dragogoalie
Posts: 1172
Joined: Sun Oct 14, 2001 3:58 pm

A340-600

Mon Dec 10, 2001 8:57 pm


Click for large version
Click here for full size photo!

Photo © Gerardo Dominguez



Okay, who else thinks that plane looks very very akward. That is just way too long in my opinion. I hope that plane has a very durable tail-skid because I have a feeling it will come in very usefull on this plane.

--dragogoalie-#88--

Formerly known as Jap. Srsly. AUSTRALIA: 2 days!
 
Chiuaua
Posts: 102
Joined: Sun Apr 16, 2000 9:31 pm

RE: A340-600

Mon Dec 10, 2001 9:18 pm

I also thought it is too long. It doesn't look very nice.

The question about the tailskid is covered. There are rules for the minimal angle between aircraft body and ground, measured from the main wheels.

Greetz, Chiuaua.
 
jsuen
Posts: 204
Joined: Tue Aug 14, 2001 2:36 pm

RE: A340-600

Tue Dec 11, 2001 5:20 am

Does anybody know the angle?

The plane that is known for tailstrikes is the 757/767. Those will scrape the ground at about 8 degrees. The overall length of the plane isn't the only factor-- the length from the main gear to the tail is important.
 
VC-10
Posts: 3546
Joined: Tue Oct 26, 1999 11:34 am

RE: A340-600

Tue Dec 11, 2001 6:49 am

Perhaps the A340-600 has over-rotation warning like the 747. I will let you know in a couple of months when I have done the course at TLS
 
Staffan
Posts: 3879
Joined: Tue Mar 18, 2008 9:21 am

RE: A340-600

Tue Dec 11, 2001 9:00 am

Perhaps the FBW system prevents the a/c from pitching more than a certain amount of degrees while the main gear is still on the ground??

 
VC-10
Posts: 3546
Joined: Tue Oct 26, 1999 11:34 am

RE: A340-600

Tue Dec 11, 2001 9:24 am

There have been tailscrapes on -300 models
 
eg777er
Posts: 1782
Joined: Fri Feb 04, 2000 11:11 pm

RE: A340-600

Tue Dec 11, 2001 9:28 pm

Staffan is right, the FBW will prevent tailsrikes by regulating the rate of rotation and the maximum angles.

Haven't got any figures though!
 
XFSUgimpLB41X
Posts: 3960
Joined: Fri Aug 25, 2000 1:18 am

RE: A340-600

Tue Dec 11, 2001 9:37 pm

Probably isnt any more critical tail-strike wise than the 777-300... have there been any problems with that plane?
Chicks dig winglets.
 
VC-10
Posts: 3546
Joined: Tue Oct 26, 1999 11:34 am

RE: A340-600

Tue Dec 11, 2001 9:42 pm

Eg777er - Er hello - see my post immediately above yours
 
cv640
Posts: 843
Joined: Wed Aug 30, 2000 8:10 pm

RE: A340-600

Wed Dec 12, 2001 12:45 am

I would think that FBW would help limit the tail strike, but it will still happen. I do know of even a A320 having one, now that you would really have to be aggressive on pitch up. Have heard of numerous MD11s having them as well.
 
VC-10
Posts: 3546
Joined: Tue Oct 26, 1999 11:34 am

RE: A340-600

Wed Dec 12, 2001 7:48 pm

FBW will not stop tailstrikes, the a/c is in Direct Law mode until the landing gear un-compresses with pitch attitude confirmation from the IRS.

Direct Law means there is a direct relationship between side stick postion & the primary flight control surface postition.
 
lewis
Posts: 3564
Joined: Thu Jul 08, 1999 5:41 am

RE: A340-600

Thu Dec 13, 2001 6:26 pm

It doesn't look good because of the exits config IMO. I think there is too much spacing between the first and the second exits, while the second exit is too close to the overwing emergency exit.
 
gerardo
Posts: 3372
Joined: Sun May 21, 2000 6:22 pm

RE: A340-600

Mon Dec 17, 2001 9:35 pm

First of all, thanks for using my pic  Smile/happy/getting dizzy

After seeing the A346 in real life, I have to say, that the aircraft looks MARVELLOUS!!

There are two things, which I will remember: the loooong fuselage, and the clearance (space between ground and engine) of the inner engines, which seems even less than on a B737. DOes anybody know that clearance of the inner and outer engines?

Regards
Gerardo
dominguez(dash)online(dot)ch ... Pushing the limits of my equipment
 
sabenapilot
Posts: 2442
Joined: Sat Feb 26, 2000 6:18 pm

RE: A340-600

Mon Dec 17, 2001 11:53 pm

The A340-600 is the first plane to have a new additional take-off speed and symbol on the Primary Flight Display (speed tape) apart from the common V1, Vr and V2 markings. This new speed will be marked with a red dot which will represent the minimum rotation speed (=max angle) to avoid a tail stike, depending on weight, wind, Rwy, flap selection etc.

This new take-off speed will be called Vreddot and should always be situated between V1 and Vr.

It will as from now also be offered as an option on other airbusses to retain full cockpit commonality with the new A340-500 and -600. In particular the A321 would benefit from this Vreddot philosophy.

Vreddot is calculated via the same way as V1, Vr and V2 and should over time become as common to pilots as the 3 later ones.

Seems Airbus is once again one step ahead of its competitors (B757-300 for instance...)

 
FDXmech
Posts: 3219
Joined: Sun Mar 19, 2000 9:48 pm

RE: A340-600

Tue Dec 18, 2001 2:53 am

What is the philosophy Vreddot?

Is it common practice to ignore VR marking on the PFD speedtape and if so why?

Should the PF need to rotate early due to a sudden unexpected situation, will he wait for Vreddot?

I'm of the opinion this is an *innovation* borne of flight test possibly due to a preponderance of this aircraft to tailstrike. This sounds like a fix for an unforeseen (or foreseen) problem which makes it no better or worse than other Airbus or Boeings needing *fixes* in the past. In other words, "necessity is the mother of invention".

As for the "one step ahead of its competitors" comment, sounds like you're making "lemons into lemonade".
You're only as good as your last departure.
 
sabenapilot
Posts: 2442
Joined: Sat Feb 26, 2000 6:18 pm

RE: A340-600

Tue Dec 18, 2001 6:05 pm

Vreddot is not only used during takeoff but also during the landing flare to avoid a tailstike.

If you don't like Vreddot, you probably also dislike the V1 concept...



 
sabenapilot
Posts: 2442
Joined: Sat Feb 26, 2000 6:18 pm

RE: A340-600

Tue Dec 18, 2001 6:28 pm

Vreddot concept during take-off:
Any rotation before Vreddot will ALWAYS lead to a tailstike due to the plane trying to achieve an excessive Body Angle in an effort to generate sufficient lift.
Any rotation after Vreddot will NEVER lead to a tailstike as the plane will lift off before an excessive Body Angle is reached. However, in cases where Vreddot is smaller then Vr, a lift off prior to Vr will not guarantee a minimum safety speed of V2 at an altitude of 35ft above the rwy in case of an engine failure and should therefore not be used as a normal rotation speed.

Vreddot concept during landing:
Touchdowns at speeds below Vreddot must be avoided as this will ALWAYS lead to a stailstike. Corrective pilot action is required and a go around should be flown.
Touchdowns at speeds above Vreddot are NEVER going to result in a tailstike.

In short:
Vreddot offers an exact indication to the pilots to help them in operating their plane in normal, abnormal and emergency situations right up to the limits, without the risk of accidentally exceeding them during critical flight phases like take off and landing.
Airbus is proud to introduce this new concept to the flightdeck of its first 21st century plane in repacement of the unaccurate maximum BA method as used by other manufacturers.
 
racko
Posts: 4548
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2001 12:06 am

RE: A340-600

Wed Dec 19, 2001 1:37 am

sounds very good and useful to me, it makes the pilot's life easier  Smile (and of course the passengers life saver)
 
VC-10
Posts: 3546
Joined: Tue Oct 26, 1999 11:34 am

RE: A340-600

Wed Dec 19, 2001 5:11 am

Sabenapilot,

Any rotation before Vreddot will ALWAYS lead to a tailstike due to the plane trying to achieve an excessive Body Angle in an effort to generate sufficient lift. should that read "pilot" trying to achieve an excessive Body Angle in an effort to generate sufficient lift?

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: qf789 and 22 guests