Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
A350 Flight Tests Official Thread Part 3  
User currently offlinejetblueguy22 From United States of America, joined Nov 2007, 2786 posts, RR: 4
Posted (1 year 2 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 44063 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
HEAD MODERATOR

Hi All,
The last thread became long so Part 3 is being created.

Part 2 can be found here A350 Flight Tests Official Thread Part 2 (by jetblueguy22 Jul 5 2013 in Civil Aviation)

Regards,
Pat


You push down on that yoke, the houses get bigger, you pull back on the yoke, the houses get bigger- Ken Foltz
323 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineferpe From France, joined Nov 2010, 2803 posts, RR: 59
Reply 1, posted (1 year 2 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 44082 times:

Quoting Speedbored (Reply 241):
Anyone know what they would have been testing with that 5x360 degree spiral to the west of Arcachon?

Those turns were to put load onto the wing. Your max FL at a given weight is set by the flow speed you need over and under the wing to generate the necessary lift in the thin air. Fly higher at the same weight and you need to crank on more alfa which generates a higher speed difference on the wings over and underside. At M 0.85 - 0.87 that they flew today you have supersonic flow on the over-side from about mid wing and almost all the way back, when this speed diff increases the supersonic area increases and you get buffeting which is when the rear shock-wave (transition area from supersonic to subsonic flow) gets stronger and it beats the boundary layer to let go.

So you fly to a FL where you have a certain margin to buffeting, this margin shall also cater for turns up to 30° IIRC. Can't remember what 30 or 45° gives you but 60° bank gives you 2G (we seldom banked that little  ). Anyway it was probably to stress the transonic flow a bit to see what parts of the boundary layer flow let go the first and how it spread over the wing and fairing, all duly filmed by the cameras per above and the turfing on the trailing edge and fairing. If they were allowed to fly into heavier buffeting (crank more turn angle and pull G ) it gets more exciting  .

[Edited 2013-08-15 12:40:42]


Non French in France
User currently offlineHeavierthanair From Switzerland, joined Oct 2000, 795 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (1 year 2 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 43198 times:

G'day

On the move again

AIB17WB

Cheers

Peter



"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the universe." (Albert Einstein, 1879
User currently offlineHeavierthanair From Switzerland, joined Oct 2000, 795 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (1 year 2 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 43061 times:

G'day

airborne now

on FR24 it looks like it took off from the taxiway  

Cheers

Peter



"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the universe." (Albert Einstein, 1879
User currently offlineparapente From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2006, 1566 posts, RR: 10
Reply 4, posted (1 year 2 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 43047 times:

Sorry not been following this thread carefully. Has Airbus released any official statements on how the aircraft is performing against computer predictions? Or is it far too early?

User currently offlineStTim From UK - England, joined Aug 2013, 738 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (1 year 2 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 42912 times:

Nothing official but positive noises from unofficial sources.

Probably too early for absolute performance but they are cracking through the test programme so are - to date - not hitting any major issues.


User currently offlineferpe From France, joined Nov 2010, 2803 posts, RR: 59
Reply 6, posted (1 year 2 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 42795 times:

Quoting Heavierthanair (Reply 3):
on FR24 it looks like it took off from the taxiwa

Well it took the 14L runway, the first time it started against the city of Toulouse.

Quoting parapente (Reply 4):
Has Airbus released any official statements on how the aircraft is performing against computer predictions?

An Airbus spokeperson answered Scott Hamilton at Leeham News:

http://leehamnews.wordpress.com/page/2/

“The newer engines of the A350-900 burn less fuel than those of the 787 which are still struggling to deliver a fuel burn level close their specification,” the Airbus spokesman adds. He said initial test flights of the A359 show fuel burn results at spec level, which he says is lower than the 787.

According to Zeke the TXWBs could come in up to 2% below spec as well by EIS, right now they are 0.5% below, so it does not look to bad  .

Another thing one can notice is that MSN001 seems to fly like Clockwork when flying is on the days agenda.



Non French in France
User currently offlineKarelXWB From Netherlands, joined Jul 2012, 11367 posts, RR: 33
Reply 7, posted (1 year 2 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 42771 times:

At what time (UTC) did AIB17WB took off?


Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity. And I'm not sure about the universe.
User currently offlineschwege From Finland, joined Jul 2013, 45 posts, RR: 1
Reply 8, posted (1 year 2 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 42704 times:

(Hello all!)

There was a gap in FR24 coverage just at the time of takeoff, the first airborne data point I have is at 09:13:30, altitude 800 ft. Considering rate of climb, my stake is on 09:13.


User currently offlineHeavierthanair From Switzerland, joined Oct 2000, 795 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (1 year 2 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 42681 times:

Quoting KarelXWB (Reply 7):
At what time (UTC) did AIB17WB took off?

My post "airborne now" must have been some 2 minutes after lift-off, that would put it at 09.18 UTC approx.

[Edited 2013-08-16 03:24:23]


"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the universe." (Albert Einstein, 1879
User currently offlineferpe From France, joined Nov 2010, 2803 posts, RR: 59
Reply 10, posted (1 year 2 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 42569 times:

Quoting schwege (Reply 8):
Hello all!)

Hi Schwege, very welcome to the A350 team!

I know that you will be a very popular member here, why and how we cover in PMs but it is great stuff

best ferpe



Non French in France
User currently offlineKarelXWB From Netherlands, joined Jul 2012, 11367 posts, RR: 33
Reply 11, posted (1 year 2 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 42609 times:

Today, the yoke with the skid block is lowered.


16/8/2013 by A380_TLS_A350, on Flickr

Yesterday it was still retracted.


Airbus - A350-941 -msn 001 by dn280tls, on Flickr

And a few more pictures before today's takeoff.


16/8/2013 by A380_TLS_A350, on Flickr


16/8/2013 by A380_TLS_A350, on Flickr


16/8/2013 by A380_TLS_A350, on Flickr

[Edited 2013-08-16 03:50:37]


Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity. And I'm not sure about the universe.
User currently offlineStTim From UK - England, joined Aug 2013, 738 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (1 year 2 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 42526 times:

Not showing any signs of heading to an alternate airfield to undetake the VMU tests. I cannot remember which long runway field they use for this.

User currently offlineblooBirdie From Lesotho, joined Sep 2003, 257 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (1 year 2 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 42465 times:

Quoting StTim (Reply 12):
I cannot remember which long runway field they use for this.
Istres, I believe.


User currently offlinekmz From Germany, joined Feb 2008, 161 posts, RR: 2
Reply 14, posted (1 year 2 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 42462 times:

Quoting KarelXWB (Reply 11):
And a few more pictures before today's takeoff

Wow, great picture of the wing fairing ! I wasn't aware how massive it is. Until now I always thought there is only a slim part following/extending the wing contour, but it looks like an additional fuel tank from this perspective  


User currently offlineKarelXWB From Netherlands, joined Jul 2012, 11367 posts, RR: 33
Reply 15, posted (1 year 2 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 42337 times:

Quoting blooBirdie (Reply 13):
Istres, I believe.

That's correct!  



Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity. And I'm not sure about the universe.
User currently offlinestarbucks From Netherlands, joined Feb 2013, 708 posts, RR: 6
Reply 16, posted (1 year 2 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 42113 times:

Looks like they're running some long autopilot streches...  

Passed the 100 blockhours today, acc. to my spreadsheet only 1.5 hours was needed for that.
Talking about spreadsheets, has the shared one been forgotten? I added yesterdays flight to the summary, but I don't have time to keep an flight-by-flight page with the FR24 data...



A350 logbook: http://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/pub?key=0AlVgPnmHLOovdFdzbVlyQzhYNDhCb1VFN1RkYXkwV3c&output=html
User currently offlineferpe From France, joined Nov 2010, 2803 posts, RR: 59
Reply 17, posted (1 year 2 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 42091 times:

Quoting starbucks (Reply 16):
but I don't have time to keep an flight-by-flight page with the FR24 data...

We don't have to anymore, will inform you via PM  



Non French in France
User currently offlineferpe From France, joined Nov 2010, 2803 posts, RR: 59
Reply 18, posted (1 year 2 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 41980 times:

Great picture from behind, there one can see the aero trufting on the left wing fairing, flaps and spoliers, on the right hand side no trufting but other markings and there seems to be camera window inserts there as well.

The think with the yoke is really intriguing, we should have had pictures from the lift-off, might have been a Vmu type one  Wow!



Non French in France
User currently offlineKarelXWB From Netherlands, joined Jul 2012, 11367 posts, RR: 33
Reply 19, posted (1 year 2 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 41960 times:

Quoting ferpe (Reply 18):
The think with the yoke is really intriguing, we should have had pictures from the lift-off, might have been a Vmu type one

Hm, they just finished repairing that runway  



Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity. And I'm not sure about the universe.
User currently offlineferpe From France, joined Nov 2010, 2803 posts, RR: 59
Reply 20, posted (1 year 2 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 41893 times:

Quoting KarelXWB (Reply 19):
Hm, they just finished repairing that runway

Well schwege says there was no ADB-S data from the take-off (which has never happened before  Yeah sure ), would not surprise me if this was a deliberate glitch  Wow!    , why should A want to publicize the first Vmu speed via Airlines.net before everyone else knew it ?   

[Edited 2013-08-16 05:38:24]


Non French in France
User currently offlineaviaponcho From France, joined Aug 2011, 613 posts, RR: 8
Reply 21, posted (1 year 2 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 41854 times:

Hello schwege... You jump the gun...
Welcome and thank you!

Quoting schwege (Reply 8):


User currently offlineferpe From France, joined Nov 2010, 2803 posts, RR: 59
Reply 22, posted (1 year 2 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 41791 times:

Quoting ferpe (Reply 20):
would not surprise me if this was a deliberate glitch

As you said Karel, Racoons are bastards    



Non French in France
User currently offlineKarelXWB From Netherlands, joined Jul 2012, 11367 posts, RR: 33
Reply 23, posted (1 year 2 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 41705 times:

So was it a slow takeoff or a tail strike? Sounds weird to do the tail strike in TLS.


Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity. And I'm not sure about the universe.
User currently offlineaviaponcho From France, joined Aug 2011, 613 posts, RR: 8
Reply 24, posted (1 year 2 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 41702 times:

Yoke lowered only for tail strike i guess
Performance take off? Heavy weight? Oei?


User currently offlinePart147 From Ireland, joined Dec 2008, 492 posts, RR: 0
Reply 25, posted (1 year 2 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 42451 times:

or maybe Airbus is just messing with us... after all we notice things and speculate a LOT here on a.net  


It's better to ask a stupid question during training, rather than make a REALLY stupid mistake later on!
User currently offlineTheRedBaron From Mexico, joined Mar 2005, 2211 posts, RR: 8
Reply 26, posted (1 year 2 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 42480 times:

Quoting schwege (Reply 8):

(Hello all!)

Welcome !

Amazing pictures, and yes there is something going on with those tail strike ummm...tests?

Ferpe thanks for the explanation on wing performance when banking at high speed, It was always my belief that just as a car rotates more the outer wheels on a turn, a wing should be the same with air and the 60 meter of diference from wing to wing should create a very different conditions....now my long question has been answered, thanks.

Best regards
TRB



The best seat in a Plane is the Jumpseat.
User currently offlinechrisflier From Sweden, joined Jul 2008, 6 posts, RR: 0
Reply 27, posted (1 year 2 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 42567 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

This is pretty cool!  
Airbus A350 Testflight over France 16th of August 2013


User currently offlineferpe From France, joined Nov 2010, 2803 posts, RR: 59
Reply 28, posted (1 year 2 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 42051 times:

Quoting chrisflier (Reply 27):
This is pretty cool!

Agree, we are on the first row and have a lot of background info as well. With the photo service from Karel and his buddies it becomes really cool, today's take-off pictures before they are finished flying was an unbelievable service, we could even glean the tests of the day, mega Karel    .

[Edited 2013-08-16 08:08:19]


Non French in France
User currently offlinePart147 From Ireland, joined Dec 2008, 492 posts, RR: 0
Reply 29, posted (1 year 2 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 41879 times:

I like the little 360 turns she does at the conclusion of the flight.

Back on the ground at 18 minutes past the hour.



It's better to ask a stupid question during training, rather than make a REALLY stupid mistake later on!
User currently offlineKarelXWB From Netherlands, joined Jul 2012, 11367 posts, RR: 33
Reply 30, posted (1 year 2 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 41879 times:

AIB17WB landed 15:18 UTC, another 6 hours on the book.


Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity. And I'm not sure about the universe.
User currently offlinesassiciai From UK - Scotland, joined Jan 2013, 340 posts, RR: 0
Reply 31, posted (1 year 2 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 41883 times:

Slightly off-topic - I can no longer resist the temptation to ask KarelXWB - does your a.net name indicate your interest, or your body shape?  

I really enjoy your posts - keep it up!

We are all a bit challenged in the weight department, not just the latest new aircraft models! I'm just back from a long Far East tour, and have moved into the XWB range myself! I need a few PIPs now! Dont know how composites might help, though!


User currently offlineferpe From France, joined Nov 2010, 2803 posts, RR: 59
Reply 32, posted (1 year 2 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 41437 times:

Quoting Part147 (Reply 29):
I like the little 360 turns she does at the conclusion of the flight.

I speculate once again that is to load up the wings to get the separation patterns filmed at different weights, heights etc. If you look at todays flight test my take on it was:

- a take-off which was much closer to max rotation then before, perhaps not Vmu but on that route, thereby the tailstrike fork lowered for safety at TO and yes I do think they blocked the data feed to the transponder for some reason.

- a mix of Autopliot runs (the regular pattern stuff as note by Starbucks) and then interleaved when fuel had been burned of further tight 360 turns to load the wings and get those flow patterns, then further other test until the next weight point was there then the turns and so on.

Any other takes (I'm just guessing so don't take it as gospel  ) ?



Non French in France
User currently offlineKarelXWB From Netherlands, joined Jul 2012, 11367 posts, RR: 33
Reply 33, posted (1 year 2 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 41526 times:

Picture of the landing, seems like the yoke was retracted just before takeoff.


AIB17WB 16/8/2013 by A380_TLS_A350, on Flickr



Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity. And I'm not sure about the universe.
User currently offlineOldAeroGuy From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 3502 posts, RR: 66
Reply 34, posted (1 year 2 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 41109 times:

Quoting ferpe (Reply 1):
Can't remember what 30 or 45° gives you

30 deg bank requires 1.15g and 45 deg requires 1.41g

Quoting TheRedBaron (Reply 26):
It was always my belief that just as a car rotates more the outer wheels on a turn, a wing should be the same with air and the 60 meter of diference from wing to wing should create a very different conditions....now my long question has been answered, thanks.

Roller coasters (pull up followed by push over) will load both wings equally. You do need to demonstrate maneuver capability by banked turns.



Airplane design is easy, the difficulty is getting them to fly - Barnes Wallis
User currently offlineKarelXWB From Netherlands, joined Jul 2012, 11367 posts, RR: 33
Reply 35, posted (1 year 2 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 41058 times:

Quoting ferpe (Reply 18):
Great picture from behind, there one can see the aero trufting on the left wing fairing, flaps and spoliers, on the right hand side no trufting but other markings and there seems to be camera window inserts there as well.

Yes the pictures reveal nicely what Airbus has done in the past 3 weeks. It was not just an update of the FTI, but also the installation of cameras, wiring, markings, attachment of the yoke with the skid block and other stuff.

So it was not a summer break for MSN1 after all  



Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity. And I'm not sure about the universe.
User currently offlineStTim From UK - England, joined Aug 2013, 738 posts, RR: 0
Reply 36, posted (1 year 2 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 40834 times:

Does anyone know what the instrumentation is for on the landing gear doors?

User currently offlineAircellist From Canada, joined Oct 2004, 1718 posts, RR: 8
Reply 37, posted (1 year 2 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 40753 times:

Quoting KarelXWB (Reply 33):
Picture of the landing, seems like the yoke was retracted just before takeoff.

During the fabrication, I was worried that the nose would be Nimrod-ish, but it is not the case, finally. It is quite a nice plane.


User currently offlineschwege From Finland, joined Jul 2013, 45 posts, RR: 1
Reply 38, posted (1 year 2 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 39257 times:

Thanks everyone for the warm welcome!

Concerning the blackout during takeoff, I just had a hunch. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I only remember this happening when she has taken off using RWY14*. The explanation could be really simple; the radiation pattern of the ADS-B transmitter hits the local FR24 base station when taking off from the 32s, but has a blind spot somewhere near the end of the 14's. Of course it's pure speculation without any facts (location of ADS-B transmitter in the plane, shape of the radiation pattern, how the plane structure interferes with it, location of the base station, terrain both around the airport and the base station, ...). But hey, we've got ourselves a nice experiment running in the background - let's see how this theory pans out! We'll still be seeing plenty of takeoffs to both directions.

Speaking of which, you guys seem to think that Istres is going to be the location for the tail strike tests - how about someone in the region grabs an ADS-B receiver and plants it nearby?  


User currently offlineOldAeroGuy From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 3502 posts, RR: 66
Reply 39, posted (1 year 2 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 39137 times:

Quoting schwege (Reply 38):
the tail strike tests

Tail strike is too harsh a term. Better to call them Vmu Attitude tests as the aft body is eased into contact with the runway.

Strike implies the contact occurs with significant force.



Airplane design is easy, the difficulty is getting them to fly - Barnes Wallis
User currently offlinepacksonflight From Iceland, joined Jan 2010, 379 posts, RR: 0
Reply 40, posted (1 year 2 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 39034 times:

Isn't it a bit early in the test program for the VMU test??? I thought that this test would normally be later in the test campaign because it poses some damage risk for the aircraft

User currently offlineschwege From Finland, joined Jul 2013, 45 posts, RR: 1
Reply 41, posted (1 year 1 week 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 38544 times:

AIB18WB takeoff at 08:02 UTC.

User currently offlineap305 From India, joined Jan 2000, 555 posts, RR: 0
Reply 42, posted (1 year 1 week 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 38560 times:

Here we go AIB18WB up at 8:03 UTC...Its like an airline operation.

User currently offlineHeavierthanair From Switzerland, joined Oct 2000, 795 posts, RR: 0
Reply 43, posted (1 year 1 week 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 38303 times:

G'day

Doing in excess of 560 knots now, doing high speed testing it seems


Cheers

Peter



"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the universe." (Albert Einstein, 1879
User currently offlineKarelXWB From Netherlands, joined Jul 2012, 11367 posts, RR: 33
Reply 44, posted (1 year 1 week 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 38221 times:

Quoting packsonflight (Reply 40):
Isn't it a bit early in the test program for the VMU test??? I thought that this test would normally be later in the test campaign because it poses some damage risk for the aircraft

I think you're confused with the RTO at MTOW. This test is done at the very end of the campaign because the aircraft tires could catch fire. The VMU test is done in the beginning, the A380 had its VMU test done within 3 months after first flight.



Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity. And I'm not sure about the universe.
User currently offlineKarelXWB From Netherlands, joined Jul 2012, 11367 posts, RR: 33
Reply 45, posted (1 year 1 week 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 38134 times:

Also from the A350 blog:

Quote:
Perfect weather conditions are needed, with no turbulence and wind less than 5 kts, to insure the precision of the measurements. The tests will be performed at Istres Air Force Base (South of France) where there is a 5 km runway and no houses or other obstacles on the runway axis for several kilometers.

On A380, a total of 22 VMU tests were executed including both development and certification.

Time to look for a wind forecast map of Istres  



Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity. And I'm not sure about the universe.
User currently offlineSpeedbored From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2013, 275 posts, RR: 0
Reply 46, posted (1 year 1 week 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 38030 times:

Quoting Heavierthanair (Reply 43):
Doing in excess of 560 knots now, doing high speed testing it seems

Definitely high speed tests.

Fastest I've seen on FR24 so far today is 591kts at 30,000ft. Don't know what the temperature is around there at that altitude right now but it looks like they might be testing at over 0.95 mach.


User currently offlineschwege From Finland, joined Jul 2013, 45 posts, RR: 1
Reply 47, posted (1 year 1 week 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 38049 times:

OK, they just did 591 kts @ 30400 ft.

Using an online calculator I got Mach 1.0046 out of that - is it right?

Edit: Probably not, the calculator doesn't take in temperature at all.

[Edited 2013-08-17 03:20:05]

User currently offlineHeavierthanair From Switzerland, joined Oct 2000, 795 posts, RR: 0
Reply 48, posted (1 year 1 week 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 38067 times:

G'day

They just did 590 knots at 30000 ft level flight, what would that be in Mach numbers? All per FR24, but over an extended period of time so this is presumably quite accurate.

Cheers

Peter



"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the universe." (Albert Einstein, 1879
User currently offlineSpeedbored From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2013, 275 posts, RR: 0
Reply 49, posted (1 year 1 week 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 37984 times:

Or could it just be that there's a strong northerly wind at the moment? FR24 shows ground speed and all of the 'high speed' runs seem to be when they're heading south. They're going quite a bit slower headingnorth.

User currently offlineKarelXWB From Netherlands, joined Jul 2012, 11367 posts, RR: 33
Reply 50, posted (1 year 1 week 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 37993 times:

Quoting schwege (Reply 47):
Using an online calculator I got Mach 1.0046 out of that - is it right?

That can't be right, even the flutter test goes no further than Mach 0.96



Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity. And I'm not sure about the universe.
User currently offlineovercast From United Kingdom, joined May 2005, 160 posts, RR: 0
Reply 51, posted (1 year 1 week 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 37917 times:

Looks like the wind component gives around 50kt tailwind on the southerly run, so 540kt TAS or around .91 Mach.

Nice and fast, especially as this is level flight, and all the FTI equipment attached to the outside of the airframe.


User currently offlineHeavierthanair From Switzerland, joined Oct 2000, 795 posts, RR: 0
Reply 52, posted (1 year 1 week 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 38114 times:

G'day

Quoting Speedbored (Reply 49):
strong northerly wind at the moment

You must be right, there is a KLM 772 travelling the same direction right now at 550 knots


Cheers

Peter



"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the universe." (Albert Einstein, 1879
User currently offlineKarelXWB From Netherlands, joined Jul 2012, 11367 posts, RR: 33
Reply 53, posted (1 year 1 week 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 37727 times:

AIB18WB landed 12:33 UTC.


Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity. And I'm not sure about the universe.
User currently offlineKarelXWB From Netherlands, joined Jul 2012, 11367 posts, RR: 33
Reply 54, posted (1 year 1 week 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 37182 times:

And the pictures of today.


17/8/2013 by A380_TLS_A350, on Flickr


17/8/2013 by A380_TLS_A350, on Flickr


AIB18WB 17/8/2013 by A380_TLS_A350, on Flickr



Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity. And I'm not sure about the universe.
User currently offlinesassiciai From UK - Scotland, joined Jan 2013, 340 posts, RR: 0
Reply 55, posted (1 year 1 week 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 36997 times:

Great to see these photos every time!

But sorry to have a bit of a downer! How can we know if these are from "today"?

In the last photo in post 54, where is the anti-skid thingy at the back? That was prominent in some recent photos, but is absent in these ones, in MHO!


User currently offlineStTim From UK - England, joined Aug 2013, 738 posts, RR: 0
Reply 56, posted (1 year 1 week 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 36885 times:

You can see the tufting on the right hand wing flaps so it is recent.

I agree it looks like the tail skid is not there though.


User currently offlineClipper136 From United States of America, joined Mar 2006, 318 posts, RR: 1
Reply 57, posted (1 year 1 week 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 36845 times:

Tail skid is there. It is in shadow. Zoom in on pick and you can clearly see it's red base.

User currently offlineferpe From France, joined Nov 2010, 2803 posts, RR: 59
Reply 58, posted (1 year 1 week 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 36273 times:

Quoting StTim (Reply 36):
Does anyone know what the instrumentation is for on the landing gear doors?
Quoting StTim (Reply 56):
You can see the tufting on the right hand wing flaps so it is recent.

Actually the right hand side is equipped with pressure sensors, StTrim got me to it, here the landing gear door where it is easiest to see the sensors and their wiring:

http://i298.photobucket.com/albums/mm262/ferpe_bucket/Pressuresondinstallationforcampaign2_zps28273121.jpg

The underside of the wing has overpressure so their the sensors protruding and the wires being taped directly on the surface does not trip any change in the flow and therefore the pressure picture. On the overside it is the reverse, you have to hide the wires inside the wing/flaps/aileron and let just the tip of the pressure sensors protrude:

http://i298.photobucket.com/albums/mm262/ferpe_bucket/Pressuresondinstallationforcampaign2150820132_zps63636b62.jpg

The shot from behind shows that the tufting spreads all along the left wing and the pressure sensors all along the right wing. The left wing has narrow bands and the right thicker multstripes. I don't know if the right hand stripes can contain any pressure sensors, they might just be there for films/photos with the camera and (stroboscope?) lamps you see in this picture of the windows above the right wing, the left side has a simular installation. At certain lighting conditions one should be able to film the chock-waves (and of course at all times the tufting) with these cameras:

http://i298.photobucket.com/albums/mm262/ferpe_bucket/Pressuresondinstallationforcampaign2150820133_zps85847009.jpg

One can also see a static pressure port replacing the window at the front.

So why all this stuff on the left and right wing? Airbus wants to correlate the CFD (computer based flow simulations) and scale windtunnel tests with the real thing flying in the big windtunnel. If things correlate well all is fine and they can use their models with bigger confidence going forward. OldAeroguy might be able to tell us more....

[Edited 2013-08-17 23:24:26]


Non French in France
User currently offlineferpe From France, joined Nov 2010, 2803 posts, RR: 59
Reply 59, posted (1 year 1 week 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 36178 times:

Quoting overcast (Reply 51):
Looks like the wind component gives around 50kt tailwind on the southerly run, so 540kt TAS or around .91 Mach.

This fast flying is to explore the region where the transonic flow around the wing make big changes and the transonic drag raises like a rocket, at the same time the cameras films what happens on the wings, what boundary layer start to separate and what pressure changes happen. This is all about what is the max Mach numbers which can be allowed and what are the maneuver margins that one has up at those speeds (maneuvers generate Gs which requires more lift force which must be generated by a bigger speed differential on the wings over and underside = higher M on the overside = more supersonic flow = more flow separation on the places where the shockwaves become more violent ).



Non French in France
User currently offlineStTim From UK - England, joined Aug 2013, 738 posts, RR: 0
Reply 60, posted (1 year 1 week 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 35598 times:

Thanks for the info Ferpe. I presume they are calso checking that the landing gear doors are not deforming under the pressure and hence the multitude of sensors.

User currently offlinezeke From Hong Kong, joined Dec 2006, 9030 posts, RR: 75
Reply 61, posted (1 year 1 week 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 35348 times:

Quoting StTim (Reply 60):
I presume they are calso checking that the landing gear doors are not deforming under the pressure and hence the multitude of sensors.

Probably trying to establish the maximum gear operating speed and altitude, and maximum gravity extension speed. Some of the sensors also look noise related, they maybe looking to see the contribution of the noise footprint by various components.



We are addicted to our thoughts. We cannot change anything if we cannot change our thinking – Santosh Kalwar
User currently offlineKarelXWB From Netherlands, joined Jul 2012, 11367 posts, RR: 33
Reply 62, posted (1 year 1 week 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 34334 times:

AIB19WB online http://fr24.com/AIB19WB


Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity. And I'm not sure about the universe.
User currently offlineStTim From UK - England, joined Aug 2013, 738 posts, RR: 0
Reply 63, posted (1 year 1 week 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 34300 times:

From FR24 it looks like there was a rejected take off. Planned?

User currently offlineKarelXWB From Netherlands, joined Jul 2012, 11367 posts, RR: 33
Reply 64, posted (1 year 1 week 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 34295 times:

I saw it too, and MSN1 is now back at the test center.


Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity. And I'm not sure about the universe.
User currently offlinesassiciai From UK - Scotland, joined Jan 2013, 340 posts, RR: 0
Reply 65, posted (1 year 1 week 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 33765 times:

With a bit of patience, I was eventually able to replay this morning's action using the FR24 playback.

Start at 07.10UTC, replay speed 12, she taxied to the start of runway 32R, take off run started at 07.12, at 07.14 she was already off on the taxiway to the right, returning to the test centre

With the precision of FR24, I noted that it recorded the speed at 88kts

I await with interest some explanation for this


User currently offlineferpe From France, joined Nov 2010, 2803 posts, RR: 59
Reply 66, posted (1 year 1 week 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 33742 times:

Quoting sassiciai (Reply 65):
I await with interest some explanation for this

A pity we don't have the tower conversation, if it was planned we would have known it from the clearance   .



Non French in France
User currently offlinePart147 From Ireland, joined Dec 2008, 492 posts, RR: 0
Reply 67, posted (1 year 1 week 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 33709 times:

Quoting sassiciai (Reply 65):

It would be unwise to hold your breath for an explanation, test flights are called test flights for a reason...



It's better to ask a stupid question during training, rather than make a REALLY stupid mistake later on!
User currently offlineovercast From United Kingdom, joined May 2005, 160 posts, RR: 0
Reply 68, posted (1 year 1 week 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 33284 times:

Looks like whatever happened this morning has been worked on,
They are doing a taxi test now http://fr24.com/AIBT6


User currently offlineap305 From India, joined Jan 2000, 555 posts, RR: 0
Reply 69, posted (1 year 1 week 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 33264 times:

She's taxiing around as AIBT6...

User currently offlineHeavierthanair From Switzerland, joined Oct 2000, 795 posts, RR: 0
Reply 70, posted (1 year 1 week 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 33264 times:

G´day

AIBT6 on the move again


Cheers

Peter



"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the universe." (Albert Einstein, 1879
User currently offlineparapente From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2006, 1566 posts, RR: 10
Reply 71, posted (1 year 1 week 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 33225 times:

For those near the aircraft. What is the comparable noise levels to similar sized aircraft?

User currently offlineHeavierthanair From Switzerland, joined Oct 2000, 795 posts, RR: 0
Reply 72, posted (1 year 1 week 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 33141 times:

per FR24 went up to 128 knots on 32R and aborted, now on the way "home"


"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the universe." (Albert Einstein, 1879
User currently offlineschwege From Finland, joined Jul 2013, 45 posts, RR: 1
Reply 73, posted (1 year 1 week 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 33077 times:

Quoting Heavierthanair (Reply 72):
per FR24 went up to 128 knots on 32R and aborted, now on the way "home"

Yep, the data even shows her being airborne for a half a minute at 225 ft, which I find kind of hard to believe. Does anyone have information on the inner workings of FR24 - ie. do they just report the data as-is from the ADS-B stream or do they process it somehow before forwarding it? In the former case it seems that the A350 is spitting out false data...


User currently offlinesassiciai From UK - Scotland, joined Jan 2013, 340 posts, RR: 0
Reply 74, posted (1 year 1 week 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 33002 times:

In my experience, FR24 is an application "with attitude"! Much/most to the time it works well, especially over longer periods and at low resolution. Occasionally it gets things really quite wrong, and one can see eventual corrections with aircraft flying backwards or sideways or forward at Mach2!

At high resolution, it is not sampling frequently enough, so an aircraft - like the A359 today taxing around TLS seems to be off the tarmac and on the grass more often than not whenever it is not traveling in a straight line

I wonder what is the altitude of TLS - 225ft, perhaps?


User currently offlinesassiciai From UK - Scotland, joined Jan 2013, 340 posts, RR: 0
Reply 75, posted (1 year 1 week 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 32922 times:

I'll answer my own question, from here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toulouse%E2%80%93Blagnac_Airport

Elevation AMSL 497 ft / 151 m
Coordinates 43°38′06″N 001°22′04″ECoordinates: 43°38′06″N 001°22′04″E
Website toulouse.aeroport.fr

I'm sure that some of the odd features of FR24 I mentioned (about aircraft going backwards, etc) are a result of FR24 processing data, perhaps when several ADS-B sources are simultaneously providing data it results in some glitches, potentially when one of them starts or stops supplying data. I wonder how it decides which source to use, how it measures "strength" or "proximity" to the aircraft being tracked

Perhaps it is programmed to ignore altitude when departing aircraft ground speed is below a certain level, and only to take it into account once airborne. It is normal that when aircraft land and are chocked, FR24 shows non-zero altitude. I also doubt that this most recent A359 movement went airborne at all

[Edited 2013-08-19 05:49:53]

User currently offlineferpe From France, joined Nov 2010, 2803 posts, RR: 59
Reply 76, posted (1 year 1 week 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 32639 times:

FR24 uses linear forward prediction, that is it estimates the next position based on speed, altitude, vertical speed and course. Given that it knows it's sample rate it then let the plane figure move ahead so that the plane should be at the next sample position if no course or altitude, vertical speed changes happens. This is why one sees it taxi out in the grass, you are heading east at 25kt and 15 seconds later you shall be at a certain point, the real aircraft has turned on the halfway and there is a sharp triangle as a result from the predicted point to the present point.

It should not have predicted a different altitude unless the vertical rate had a component from the last data sample, this can be if the runway is not 100% even, at 128kt that component gets a certain result at the prediction point 15 seconds later.

Re todays events, IMO the first aborted take-off was not planned as they would have filed a AIBTxxWB call sign in such case as they did for the second where they verified whatever was fixed from the first aborted run. First glitch we have been able to see in 15 flights, not bad for a first out the chute specimen  .

[Edited 2013-08-19 07:36:05]


Non French in France
User currently offlineKarelXWB From Netherlands, joined Jul 2012, 11367 posts, RR: 33
Reply 77, posted (1 year 1 week 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 32502 times:

Unfortunately the picture of today can't tell us much.


RTO 19/8/2013 by A380_TLS_A350, on Flickr



Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity. And I'm not sure about the universe.
User currently offlinesassiciai From UK - Scotland, joined Jan 2013, 340 posts, RR: 0
Reply 78, posted (1 year 1 week 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 32382 times:

Ferpe, just to strengthen your conclusion, today's Mission would have been the 19th, so 18 under her belt already! And agreed, very impressive for an all-new aircraft!

I use the word "mission" to differentiate "flight", because on (at least) one occasion - the second "mission" to be exact - there were 3 landings, (the first after a flight of 5hours 30mins, followed by 2 stop-and-go circuits - the Google spreadsheet states "Flight enveloppe open 25 000 - 41000 ft PLUS 3 landings at end of day"). Let's adopt a common vocabulary for this - I propose that a flight is a cycle starting with a take off, and ending with the subsequent landing, a mission is a set (1:n) of flights under one call sign!

As for FR24, I understand its algorithm as you explain, and that it will plot the straight line between successive plots. This explains its slightly erratic triangulation-only behavior when a plane is in a turn, then the entire historic flight trail from the start of the turn will change to "catch up" with the plot changes.

What I would like to understand are the situations when an FR24 plane track all of a sudden behaves very oddly - is this a problem of it changing receivers? Or it lost contact for "a long time" and kept on predicting, only to get a rude awakening some time later?

I remember in July we were simultaneously on-line (with others) following the A359 over the Western Med, and it was seen to be performing improbable paths, which were the subject of some comment, and which were eventually repainted by FR24 when it somehow (how?) worked it out correctly!

[Edited 2013-08-19 08:16:41]

User currently offlinesassiciai From UK - Scotland, joined Jan 2013, 340 posts, RR: 0
Reply 79, posted (1 year 1 week 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 32212 times:

She's back taxiing on FR24 now

User currently offlinesassiciai From UK - Scotland, joined Jan 2013, 340 posts, RR: 0
Reply 80, posted (1 year 1 week 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 32160 times:

This time a leisurely 76kts at 15.42UTC, now she's taxiing back home!

User currently offlineStTim From UK - England, joined Aug 2013, 738 posts, RR: 0
Reply 81, posted (1 year 1 week 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 31798 times:

Strange day for MSN0001 - I wonder if there was any element of VMU going on? I doubt it on the new track but.......

User currently offlineStTim From UK - England, joined Aug 2013, 738 posts, RR: 0
Reply 82, posted (1 year 1 week 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 30714 times:

What ever was the issue seems to be taking a little while to resolve. No flying today so far for the raccoon.

User currently offlinebigsmile From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2005, 165 posts, RR: 4
Reply 83, posted (1 year 1 week 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 30529 times:

There is no issue......RTO was planned.

Be patient, there will be quiet days, then days where flights will be very common, more like an Airline operation.


User currently offlineferpe From France, joined Nov 2010, 2803 posts, RR: 59
Reply 84, posted (1 year 1 week 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 29747 times:

Quoting bigsmile (Reply 83):
There is no issue......RTO was planned.

Thanks bigsmile, highly appreciated. Those tiny snippets are worth gold that you and knoxibus gives us, there is quite a crowd following the A350 and we are impressed with how things are going so far. Nice to know that yesterday was no blip, makes us just more interested to see what gamut of tests we have in front of us.

There is not question that MSN001 over the summer break has been armed for some more demanding tests, the RTO was perhaps part of the build up to one to follow.....  .



Non French in France
User currently offlineferpe From France, joined Nov 2010, 2803 posts, RR: 59
Reply 85, posted (1 year 1 week 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 29661 times:

Quoting KarelXWB (Reply 77):
Unfortunately the picture of today can't tell us much.

Not about the RTO, bigsmile fixed that  but it tells us that the tufting on the left side goes from the wing fairing all the way to the winglet. Thereby it is part of a standard correlation check of the wings flow, if there would have been a particular problem area we would have seen intensified tufting in this area, it does not seems so, it is evenly spread on the rear surfaces (flaps, ailerons, ...) and just ahead on the spoiler line.

As always, those pictures are really valued    to both you and your friends.



Non French in France
User currently offlinetravelavnut From Netherlands, joined May 2010, 1610 posts, RR: 7
Reply 86, posted (1 year 1 week 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 29629 times:

Ok, I didn't think I would ever say this, but... this thread is better than the A350 Prototype Construction thread.

Thanks again ferpe, Karel, mysterious bigsmile, knoxibus and all the others. As just an aviation enthusiast I really have not a damn relevant thing to add except, and I think I speak for quite a lot of people here; please, please continue with this! It really has been my sole reason for coming to A.nut latily.

[Edited 2013-08-20 13:05:58]


Live From Amsterdam!
User currently offlinePihero From France, joined Jan 2005, 4409 posts, RR: 76
Reply 87, posted (1 year 1 week 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 29195 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Hello all.
Back from some well deserved leave and some serious diving first, then a very quiet time in the Dordogne area where the scenery is beautiful with unpolluted skies and some gorgeous nights of star gazing.
This thread has grown a lot and I'm glad things seem to progress smoothly for the racoon.
Some remarks before I retire tonight :

Quoting schwege (Reply 73):
Yep, the data even shows her being airborne for a half a minute at 225 ft, which I find kind of hard to believe. Does anyone have information on the inner workings of FR24 - ie. do they just report the data as-is from the ADS-B stream or do they process it somehow before forwarding it? In the former case it seems that the A350 is spitting out false data...
Quoting schwege (Reply 73):
Yep, the data even shows her being airborne for a half a minute at 225 ft, which I find kind of hard to believe. Does anyone have information on the inner workings of FR24 - ie. do they just report the data as-is from the ADS-B stream or do they process it somehow before forwarding it? In the former case it seems that the A350 is spitting out false data...

The discrepancy between LFBO altitude - some 500 ft - and the FR24 recorded 225 ft is the difference between the QNH, which gives a reading of the airport height over MSL and the aircrtaft transponder pressure altitude - i.e relative to 29.92 in Hg / 1013.2 hPa ; Yesterday, the QNH was 10213 hPa, so considering a ~28 ft/hPa gradient represent some 280 ft. So 500 - 280 = 220 ft, very close to the recorded 225 ft .

Quoting schwege (Reply 47):
OK, they just did 591 kts @ 30400 ft.

Using an online calculator I got Mach 1.0046 out of that - is it right?
Quoting schwege (Reply 47):
They just did 590 knots at 30000 ft level flight, what would that be in Mach numbers? All per FR24, but over an extended period of time so this is presumably quite accurate.

Those are ground speeds. One has to substract the wind in order to get the TAS, then work out the Mach number with the SAT.
Without a computer, an accurate way of calculating it is to add / substract [SAT - 35 ° C] to the TAS, then divide the result by 6 and you get the Mach
example 590 kt (FR24)
Wind comp : 45 kt tail
SAT : - 47° C
that gives TAS = 590 - 45 = 545 kt
as SAT - 35 = 12, my Mach will be based on 545 + 12 = 557 kt (use positive correction for SAT colder than - 35°, negative for SAT above -35 )
which divided by 6 gives 92.1, therefore the achieved Mach number is .921.

The data can be obtained from http://euro.wx.propilots.net/index.html
METARS are in the top middle of the home page, just type LFBO for Toulouse... etc...
For the winds aloft, scroll the "Make your selection ", then select " Upper winds and temperatures ", then the time of the forecast as close as possible to the actual and select the level you need... some quick interpolating could be needed between the levels used.



Contrail designer
User currently offlineBoeingVista From Australia, joined Jan 2009, 1576 posts, RR: 3
Reply 88, posted (1 year 1 week 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 29170 times:

Quoting ferpe (Reply 85):
Not about the RTO, bigsmile fixed that..

If we had pictures of the RTO's we could maybe tell if they were done with a simulated engine failure, you'd wan't to check 'single engine' RTO before you started the engine out take off flight tests.



BV
User currently offlineschwege From Finland, joined Jul 2013, 45 posts, RR: 1
Reply 89, posted (1 year 1 week 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 28901 times:

Early bird AIB19WB went for a quick one; 05:14 - 05:20 UTC. Probably not the last movement for today...

Another: 05:29 - 05:35.

[Edited 2013-08-20 22:44:37]

User currently offlineschwege From Finland, joined Jul 2013, 45 posts, RR: 1
Reply 90, posted (1 year 1 week 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 28855 times:

Quoting Pihero (Reply 87):
The discrepancy between LFBO altitude - some 500 ft - and the FR24 recorded 225 ft is the difference between the QNH, which gives a reading of the airport height over MSL and the aircrtaft transponder pressure altitude - i.e relative to 29.92 in Hg / 1013.2 hPa ; Yesterday, the QNH was 10213 hPa, so considering a ~28 ft/hPa gradient represent some 280 ft. So 500 - 280 = 220 ft, very close to the recorded 225 ft .

Good catch! Now, what I'm still wondering is this: does the transponder always report pressure altitude, disregarding any QNH setting? Or was it just that the QNH was not set properly as they never intended to go airborne that day? I would guess it's the former, considering ensuring TCAS functionality and the KISS principle.

Of course, all of that still requires this in order to make any sense:

Quoting sassiciai (Reply 75):
Perhaps it [FR24] is programmed to ignore altitude when departing aircraft ground speed is below a certain level


User currently offlineferpe From France, joined Nov 2010, 2803 posts, RR: 59
Reply 91, posted (1 year 1 week 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 28865 times:

Quoting schwege (Reply 89):
Early bird AIB19WB went for a quick one; 05:14 - 05:20 UTC. Probably not the last movement for today...

Funny that they use the call sign from Tuesday, seems they would like to finish that flight. Guess she will come online again in 30-45 minutes to taxi, indeed early today. Itching to fly at last I gather  .

We shall watch this start carefully if the Tuesday RTO was a preparation for a OEI start, then we need someone who takes a photo just after lift-off so we can see the position of the rudder and the bank towards running engine.

Edit: when schwege said a quick one I thought he meant a quick transponder show but he meant a quick flight and it was, it was the first round of a series of 4 as can be seen below Big grin .

[Edited 2013-08-20 23:42:59]


Non French in France
User currently offlineferpe From France, joined Nov 2010, 2803 posts, RR: 59
Reply 92, posted (1 year 1 week 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 28849 times:

Guys! Wake-up, she is flying and have done 2 touch and go already and is now on her 3rd at TLS  Wow! , early birds !!

That was a full stop and now she is taxing onto the runway for another OEI ?? start?

[Edited 2013-08-20 23:01:01]


Non French in France
User currently offlineBoeingVista From Australia, joined Jan 2009, 1576 posts, RR: 3
Reply 93, posted (1 year 1 week 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 28794 times:

Quoting ferpe (Reply 91):
We shall watch this start carefully if the Tuesday RTO was a preparation for a OEI start, then we need someone who takes a photo just after lift-off so we can see the position of the rudder and the bank towards running engine.

Yes, as I speculated above... Does anybody have a link to any of the RTO pictures from Tuesday?



BV
User currently offlineferpe From France, joined Nov 2010, 2803 posts, RR: 59
Reply 94, posted (1 year 1 week 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 28769 times:

Quoting BoeingVista (Reply 93):
Does anybody have a link to any of the RTO pictures from Tuesday?

Karel posted one in post 77.



Non French in France
User currently offlineferpe From France, joined Nov 2010, 2803 posts, RR: 59
Reply 95, posted (1 year 1 week 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 28703 times:

If one watches the playback they did 4 takeoffs today so far, now they seem to take a pause probably to evaluate the data before continuing later today (and drink morning coffee and chat about the feeling of the bird on one engine Big grin ). Two of these, the last, was with OEI. Given the course change directly after rotation I would say the first with the right engine at flight idle (OEI) and then with the left. How do I know these were OEI test? Compare the vertical speeds after take-off, for the first two we have for the first 2 samples after rotation north of 2000ft/min and then some 700-800ft/min for the last two starts (it varies as the sample rate is so low, you get 3 samples at the OEI take-offs as they climb slower and 2 for the normal take-offs before the finish the OEI and fly back normally for another one)   .

So given we have the vertical speed one can see which one was OEI. Radar Toulouse has higher sample rates but no recording so one has to be there in real time.

[Edited 2013-08-20 23:45:11]


Non French in France
User currently offlineschwege From Finland, joined Jul 2013, 45 posts, RR: 1
Reply 96, posted (1 year 1 week 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 28520 times:

Quoting ferpe (Reply 94):
Radar Toulouse has higher sample rates but no recording so one has to be there in real time.

This shouldn't be a problem  

However, checking their coverage it seems that it isn't any better on the ground compared to FR24. Or are they filtering out some (stationary?) aircraft? Like the big birds F-WWDD and F-WWAY currently showing on FR24. I might look into it if you think RT provides better on-ground info than FR24.


User currently offlineap305 From India, joined Jan 2000, 555 posts, RR: 0
Reply 97, posted (1 year 1 week 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 28491 times:

AIB20WB is taxiing around the test center area...

User currently offlinePihero From France, joined Jan 2005, 4409 posts, RR: 76
Reply 98, posted (1 year 1 week 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 28503 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting schwege (Reply 90):
Now, what I'm still wondering is this: does the transponder always report pressure altitude, disregarding any QNH setting?

  
See today's METAR : LFBO 210700Z AUTO 18003KT 9999 NSC 16/13 Q1021
so we have a n 8 hPa difference ( 1021 - 1013 ) equivalent to 28 x 8 = 224 ft
so the pressure altitude is 500 - 224 = 276 ft, which is the value at landing. After a while, the altitude transmission ceases and you read zero.

Quoting ferpe (Reply 95):
So given we have the vertical speed one can see which one was OEI.

Good catch, ferpe !
The conditions were ideal that early in the morning : calm wind and smooth air.



Contrail designer
User currently offlineaviaponcho From France, joined Aug 2011, 613 posts, RR: 8
Reply 99, posted (1 year 1 week 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 28486 times:

All right, Ferpe did you dig in the nice Schwege work ?

Ferpe, the first one show no data under 800ft, the last two shows some points. Above 800 ft no obvious difference in climb rate?


User currently offlineferpe From France, joined Nov 2010, 2803 posts, RR: 59
Reply 100, posted (1 year 1 week 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 28414 times:

Quoting aviaponcho (Reply 99):
All right, Ferpe did you dig in the nice Schwege work ?

Yes, I watched the "Playback" , one can see things nicely there. After 800ft your next sample point is at 1200ft in a normal take-off and 1100ft for a OEI, there they feed in the second engine and fly normally again cause the critical part they want to test is the safe fly out speed of V2 just after rotation. Once you can clean up the aircraft your are fine on one engine in this dense air and low forward speed (= engine has a lot of power ), no point in continuing the OEI test, better to fly the circuit and taxi round to a new test after landing.

Actually all 4 runs before was with a full stop and taxi for a new start, no touch and go as I wrote. Makes sense given the test to be made. Yesterday was probably spent in the simulator for the crew to fly these tests including all thinkable emergency procedures (RTO ect) with the latest data, therefore these tests on Tuesday. OEI is a high risk test moment, you approach it with a LOT of training in the simulator including all thinkable and not thinkable go wrong scenarios..

[Edited 2013-08-21 00:42:22]


Non French in France
User currently offlineaviaponcho From France, joined Aug 2011, 613 posts, RR: 8
Reply 101, posted (1 year 1 week 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 28372 times:

All right ... I was too lazy (or occupied) to throw time vs vertical speed charts
So no full OEI take off / approach / landing


User currently offlineschwege From Finland, joined Jul 2013, 45 posts, RR: 1
Reply 102, posted (1 year 1 week 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 28388 times:

So including METAR info in the logs could be really useful.
Getting METAR data by IATA code seems to be a piece of cake, and now I found this: http://www.partow.net/miscellaneous/airportdatabase/ - that will allow me to lookup IATA codes by coordinates...

Which means that... automatic METAR inclusion at landing/takeoff airport coming soon to your favourite data logger  


User currently offlineferpe From France, joined Nov 2010, 2803 posts, RR: 59
Reply 103, posted (1 year 1 week 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 28343 times:

Quoting schwege (Reply 102):
Which means that... automatic METAR inclusion at landing/takeoff airport coming soon to your favourite data logger  

Awesome, we love it!!! And now we make another round as AIB20WB  Wow!



Non French in France
User currently offlinewisborg From Australia, joined Jun 2005, 26 posts, RR: 0
Reply 104, posted (1 year 1 week 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 28279 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Takeoff at 07:58 UTC from runway 32L

User currently offlineap305 From India, joined Jan 2000, 555 posts, RR: 0
Reply 105, posted (1 year 1 week 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 28266 times:

Another circuit around tls i guess...

User currently offlinewisborg From Australia, joined Jun 2005, 26 posts, RR: 0
Reply 106, posted (1 year 1 week 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 28257 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

And back on the ground at 08:01 UTC

User currently offlineStTim From UK - England, joined Aug 2013, 738 posts, RR: 0
Reply 107, posted (1 year 1 week 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 28292 times:

Another OEI circuit by the looks of it.

User currently offlineferpe From France, joined Nov 2010, 2803 posts, RR: 59
Reply 108, posted (1 year 1 week 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 28310 times:

Quoting StTim (Reply 107):
Another OEI circuit by the looks of it.

Yup, V2 was 157kts and climb rate (which is very approximate given the low sample rate ) around 500-600 fpm at V2. V2 is not to far off from my models predicted 156kts  Wow!  (though that is at MTOW, don't know what TOW they have, probably not max right away but they might still have some cushion in there this early in the campaign).



Non French in France
User currently offlineStTim From UK - England, joined Aug 2013, 738 posts, RR: 0
Reply 109, posted (1 year 1 week 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 28373 times:

Looks like it is off for another circuit,


Spoke a little too soon - has disappeared from FR24 again.

[Edited 2013-08-21 01:12:26]

User currently offlineKarelXWB From Netherlands, joined Jul 2012, 11367 posts, RR: 33
Reply 110, posted (1 year 1 week 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 28380 times:

Picture of AIB19WB on FR24.


AIB19WB 21.08.2013_03 by bmw801_dd, on Flickr



Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity. And I'm not sure about the universe.
User currently offlineferpe From France, joined Nov 2010, 2803 posts, RR: 59
Reply 111, posted (1 year 1 week 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 28265 times:

Quoting KarelXWB (Reply 110):
Picture of AIB19WB on FR24.

We would love from behind pictures just after lift-off as well  Wow!  to look at the side rudder and the bank angle 



Non French in France
User currently offlineferpe From France, joined Nov 2010, 2803 posts, RR: 59
Reply 112, posted (1 year 1 week 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 28237 times:

Changed callsign to AIB19WB again, must designate the tests series I presume  


Non French in France
User currently offlineferpe From France, joined Nov 2010, 2803 posts, RR: 59
Reply 113, posted (1 year 1 week 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 28195 times:

The last one was a right engine OEI judged by the slight left turn at V2 and the V2 was lower, 151kts, vertical around 500fpm (I look at Radar TLS as FR24 has to low sample rate for the finer details, it is 15 vs 2 sec  Yeah sure ) . They are getting more confident and are gradually going down in V2 with the test center and the crew checking things like alfa etc.

After this run they were satisfied for the morning and took lunch  , lets see what happens in the afternoon.

[Edited 2013-08-21 02:21:36]


Non French in France
User currently offlineKarelXWB From Netherlands, joined Jul 2012, 11367 posts, RR: 33
Reply 114, posted (1 year 1 week 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 28051 times:

Quoting ferpe (Reply 94):
Karel posted one in post 77.

Few more from August 19:


2013-08-19 - LFBO - FWXWB - 01 by Bistou Fly Photographies, on Flickr


2013-08-19 - LFBO - FWXWB - 03 by Bistou Fly Photographies, on Flickr



Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity. And I'm not sure about the universe.
User currently offlinetravelavnut From Netherlands, joined May 2010, 1610 posts, RR: 7
Reply 115, posted (1 year 1 week 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 27902 times:

Quoting KarelXWB (Reply 114):

It's such a pretty lady   

I know it has been mentioned before up-thread or in a previous thread, but like others today my office computer is melting with all these long threads, so please forgive me for asking;

When is MSN3 planned to fly for the first time?



Live From Amsterdam!
User currently offlineKarelXWB From Netherlands, joined Jul 2012, 11367 posts, RR: 33
Reply 116, posted (1 year 1 week 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 27851 times:

Quoting travelavnut (Reply 115):
When is MSN3 planned to fly for the first time?

MSN3 should join the fleet at the end of next month.



Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity. And I'm not sure about the universe.
User currently offlinestarbucks From Netherlands, joined Feb 2013, 708 posts, RR: 6
Reply 117, posted (1 year 1 week 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 27543 times:

And AIB21WB is active...

I have for today:
AIB19WB from 05:01Z to 06:34Z total 01:34 hrs
AIB20WB from 07:31Z to 08:57Z total 01:25 hrs

these are as close to block times as I could get, first movement -> lost tracking



A350 logbook: http://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/pub?key=0AlVgPnmHLOovdFdzbVlyQzhYNDhCb1VFN1RkYXkwV3c&output=html
User currently offlinestarbucks From Netherlands, joined Feb 2013, 708 posts, RR: 6
Reply 118, posted (1 year 1 week 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 27435 times:

AIB21WB is airborne, Looks like a normal flight now


A350 logbook: http://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/pub?key=0AlVgPnmHLOovdFdzbVlyQzhYNDhCb1VFN1RkYXkwV3c&output=html
User currently offlineKarelXWB From Netherlands, joined Jul 2012, 11367 posts, RR: 33
Reply 119, posted (1 year 1 week 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 27384 times:

Quoting starbucks (Reply 117):
I have for today:

Perfect.

Quoting starbucks (Reply 118):
AIB21WB is airborne, Looks like a normal flight now

Do you also have takeoff at 11:07 UTC?



Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity. And I'm not sure about the universe.
User currently offlineschwege From Finland, joined Jul 2013, 45 posts, RR: 1
Reply 120, posted (1 year 1 week 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 27369 times:

Quoting KarelXWB (Reply 119):
Do you also have takeoff at 11:07 UTC?

11:05.

Would someone mind to check if I got the pressure altitude equivalent thingy correct?


User currently offlinestarbucks From Netherlands, joined Feb 2013, 708 posts, RR: 6
Reply 121, posted (1 year 1 week 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 27371 times:

Quoting KarelXWB (Reply 119):
Perfect.

Just to add, for AIB20WB I combined 20WB and the second time 19WB was used, because it looked like they didn't stop at the flighttest center, so I see it as one flight..

Quoting KarelXWB (Reply 119):
Do you also have takeoff at 11:07 UTC?

11:05Z



A350 logbook: http://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/pub?key=0AlVgPnmHLOovdFdzbVlyQzhYNDhCb1VFN1RkYXkwV3c&output=html
User currently offlineHeavierthanair From Switzerland, joined Oct 2000, 795 posts, RR: 0
Reply 122, posted (1 year 1 week 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 27185 times:

G´day

A minute ago FR24 showed FWWSZ, an A380 in Korean Airline colours over Algiers, now it appears to be back "home" in Toulouse, quite an achievement.

In other news, AIB21WB is airborne again doing whatever at 10000 ft and 400 kts, venturing quite a bit away from base in a south easterly direction


Cheers

Peter



"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the universe." (Albert Einstein, 1879
User currently offlineap305 From India, joined Jan 2000, 555 posts, RR: 0
Reply 123, posted (1 year 1 week 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 26845 times:

Cruising at Fl410 and 508kts

User currently offlinesassiciai From UK - Scotland, joined Jan 2013, 340 posts, RR: 0
Reply 124, posted (1 year 1 week 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 26611 times:

Looking at the flight path today, I wonder how much discretion the crew has to go "where they want", how much of the path is pre-planned, and how much they have to submit as a flight plan.

Maybe they are given some discretion in particular zones, and restricted in any particular zone to a particular altitude range. The 10,000ft stuff close to TLS, the 41,000ft stuff where they are currently (Western Med & Southern France, just west of the Rhone valley!)

How controlled are these test flights from an ATC point-of-view?


User currently offlineferpe From France, joined Nov 2010, 2803 posts, RR: 59
Reply 125, posted (1 year 1 week 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 26566 times:

Quoting sassiciai (Reply 124):
How controlled are these test flights from an ATC point-of-view?

I would not know from an ATC point of view, there are others like Pihero better but the whole flight is controlled from the test flight engineer, the pilots do as he says and he has everything preplanned in a test script which is also available in the test center. This means they could be pretty exact in the flight plans, however I think the ATC gives them areas including FLs to use for these donnut flight paths  .

Today it could also be that there was one flight crew specially trained for the OEI stuff this morning and there is another one flying this more normal test sortie this afternoon. It is difficult to say what they test, seems like high speed at 10k feet and then high up curise style test at FL 410, 488 kts wind still is M 0.85 in std temps .



Non French in France
User currently offlineferpe From France, joined Nov 2010, 2803 posts, RR: 59
Reply 126, posted (1 year 1 week 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 26213 times:

Landed at 14.50 UTC after tests at 10k feet and FL 410


Non French in France
User currently offlinestarbucks From Netherlands, joined Feb 2013, 708 posts, RR: 6
Reply 127, posted (1 year 1 week 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 26344 times:

She's back home

Quoting starbucks (Reply 117):
I have for today:
AIB19WB from 05:01Z to 06:34Z total 01:34 hrs
AIB20WB from 07:31Z to 08:57Z total 01:26 hrs

AIB21WB blocktimes: 10:43Z to 14:59Z total 04:15

So today's block total: 7hrs15mins (approx, counting from first movement towards runway till arrival at flight test center)

[Edited 2013-08-21 08:02:23]


A350 logbook: http://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/pub?key=0AlVgPnmHLOovdFdzbVlyQzhYNDhCb1VFN1RkYXkwV3c&output=html
User currently offlinesassiciai From UK - Scotland, joined Jan 2013, 340 posts, RR: 0
Reply 128, posted (1 year 1 week 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 26289 times:

Quoting starbucks (Reply 127):
Quoting starbucks (Reply 117):
I have for today:
AIB19WB from 05:01Z to 06:34Z total 01:34 hrs
AIB20WB from 07:31Z to 08:57Z total 01:26 hrs

AIB21WB blocktimes: 10:43Z to 14:59Z total 04:15

So today's block total: 7hrs15mins (approx, counting from first movement towards runway till arrival at flight test center)

Well, she's back at the flight test centre (not at an American center). Sorry!  

Now we collectively need to decide in our shadow spreadsheet what it is that is recorded as flight hours. Today's earlier movements consisted of circuits, each of a few minutes (4 or 5?) followed by much longer ground movements, so of the AIB19WB 1:34hrs, how much of that was actual flight time?

It becomes ever more difficult to maintain an amateur log of flight time!


User currently offlineaviaponcho From France, joined Aug 2011, 613 posts, RR: 8
Reply 129, posted (1 year 1 week 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 26289 times:

Not bad at all
So OEI Take off / 10 000 play and FL410 run ....

Quite a busy day bigsmile :d

Gathering datas to throw at Boeing for the supposed 777X launch next week at dubay ?


User currently offlinestarbucks From Netherlands, joined Feb 2013, 708 posts, RR: 6
Reply 130, posted (1 year 1 week 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 26266 times:

Quoting sassiciai (Reply 128):
Now we collectively need to decide in our shadow spreadsheet what it is that is recorded as flight hours. Today's earlier movements consisted of circuits, each of a few minutes (4 or 5?) followed by much longer ground movements, so of the AIB19WB 1:34hrs, how much of that was actual flight time?

I know, for my own spreadsheet (found here: http://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/c...DhCb1VFN1RkYXkwV3c&usp=sharing ) I use block times since Airbus said that they use that as well for certification hours

Block times are from departure at flight test centre till arrival back there, that's why I combined all the circuits to one flight per call sign.
Tracking hours will be even harder when they start with the VMU, Water ingestion, Max RTO, etc.. tests... but for now I log hours as block hours  
Quoting sassiciai (Reply 128):
Well, she's back at the flight test centre (not at an American center). Sorry!

Haha, I know, little typo  

[Edited 2013-08-21 08:21:37]


A350 logbook: http://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/pub?key=0AlVgPnmHLOovdFdzbVlyQzhYNDhCb1VFN1RkYXkwV3c&output=html
User currently offlinesassiciai From UK - Scotland, joined Jan 2013, 340 posts, RR: 0
Reply 131, posted (1 year 1 week 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 26159 times:

Quoting starbucks (Reply 130):
since Airbus said that they use that as well for certification hours

I am aware of an Airbus target of 2600hours of flight tests. Surely that has to be all flight time

Today's morning session (of which I only saw the last circuit) was only about 15 minutes flight, out of a "mission" of 1:34.

Does Airbus count that mission as 1:34, or as 0:15? That's a factor of 6 difference

[Edited 2013-08-21 08:41:00]

[Edited 2013-08-21 08:53:20]

User currently offlinestarbucks From Netherlands, joined Feb 2013, 708 posts, RR: 6
Reply 132, posted (1 year 1 week 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 26057 times:

Quoting sassiciai (Reply 131):
I am aware of an Airbus target of 2600hours of flight tests. Surely that has to be all flight time

I thought a member from here sent it, but I just realized it was a member from the doubledecker forum

He sent a mail/message to Airbus and received this answer:

Quote:

Concerning your question below, here is our answer:
They only register the flight time, not the block time
TOTAL BLOCK TIME (which is the official counting of flight test time): 91h50
TOTAL FLIGHT TIME (time airborne): 87h30

Read more: http://doubledecker.boards.net/threa...-flight-tests?page=9#ixzz2ccSsSKtq

I interpreted this that blocktime is the official time, however now that I read the first line again I'm starting to doubt...



A350 logbook: http://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/pub?key=0AlVgPnmHLOovdFdzbVlyQzhYNDhCb1VFN1RkYXkwV3c&output=html
User currently offlineKarelXWB From Netherlands, joined Jul 2012, 11367 posts, RR: 33
Reply 133, posted (1 year 1 week 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 25569 times:

Quoting Heavierthanair (Reply 122):
A minute ago FR24 showed FWWSZ, an A380 in Korean Airline colours over Algiers, now it appears to be back "home" in Toulouse, quite an achievement.

Yes that was the customer acceptance flight of Korean Air's next A380.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/aircrafts/9561463141/



Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity. And I'm not sure about the universe.
User currently offlineferpe From France, joined Nov 2010, 2803 posts, RR: 59
Reply 134, posted (1 year 1 week 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 25250 times:

Quoting KarelXWB (Reply 114):
Few more from August 19:

The picture from the front is nice, here one can also see an interesting aspect of the flaps and how they are guided by the different flap mechanisms, so called dropped hinge mechanisms.

The inner flaps (roughly between fuselage and engines) are extending straight back, this is natural as the yehudi (yes this is what it is called, the straight bit of the wings aft part which holds the landing gear leg, don't ask me why it is called that  ) makes for a straight flap hinge line.

Normally the outer flap would also extend straight back from it's part of the wing, the only problem is that this now has an angled hinge line as the trailing edge is angled, see the figure:



So you have to have a gap between the flaps otherwise they would collide, not good for the aero performance of the wing. Further, for a normal outer flap the mechanisms (inner and outer) and their gondolas would have to move straight back from the trailing edge, ie they would extend into the wind as they are angled vs the wind direction. To reduce drag and noise Airbus has designed the outer flap to also extend straight back meaning the mechanisms are pointing straight back from an angled trailing edge.

For anyone with a geometric mind this is an enigma  , how do they do it with simple dropped hinge mechanisms, you have a non straight hinge line? Well I have concluded that they do it by just having the inner flap hinge taking all the loads, both in longitudinal and lateral (sideways). That is why this hinge is broader and beefier (easy to see in the picture), the one you can only see part of is the outer hinge. This is only taking longitudinal loads and is totally flexible sideways, it has therefore ball joints in all 3 attachment points. This hinge is therefore not as beefy, does not have to take any sideways loads, just make sure the flap follows it's curved deployment path.

So why this long thing about a flap movement  Wow! . I guess it has kept me busy how they did it   and I might still not have got it  Wow! , in which case I hope someone in the know will help me out  .

But it is a nice picture Karel  .

[Edited 2013-08-21 13:45:29]


Non French in France
User currently offlineKarelXWB From Netherlands, joined Jul 2012, 11367 posts, RR: 33
Reply 135, posted (1 year 1 week 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 25064 times:

And the pictures of today:


A359 Airbus F-WXWB msn 001 by Mav'31, on Flickr


A359 Airbus F-WXWB msn 001 by Mav'31, on Flickr


A359 Airbus F-WXWB msn 001 by Mav'31, on Flickr

More pictures are available at http://www.flickr.com/photos/mav31/



Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity. And I'm not sure about the universe.
User currently offlineOldAeroGuy From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 3502 posts, RR: 66
Reply 136, posted (1 year 1 week 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 25038 times:

Quoting ferpe (Reply 134):
(yes this is what it is called, the straight bit of the wings aft part which holds the landing gear leg, don't ask me why it is called that  )

This a bit off topic, but here is some background on why this part of the wing is called a Yehudi. It does correspond with stories I heard at Boeing. The excerpt is from this source:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/32766298/S...Aerodynamics-of-Airfiols-and-Wings

"Many other refinements are available to the aerodynamic designer. Insight into both the human and technical aspects of wing design prior to the introduction of computational aerodynamics is available in two recent books describing the evolution of the Boeing series of jet transports.

One interesting refinement of swept wings has been the addition of trailing edge area at the wing root. Generally known as a “Yehudi flap”, this additional area arises for at least two reasons. The reason cited most frequently is the need to provide structure to attach the landing gear at the proper location. However, the additional chord lowers the section lift coefficient at the root, where wing-fuselage interference can be a problem, and the lower required section lift makes the design job easier. Douglas introduced this planform modification for swept wings on the DC-8, while Boeing did not incorporate it until the -320 model of the 707. However, retired Boeing engineer William Cook, in his book, on page 83, says it was first introduced on the B-29 to solve an interference problem between the inboard nacelle and the fuselage. The aerodynamic benefit to the B-29 can be found in the paper by Snyder.

Cook says, in a letter to me, that the device got its name because each wind tunnel part needed a name and there was a popular radio show at the time that featured the continuing punch line “Who’s Yehudi?” (the Bob Hope Radio show featuring Jerry Colonna, who had the line). Thus, a Boeing engineer decided to call it a Yehudi flap. This slight extra chord is readily apparent when examining the B-29, but is very difficult to photograph."

It also helps to understand the American language in the '30's to '50's.

http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-yeh1.htm

(Edited for spacing)

[Edited 2013-08-21 14:55:53]


Airplane design is easy, the difficulty is getting them to fly - Barnes Wallis
User currently offlineAircellist From Canada, joined Oct 2004, 1718 posts, RR: 8
Reply 137, posted (1 year 1 week 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 24696 times:

Quoting OldAeroGuy (Reply 136):
However, retired Boeing engineer William Cook, in his book

"The road to the 707", is it?

I reallyh wish someone, one day, would make such a nice, instructive, pleasant to read and easy to understand book about what has happened from the 707 to the 787 (or A350, for that matter…)

Sorry for the little straying out of topic. Let me also restate that this is one of the, if not the, best threads ever, on A.net. Thanks, gentlemen.


User currently offlineferpe From France, joined Nov 2010, 2803 posts, RR: 59
Reply 138, posted (1 year 1 week 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 24528 times:

Quoting Aircellist (Reply 137):
Let me also restate that this is one of the, if not the, best threads ever, on A.net. Thanks, gentlemen.

We have to a large extent thank the guys at the test center in TLS for that, now they are offering us new excitement in the form of AIB22WB which just appeared on FR24  and then dissapears again, this is normal, it will reappear.

Also a big thanks to OldAeroguy for giving the historical connection and the resolution around the Yehudi , has the same background then as the famous Skunk works name (also from a Radio / TV series at the time) .

[Edited 2013-08-21 22:45:00]


Non French in France
User currently offlineschwege From Finland, joined Jul 2013, 45 posts, RR: 1
Reply 139, posted (1 year 1 week 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 24388 times:

Takeoff time for AIB22WB a bit hard to tell exactly, as there was once again a long blackout. Taking into account airport elevation and climb rate, my best guess is 06:07Z.

User currently offlineSpeedbird128 From Pitcairn Islands, joined Oct 2003, 1648 posts, RR: 2
Reply 140, posted (1 year 1 week 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 24281 times:

Quoting sassiciai (Reply 124):
How controlled are these test flights from an ATC point-of-view?

As an ATC I can give you some insight from my handling of test flights...

We really don't want to interfere with the flight, as usually parameters are being monitored for a whole procedure.

So, we would normally grant a block of airspace for free use (but its essential to pre-arrange with ATC), so they can do what they want, when they want. Obviously getting a big chunk of airspace blocked off in the middle of europe is hard, however, I think Airbus use specific areas (over bay of biscay, and over the med) that they can probably "book" in advance, and then CFMU/ATC keeps other traffic around it.



A306, A313, A319, A320, A321, A332, A343, A345, A346 A388, AC90, B06, B722, B732, B733, B735, B738, B744, B762, B772, B7
User currently offlineKarelXWB From Netherlands, joined Jul 2012, 11367 posts, RR: 33
Reply 141, posted (1 year 1 week 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 24102 times:

It's flying 2,900 ft above the Bay of Biscay.


Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity. And I'm not sure about the universe.
User currently offlineUnflug From Germany, joined Jan 2012, 475 posts, RR: 2
Reply 142, posted (1 year 1 week 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 24087 times:

Quoting KarelXWB (Reply 141):
It's flying 2,900 ft above the Bay of Biscay.

... with significant changes in vertical speed this morning: -2500 to +1000 ft/m in a very short time. They seem to have fun  


User currently offlineferpe From France, joined Nov 2010, 2803 posts, RR: 59
Reply 143, posted (1 year 1 week 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 24055 times:

Quoting KarelXWB (Reply 141):
It's flying 2,900 ft above the Bay of Biscay.

I don't have the wind at 10kft but at FL240 it is 25kts at northerly direction so we should add say 15-20kts to the speeds going north but it is hard to tell, looking at the traces when she is going north and south it seems rather low winds at 10kft. It seems to be slow speed work and she is gradually decending as the speed goes to the 170-180kts area, if I would have to guess preparation for OEI landing patterns.



Non French in France
User currently offlineaviaponcho From France, joined Aug 2011, 613 posts, RR: 8
Reply 144, posted (1 year 1 week 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 24025 times:

Still, at least one flight a day

Concerning Sassiciai's question
I think it's good to track the number of flight cycle, ie take-off landing...


User currently offlineKarelXWB From Netherlands, joined Jul 2012, 11367 posts, RR: 33
Reply 145, posted (1 year 1 week 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 23995 times:

Few more pictures of yesterday's flight:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/florent_peraudeau/9569331604/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/florent_peraudeau/9569332146/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/florent_peraudeau/9569332894/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/florent_peraudeau/9569332490/


F-WXWB Airbus Industrie Airbus A350-941 - cn 001 by Flox Papa, on Flickr



Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity. And I'm not sure about the universe.
User currently offlinePihero From France, joined Jan 2005, 4409 posts, RR: 76
Reply 146, posted (1 year 1 week 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 23951 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

FL 100 : 240/10 kt SAT +8 over the sea, going 270/10 over land (the Landes !!! )
St Nazaire : 210/06 kt SAT +6
FL180 : 260/15 SAT -13
FL 240 : 270/15 SAT -24
so by interpolation : FL 200 : 270 15 kt SAT -17°C
So at this time ( 0848 Z ) GS 271kt TAS = 270 and CAS = 200 kt

some slight variations of ROC seem to indicate manual flying.
Has anyone noticed the sqawk ?... 7700 !

[Edited 2013-08-22 01:53:40]


Contrail designer
User currently offlineKarelXWB From Netherlands, joined Jul 2012, 11367 posts, RR: 33
Reply 147, posted (1 year 1 week 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 23932 times:

Quoting Pihero (Reply 146):
Has anyone noticed the sqawk ?... 7700 !

An emergency, wonder what they are testing.

BTW welcome back Pihero  



Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity. And I'm not sure about the universe.
User currently offlineKarelXWB From Netherlands, joined Jul 2012, 11367 posts, RR: 33
Reply 148, posted (1 year 1 week 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 23889 times:

Quoting Pihero (Reply 146):
Has anyone noticed the sqawk ?... 7700 !
Quoting KarelXWB (Reply 147):
An emergency, wonder what they are testing.

It already changed to 2640.



Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity. And I'm not sure about the universe.
User currently offlinewisborg From Australia, joined Jun 2005, 26 posts, RR: 0
Reply 149, posted (1 year 1 week 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 23885 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Pihero (Reply 146):
Has anyone noticed the sqawk ?... 7700 !

Interesting - it's changed to 2640 just now.


User currently offlinePihero From France, joined Jan 2005, 4409 posts, RR: 76
Reply 150, posted (1 year 1 week 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 23778 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

At FL 050, wind is 090/5 kt SAT +18 over the sea and 180/5 kt SAT +19 over land.
Hi, Karel !
Hell of a job you guys did these past four weeks !



Contrail designer
User currently offlinetravelavnut From Netherlands, joined May 2010, 1610 posts, RR: 7
Reply 151, posted (1 year 1 week 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 23803 times:

Quoting KarelXWB (Reply 147):
An emergency, wonder what they are testing.

So for the OT question; but next to my Flightradar24 A350 alerts I get almost daily 7700 alerts from around the globe. But when I search those flights directly after the alert it's always a different transponder number. A flightradar24 mistake? Or sometimes somebody hits a button by accident??



Live From Amsterdam!
User currently offlinegroover158 From Australia, joined Aug 2005, 41 posts, RR: 0
Reply 152, posted (1 year 1 week 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 23920 times:

Hi, first time poster here at Airliners; although I have been a lurker for more than 7 years.

I just wanted to thank you all for the truly informative and interesting posts above regarding the Flight Test Program of the mighty Airbus A350. Having worked in Aviation for the last 25 years, and been interested in Aviation since I was around 8 years old, I really love this stuff and am truly appreciative. Thank you.   


User currently offlineSXI899 From Netherlands, joined Jan 2008, 269 posts, RR: 0
Reply 153, posted (1 year 1 week 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 23805 times:

Quoting Speedbird128 (Reply 140):
As an ATC I can give you some insight from my handling of test flights...

We really don't want to interfere with the flight, as usually parameters are being monitored for a whole procedure.

So, we would normally grant a block of airspace for free use (but its essential to pre-arrange with ATC), so they can do what they want, when they want. Obviously getting a big chunk of airspace blocked off in the middle of europe is hard, however, I think Airbus use specific areas (over bay of biscay, and over the med) that they can probably "book" in advance, and then CFMU/ATC keeps other traffic around it.

In France, provided you're doing the testflights by the book, its all arranged with the military CEV (Centre d'essais en vol), and the flight is controlled by one of their CCERs (Centres de Contrôle Essai Réception).

A testflight profile is provided when requesting the service from the CEV, listing flight type/details, altitudes and times. When the flight is approved, you are advised which CCER(s) is/are controlling the flight along with the contact numbers to make any final preflight arrangements. It's an excellent service, as generally you have a dedicated controller for the duration of the flight.

Look up AIC A 03/03 on the SIA site, which provides a lot of info on this.

Yorden



Any Type, Any Time, Anywhere
User currently offlinestarbucks From Netherlands, joined Feb 2013, 708 posts, RR: 6
Reply 154, posted (1 year 1 week 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 23818 times:

Seems to be coming home now... Maybe they really had an emergency, resolved it and are cutting the test flight short... Really hope not  


A350 logbook: http://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/pub?key=0AlVgPnmHLOovdFdzbVlyQzhYNDhCb1VFN1RkYXkwV3c&output=html
User currently offlinePihero From France, joined Jan 2005, 4409 posts, RR: 76
Reply 155, posted (1 year 1 week 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 23797 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting starbucks (Reply 154):
Maybe they really had an emergency, resolved it and are cutting the test flight short...

Verry unlikely as they had quite a few fields to land on closer than TOU and they didn't seem to be in a hurry.
They could have tested the automated TCAS resolution feature as there were quite a few high rates of descent / climb.

TOU METAR :LFBO 220900Z AUTO 15013KT 9999 NSC 24/16 Q1015



Contrail designer
User currently offlineKarelXWB From Netherlands, joined Jul 2012, 11367 posts, RR: 33
Reply 156, posted (1 year 1 week 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 23680 times:

AIB22WB on the ground at 09:54 UTC.


Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity. And I'm not sure about the universe.
User currently offlineferpe From France, joined Nov 2010, 2803 posts, RR: 59
Reply 157, posted (1 year 1 week 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 23004 times:

Quoting Pihero (Reply 155):
They could have tested the automated TCAS resolution feature as there were quite a few high rates of descent / climb.

Having looked at the playback I think you are right, in the middle of the stint it was a real roller-coaster and then we had this 7700 squak after which is was cruising level and doing nothing for a while, then it started over again.

What would be the criteria for a TCAS (collision avoidance system based on sending your 3D GPS coordinates to each other) switch to a 7700 sqawk and why test this at this stage of the program, MSN004 is the dedicated Avionics test program.

Is a proven TCAS a requirement for being allowed into certain airspaces that the test programs need to enter before MSN004 has flown?



Non French in France
User currently offlineKarelXWB From Netherlands, joined Jul 2012, 11367 posts, RR: 33
Reply 158, posted (1 year 1 week 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 22860 times:

Picture of today:


AIB22WB 22/8/2013 by A380_TLS_A350, on Flickr



Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity. And I'm not sure about the universe.
User currently offlinestarbucks From Netherlands, joined Feb 2013, 708 posts, RR: 6
Reply 159, posted (1 year 1 week 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 22752 times:

Quoting KarelXWB (Reply 158):

Picture of today:

Is it me, or do I see a low flap setting??



A350 logbook: http://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/pub?key=0AlVgPnmHLOovdFdzbVlyQzhYNDhCb1VFN1RkYXkwV3c&output=html
User currently offlineStTim From UK - England, joined Aug 2013, 738 posts, RR: 0
Reply 160, posted (1 year 1 week 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 22738 times:

Looks like hardly any flap set. Anyone have any thoughts on why?

User currently onlineav8ornta From United States of America, joined Aug 2013, 35 posts, RR: 0
Reply 161, posted (1 year 1 week 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 22700 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting groover158 (Reply 152):

Hi, first time poster here at Airliners; although I have been a lurker for more than 7 years.

I just wanted to thank you all for the truly informative and interesting posts above regarding the Flight Test Program of the mighty Airbus A350. Having worked in Aviation for the last 25 years, and been interested in Aviation since I was around 8 years old, I really love this stuff and am truly appreciative. Thank you.

I'm with Groover158- best thread! I keep flipping between here and FR24


User currently offlineferpe From France, joined Nov 2010, 2803 posts, RR: 59
Reply 162, posted (1 year 1 week 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 22599 times:

Quoting StTim (Reply 160):
Looks like hardly any flap set. Anyone have any thoughts on why?


How much flap do you set when you do an OEI (One Engine Inoperative is the term  ) approach? In my view rather little to keep the drag low if you want to go around. I think we just saw the first OEI landing    ....

Those photos around the flights are of great value, I also have comments about the nice photos from yesterday, for later....

[Edited 2013-08-22 08:23:36]


Non French in France
User currently offlinestarbucks From Netherlands, joined Feb 2013, 708 posts, RR: 6
Reply 163, posted (1 year 1 week 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 22562 times:

Quoting ferpe (Reply 162):
How much flap do you set when you do an OEI (One Engine Inoperative is the term  )

On the 737 "we" use flaps 15 for One Engine Inop. approaches. For the Bus that would be Flaps 2 I guess?

Quoting ferpe (Reply 162):
I think we just saw the first OEI landing

Can't see if the rudder is giving any input to compensate the Asym. thrust...

[Edited 2013-08-22 08:31:01]


A350 logbook: http://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/pub?key=0AlVgPnmHLOovdFdzbVlyQzhYNDhCb1VFN1RkYXkwV3c&output=html
User currently offlineStTim From UK - England, joined Aug 2013, 738 posts, RR: 0
Reply 164, posted (1 year 1 week 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 22478 times:

Thanks guys - informative as ever.

User currently offlinePihero From France, joined Jan 2005, 4409 posts, RR: 76
Reply 165, posted (1 year 1 week 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 22394 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting starbucks (Reply 159):
Is it me, or do I see a low flap setting??

Good catch : Seems like Flaps config 2.

Quoting starbucks (Reply 163):
On the 737 "we" use flaps 15 for One Engine Inop. approaches. For the Bus that would be Flaps 2 I guess?

Onj the 'Bus (320 family, 330, 340 and 380 ), the one engine out approach is flown with flap config 3. On a Go around, retract them to 2.
I don't see why the A350 would be any different.

Quoting ferpe (Reply 162):
I think we just saw the first OEI landing    ....

As starbucks remarks, there is no rudder at all... so I doubt it.
Looks a lot more like a test on abnormal flap / flight controls config. I haven't had time to go through the spreadsheet but I'd be interested in the final approach speed.
Got it : 152 kt. Must have been a light airplane !



Contrail designer
User currently offlineaviaponcho From France, joined Aug 2011, 613 posts, RR: 8
Reply 166, posted (1 year 1 week 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 22349 times:

Hello Pihero

Can a differential flap setting can be imagine for OEI situations ?


User currently offlinePihero From France, joined Jan 2005, 4409 posts, RR: 76
Reply 167, posted (1 year 1 week 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 22187 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting aviaponcho (Reply 166):
Can a differential flap setting can be imagine for OEI situations ?

Hi ! Salut, Poncho !
If you mean *differenr* flap configs, yes, of course it's possible but note that we're talking SOPs here. As a matter of fact, on the A320 a single engine Cat III autoland can only be done with full flaps.
Thje 'Buses are aerodynamically very clean aircraft with very efficient High lift devices ( a lot less draggy than one would expect, really )



Contrail designer
User currently offlinestarbucks From Netherlands, joined Feb 2013, 708 posts, RR: 6
Reply 168, posted (1 year 1 week 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 22125 times:

Quoting Pihero (Reply 165):
Onj the 'Bus (320 family, 330, 340 and 380 ), the one engine out approach is flown with flap config 3. On a Go around, retract them to 2.
I don't see why the A350 would be any different.

Check, even I keep learning here..  

The reason I thought Flap2 for OEI was because for normal operations Flaps 3 and not "Full" are used for landing (at least at the carriers I had the honor of taking the flight on the jumpseat)

Just like flaps 30 and not 40 on the 737....

My reasoning was (until now):
Flaps 1 (320) ~ Flaps 1 (737)
Flaps 2 (320) ~ Flaps 15 (737)
Flaps 3 (320) ~ Flaps 30
Flaps Full ~ Flaps 40
All approximates ofc.

I know the Airbi only give Slats when selecting F1 but 1 degree of flaps on the 737 isn't much either but you get Slats too...

Interesting to see the F2 selection on Go Around, in the 737 the flaps go back to 1 immediately... But I guess that has to do with the "Aerodynamically clean" A320 you talked about..  



A350 logbook: http://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/pub?key=0AlVgPnmHLOovdFdzbVlyQzhYNDhCb1VFN1RkYXkwV3c&output=html
User currently offlineferpe From France, joined Nov 2010, 2803 posts, RR: 59
Reply 169, posted (1 year 1 week 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 21694 times:

Quoting Pihero (Reply 165):
As starbucks remarks, there is no rudder at all... so I doubt it.
OK, but would there be much rudder in an OEI approach with that low flap setting? You are at 160kts, low drag ie the active engine on almost flight idle and the other at flight idle and your rudder has the aurthority of 160kts, until you start putting on throttle (for some reason) there is not much rudder needed. In what other way could we check if it was OEI? I would expect the approach speed to go with the flap, in such a case 152kts is low for flaps 2 (and it ain't more), that is the normal final speed for flaps 3 for the last landings and with both engines.

Any clues?

Edit:
Had a look at the picture again, this is not even the normal start flap, it mus be config 1. How do we know that this is a landing picture, could be from the start and then with config 1, the only thing that speaks against if is that the pitch angle is a bit low. The playback has an interupt during the take-off so one can not see what is happening there but I think it is a start picture as the flap setting and a 152 kts final speed does not jive.

[Edited 2013-08-22 12:42:00]


Non French in France
User currently offlineferpe From France, joined Nov 2010, 2803 posts, RR: 59
Reply 170, posted (1 year 1 week 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 21616 times:

Here a close-up of todays wing, definately less flap then anytime seen before, I would say config 1. What surprises me is that the slat is fully extended in this mode with full gap and all, doesn't it retract to sealed slat at some config or is this only Boeing that does that? Looks funny with a full slat and almost no flap  :

http://i298.photobucket.com/albums/mm262/ferpe_bucket/22082013wingandhighliftconfig1_zps34bda60a.jpg



Non French in France
User currently offlinebobmuc From Germany, joined Nov 2011, 406 posts, RR: 0
Reply 171, posted (1 year 1 week 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 21442 times:

Quoting ferpe (Reply 169):
1. How do we know that this is a landing picture,

Not 100% sure but
a) the angle looks more like from a landing and not from takeoff
b) info from Flickr picture is saying: taking 11 hours ago


User currently offlineferpe From France, joined Nov 2010, 2803 posts, RR: 59
Reply 172, posted (1 year 1 week 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 21404 times:

Quoting bobmuc (Reply 171):
Not 100% sure but
a) the angle looks more like from a landing and not from takeoff
b) info from Flickr picture is saying: taking 11 hours ago

Agree with the angle and the time says it is landing, then we have landing with very little flap. I forgot to add the wind to the final approach speed, it was 14kts straight from 140° (thanks Veikko ) so we are talking 166kts approach speed, seems more plausible. Now what were they testing   ...

[Edited 2013-08-22 13:24:58]


Non French in France
User currently offlineKarelXWB From Netherlands, joined Jul 2012, 11367 posts, RR: 33
Reply 173, posted (1 year 1 week 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 21394 times:

The EXIF info of the picture has been deleted so we can't see the time of capture, but we can see trees in the background. These are the trees in the left top corner of this picture:



So it was the landing because MSN1 touched down on runway 14.



Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity. And I'm not sure about the universe.
User currently offlineferpe From France, joined Nov 2010, 2803 posts, RR: 59
Reply 174, posted (1 year 1 week 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 21330 times:

Quoting KarelXWB (Reply 173):
These are the trees in the left top corner of this picture

You are right, I actually checked it all by putting me on Streetview on the road marked D1 a bit more to the north and looked WSW at the final, I could see the trees and also the radar station.

Basta, settled  .

So why a config 1 landing? Just to test it or was there something more to it? Could have been OEI...

Edit: Didn't find the Bike sign though......    ...... Big grin

[Edited 2013-08-22 13:45:15]


Non French in France
User currently offlineabba From Denmark, joined Jun 2005, 1335 posts, RR: 2
Reply 175, posted (1 year 1 week 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 21301 times: