TT737FO From United States, joined Jun 2001, 471 posts, RR: 12 Posted (5 years 4 months 3 weeks 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 1799 times:
The Chief Pilot of the company I work for has started taking a list of all Captains who choose not to de-rate their take-off power settings (there are a lot that don't do it if it isn't mandated). De-rating saves the company money, but we're all paid just the same.
I wonder if they do the same thing at KE and CX.
Man, condition monitoring is a beautiful thing...big brother is watching.
MD-11 forever From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 1, posted (5 years 4 months 3 weeks 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 1764 times:
At least at CX they do it, they even produce so-called "de-rate reports".
It really saves big bucks for the airline as you say.... I saw the following numbers valid for a JT9D fleet:
If a fleet of 40 engines (each flying 3500 hours/year at 4 hours/cycle) use of 10% derate on every second takeoff saves 1'300'000 $ in maintenance cost per year. The savings will of course increase the more you use the fleet and with increased de-rate applied.
Of course big brother is watching, but it is my understanding that the pilot also has to consider the economics of his employer......
Wing From Turkey, joined Oct 2000, 1440 posts, RR: 34 Reply 2, posted (5 years 4 months 3 weeks 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 1745 times:
Although we don't have a specific report for de-rated TO's, we only log full rated TO's to maintenanance logbook which is a lot less than the other.Chief constantly issues memo's about de rated TO saves money and increases engine life.
We not only use de rated thrusts but also try to use "assumed temperature thrust reduction" as much as possible as the conditions permits.Writing a report about every de rated take off seems like another extra file to fill,ofcourse company procedures may differ but as a FO I almost spend more time writing reports than my hands on the yoke,I wouldn't like one more added to my list.
SunriseValley From Canada, joined Jul 2004, 2254 posts, RR: 1 Reply 3, posted (5 years 4 months 3 weeks 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 1623 times:
I believe AirNZ was one of the early carriers to use de-rated power on takeoffs; this goes back to the early 1960's when they introduced DC8's.
I remember their Engineer of the time who looked after analyzing new equipment and the operation of it telling of going to HKG ( the old airport) and conducting de-rated power trials with a DC8 to prove his slide rule calculations before adopting them in operations. As many will remember the "old" HKG approach from over land was rather "hair raising", I'm told.
I believe it was he who introduced the idea of changing flight altitude as the fuel load was burned off. I remember he went to Long Beach and made a presentation on the subject to DC8 operators.
CX flyboy From Hong Kong SAR, PRC, joined Dec 1999, 5581 posts, RR: 61 Reply 4, posted (5 years 4 months 3 weeks 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 1335 times:
The company is always watching the parameters of our aircraft. if we have a problem on board sometimes engineering know about it before we do!
As for derated takeoffs, we do them whenever we can, so there is no need for management to keep a watch on us. I don't think there are any crew who choose not to derate takeoffs. It's unprofessional and not the kind of conduct one would expect at a major airline with a good operation in general...of course there maybe always one or two bad eggs....but I have not met them.
B-HOP From Hong Kong, joined Nov 2000, 520 posts, RR: 7 Reply 5, posted (5 years 4 months 3 weeks 3 days ago) and read 1316 times:
CX Flyboy: -
How you doing? Just to add, at some ports, such as Heathrow, they do full power take off, mainly to climb to a certain height quicker (happened on my flight to Hong Kong last year).
Philsquares From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 7, posted (5 years 4 months 3 weeks 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 1277 times:
At SQ we don't log full thrust takeoffs and there is no one keeping track of derate vs. full TO. Generally on the LHR, AB) (FRA / FRF / EDDF), Germany">FRA, CDG flights you need full TO with perhaps a slight derate based on assumed temp.
On the -400 we're limited to TO-1 and assumed temp of 52C as a max derate. I guess the real question would be if the performance allows a derate then why don't the crews use it.
Ba299 From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2003, 173 posts, RR: 6 Reply 8, posted (5 years 4 months 3 weeks 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 1232 times:
At BA we log only the full thrust take off. The flight ops management keep monitoring the pilot action throughout the FOQA (the download of the data from the flight data recorder) but only on a statistic base. So if lots of pilots do not de-rate during the take-off they see only increase on non de-rated take-off
G4doc2004 From United States, joined Feb 2004, 123 posts, RR: 0 Reply 9, posted (5 years 4 months 3 weeks 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 1206 times:
We use what is referred to as "Flex Power" on our G-IV for takeoff, which is based on EPR. The FMS will set the "power for the day", or a full thrust setting, and a flex power setting as well. These parameters are selected on the display contollers on the glareshield.
For instance, when we were doing engine runs yesterday, power for the day was an EPR of 1.71, whereas flex power was an EPR of 1.55. Our ops spec for the airplane is to use flex power for all take-offs unless safety dictates otherwise. This ensures the engines have a better chance of making midlife and overhaul time limits.
"Failure to prepare is preparing to fail"--Benjamin Franklin
G4doc2004 From United States, joined Feb 2004, 123 posts, RR: 0 Reply 11, posted (5 years 4 months 3 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 1114 times:
I have the RR Tay 611-8 manual here at home on my PC (in case of weekend or late-night troubleshooting) and the tern "flex" is not an acronym, just RR way of denoting de-rated power as opposed to power for the day EPR settings.
J
"Failure to prepare is preparing to fail"--Benjamin Franklin
Sponsor Message: 
From United States, joined Jun 2001, 471 posts, 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
From Turkey, joined Oct 2000, 1440 posts, 
From Canada, joined Jul 2004, 2254 posts, 
From Hong Kong SAR, PRC, joined Dec 1999, 5581 posts, 
From Hong Kong, joined Nov 2000, 520 posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2003, 173 posts, 
Sponsor Message: 
Printer friendly format
