Sponsor Message:
Aviation Technical / Operations Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Flying With Air-brakes Deployed  
User currently offlineCapt.Fantastic From United States of America, joined Aug 1999, 694 posts, RR: 0
Posted (7 years 9 months 2 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 3782 times:

Recently I was flying on a United 737-500 from O'Hare to Detroit. Throughtout almost the entire flight, the air spoilers were deployed. We were cruising at FL 260 - Why would the spoilers be deployed for this long of a period even at cruise altitude? Could this have been due to cross-winds?



I look forward to your replies

11 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineCosmicCruiser From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 2254 posts, RR: 16
Reply 1, posted (7 years 9 months 2 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 3758 times:

Quoting Capt.Fantastic (Thread starter):
Could this have been due to cross-winds?

No relation. The only times I've ever had to fly with the spoilers extended was when we were going to be above max ldg. wgt at touchdown and we were trying to burn extra fuel by adding this drag.


User currently offlineN8076U From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 425 posts, RR: 9
Reply 2, posted (7 years 9 months 2 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 3731 times:

Were both sides deployed? If they were, then they were the flight spoilers, and what CosmicCruiser stated could very well have been the case.

If only one side was deployed, then that could be part of the roll control system. The spoilers will proportionately deploy on the one side to assist the aileron that is moving upwards (which is the wing that needs to go downwards). If the aileron trim is set to the left, this may cause what I am seeing in the photo, but I am skeptical of this explanation in this particular case because in the photo, the aileron appears to be completely neutral. But I thought I'd throw it out there anyways.  Wink

Chris



Don't blame me, I don't work here...
User currently offlineCapt.Fantastic From United States of America, joined Aug 1999, 694 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (7 years 9 months 2 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 3728 times:

Thanks for your comments - The plane was completely full - Is there any case in which they would they carry more fuel than required (plus reserves) for the 240 mile trip?

User currently offlineIlikeyyc From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 1373 posts, RR: 21
Reply 4, posted (7 years 9 months 2 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 3713 times:

There are some good pictures of how the speedbrakes work on the B737 technical site:

http://www.b737.org.uk/flightcontrols.htm



Fighting Absurdity with Absurdity!
User currently offlineFlyMatt2Bermud From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 563 posts, RR: 7
Reply 5, posted (7 years 9 months 2 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 3703 times:

Quoting Capt.Fantastic (Reply 3):
The plane was completely full - Is there any case in which they would they carry more fuel than required

240 nm is a pretty short trip for a 737. Sometimes airlines will tanker less expensive fuel when conditions warrant. It could have been another airline cancelled a similar flight at the last minute and transferred their pax to your flight, creating an unexpected full capacity situation and thus the potential for an overweight landing. I'm only guessing but I think they probably didn't expect a full flight. They may have decided to try to burn it off enroute rather than defuel and take a delay.

One factor against my theory is your cruising altitude of FL260, if they were intending on burning off fuel I would think they would have opted for a much lower altitude unless there were storms or moderate turbulence at the lower levels.



"When once you have tasted flight, you will forever walk the earth with your eyes turned skyward" Leonardo Da Vinci
User currently offlineCosmicCruiser From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 2254 posts, RR: 16
Reply 6, posted (7 years 9 months 2 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 3700 times:

Quoting N8076U (Reply 2):
If only one side was deployed, then that could be part of the roll control system.

By the amount of deflection if it were a flight control input for the whole flight that would be one out of trim jet.

Quoting Capt.Fantastic (Reply 3):
Is there any case in which they would they carry more fuel than required (plus reserves) for the 240 mile trip?

Carrying more than required is not the problem but short trips are usually max ldg wgt limited so a few hundred extra pounds more than flight planned fuel may have them heavy at ldg as well as the fact that flt. planning is usually on the conservative side meaning they have the predicted burn higher than actual burn.


User currently offlineHAWK21M From India, joined Jan 2001, 31573 posts, RR: 57
Reply 7, posted (7 years 9 months 2 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 3540 times:

Could it have been an out of trim Flight Spoiler.Since the Aileron looks Neutral.
Only #3 & 4 are Raised.How was the other side.
regds
MEL



Think of the brighter side!
User currently offlineFlyMatt2Bermud From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 563 posts, RR: 7
Reply 8, posted (7 years 9 months 2 weeks 7 hours ago) and read 3442 times:

Quoting HAWK21M (Reply 7):
Only #3 & 4 are Raised.

The flight spoiler position shown is normal on a 737 with the speedbrake lever pulled back to the 'half' deploy position. The 737 design also uses the flight spoilers as part of the aileron augmentation system. With the speedbrake stowed, the spoiler simply rises on the down-going wing with aileron. With the speedbrake applied, not only do the spoilers on the lowering wing rise but simultaneously the spoilers on the up-going wing return to neutral until the ailerons are returned to the neutral position.

What was happening could have been intentional or a malfunction as there are several Airworthiness Directives effecting the Boeing 737's flight spoilers. I am not criticizing, after all this is part of being mechanical and we all know Boeing builds some great aircraft.



"When once you have tasted flight, you will forever walk the earth with your eyes turned skyward" Leonardo Da Vinci
User currently offlinePilotaydin From Turkey, joined Sep 2004, 2537 posts, RR: 51
Reply 9, posted (7 years 9 months 2 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 3368 times:

I doubt you would tanker fuel, then burn it to land under the max landing weight. You can perform an overweight landing in the 737 series without any problem at all, flaps come to 30 and you're all set....

it could have been training, or the captain showing a new F/O something, with the flight spoilers up, it takes 50% less ground distance in the 737 to slow down to most speeds from cruise speed.

A captain once showed me the flight spoilers like this : he put them up, and made me manually trim to see how much the pitch changed, incase they would ever be stuck in the flight detent position...good training to see how the plane reacts...



The only time there is too much fuel onboard, is when you're on fire!
User currently offlineHAWK21M From India, joined Jan 2001, 31573 posts, RR: 57
Reply 10, posted (7 years 9 months 1 week 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 3249 times:

Quoting Pilotaydin (Reply 9):
A captain once showed me the flight spoilers like this : he put them up, and made me manually trim to see how much the pitch changed, incase they would ever be stuck in the flight detent position...good training to see how the plane reacts...

The posters statement of it being Raised throughout the Flight is raising a doubt to as Why.
regds
MEL



Think of the brighter side!
User currently offlinePilotaydin From Turkey, joined Sep 2004, 2537 posts, RR: 51
Reply 11, posted (7 years 9 months 1 week 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 3164 times:

Quoting HAWK21M (Reply 10):
The posters statement of it being Raised throughout the Flight is raising a doubt to as Why.
regds

i dont get what you're saying....



The only time there is too much fuel onboard, is when you're on fire!
Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic Flying With Air-brakes Deployed
Username:
No username? Sign up now!
Password: 


Forgot Password? Be reminded.
Remember me on this computer (uses cookies)
  • Tech/Ops related posts only!
  • Not Tech/Ops related? Use the other forums
  • No adverts of any kind. This includes web pages.
  • No hostile language or criticizing of others.
  • Do not post copyright protected material.
  • Use relevant and describing topics.
  • Check if your post already been discussed.
  • Check your spelling!
  • DETAILED RULES
Add Images Add SmiliesPosting Help

Please check your spelling (press "Check Spelling" above)


Similar topics:More similar topics...
Landing With Speed Brakes Deployed posted Thu Mar 3 2005 03:31:30 by Bio15
How To Deal With Air Sickness posted Fri Aug 4 2006 06:14:07 by AAden
Flying With Serious Damage posted Fri Mar 24 2006 16:55:34 by HangarRat
Flying With Oxygen Aid posted Sat Apr 30 2005 03:41:20 by AirWillie6475
Flying With Broken Parts? posted Tue Apr 26 2005 16:37:21 by AirKas1
B-747 Air Brakes posted Sat Apr 3 2004 04:47:28 by Capterdi
Air Brakes On Props? posted Mon Feb 9 2004 01:31:43 by Flyboy80
Air With Air posted Sun May 13 2001 05:34:29 by Bryan Becker
Flying 737 With The Wet Compass Extended. posted Sat Jul 29 2006 19:45:36 by SlamClick
Help With Speech On Flying Safety posted Sun Mar 6 2005 21:07:56 by Lilflyboy

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format