constant griid track, right?
Were there any Universal tables, which could give grid tracks, or did one need to obtain Initial True Track and convert it into Grid Tracks?
Thanks for info on the tables - I’ve used those when flying through Atlantic and Pacific (and still sometimes do), thought there was something else when doing Polar Ops. As for “all other info on Polar Nav”, my post was towards Yikes!, who volunteered to provide further info on navigating over the p...Jump to post
In one of my previous airlines, if you were operating into high altitude airport, sterile cockpit was belo 18000’. For normal airports it was 10000. Then again, this was Asia, so they needed to have everything written down in their manuals. As others said the bottom line is not to get distracted dur...Jump to post
Update - had a look into FCOM data. 2.5T extra fuel close to the edge of range envelope yields slightly less than 200Nm extra range. Also this 2.5 extra could be used towards lifting higher payload, probably 15-20 more pax at longer ranges (taking into account extra burn from higher weight)Jump to post
At the edge of the 789’s range (like LAX-SIN) how much extra time/distance does 2.5t actually give you? The aircraft is carrying fuel to carry fuel after all. In practice the 2.5t would buy you rather less than 280nm, surely? My (somewhat educated) guess is 150-200Nm. It would also depend on the pa...Jump to post
B764er wrote:That's around 750 gallons more. Wonder how much further it will go on that.
I can only confirm what others said above - once you start flying Longhaul you discover completely new levels of fatigue - and no, flying 4 sectors/day LCC style, while tiring, come nowhere near that. Fortunately, my employer allows controlled rest, and I don’t hesitate to use it. Previously, howeve...Jump to post
On top of that it can fly with complete los of hydraulic systems thanks to hydro/electro static actuators.
I read it as in „they are not selling enough a/c to break even”, rather than “they are losing money on each airframe”Jump to post
Don’t know what QR are using, but when I used to operate to AKL, we used CHC as our alternate. Alternates 400Nm away are not that unusual, especially in a wide body, which can’t operate into certain airports. I’ve seen alternates twice as far (GLA for KEF, BOM for DEL). As far as the cost of extra f...Jump to post
Yes it would. With 25,000lb payload the 787-8 can fly 400nm further than the larger 787-9 according to the ACAPs. 9200nm versus 8800nm. The 788 burns less fuel, so in theory it has better range than the 789 - but it maxes out on MTOW too early. Technically, it could do the flight, but with 100-150 ...Jump to post
Had a quick look into the FCOM flight planning data and it *almost* works in still air and ~150-170PAX. Any significant headwind makes it a non-starter.
To make this flight operationally viable, the 789 would need ~5T extra fuel capacity (ACT anyone?) and a 5T MTOW boost...
Samrnpage wrote:Wouldnt the 787-8 be a better plane for the trip?
I think it would be doable with <200 pax. The problem is, even at max load, they would max out fuel capacity, which is 101T. LHR-PER is pretty much at max fuel. To fly 600Nm extra, they would need another 5-6T of fuel. Maybe Boeing is able to increase max fuel like Airbus did with A350ULR?Jump to post
Every turbine engine I have operated had a cool-down limitation, between 1 and 5 minutes of operation at idle. However, they vary from engine to engine, even of the same size. For instance CF-6 had 5 minutes (or 3, don’t remember now), while similar size RR T700 has only 1 minute. In any case, the p...Jump to post
As others said, it was probably not as much drama as it looks. Having said that, SYD ATC tend to push people into accepting the shorter 16L/34R as long as performance permits. On a windy day with one missed app behind me I would be more inclined to try 16R - it gives more leeway, plus perhaps the wi...Jump to post
The 787 glides very well, but it has very efficient speedbrakes, so once you extend them it turns into a brick... :) Also, it decelerates surprisingly well - no problem to lose speed, contrary to eg. A330. Also, it has autodrag function, which helps to decelerate on approach. All in all, you need to...Jump to post
They can. However in an unpressurized a/c you also need to account for cabin descent rate for pax comfort - depending who you carry of course. In my GA time I was just aiming form 500ft/min descent based on time to destination. Eg. When flying at 10000 ft, i’d Start the descent 20 minutes before lan...Jump to post
Their are multiple advisory notes regarding the opening of the cargo doors after a landing due to a possible fire. Make sure you have the trucks standing by and ready for action. Yup. This, plus you also want to have the passengers off the plane before you open the door. Still, you can’t tell if th...Jump to post
While fire suppression is one relevant standard, for a lot of people, pax especially, potentially flying for 5 hours on one engine is a bit difficult to accept. GF Then again- I’d rather be flying on one engine for 5 hours then with a fire in my cargo hold. The funny thing is, that the smoke detect...Jump to post
GF’s Works pretty well till today - actually with a bit of practice the mental calculations done this way may be more accurate than whatever VNAV comes up with...
Just on the newest jets it’s altitude x4 instead of 3 - they tend to glide like crazy...