The data we had in tech ops also compares well with independent published research, "Baxter, Glenn & Srisaeng, Panarat & Wild, Graham. (2018). The Air Cargo Carrying Potential of The Airbus A350-900XWB and Boeing 787-9 Aircraft on Their Ultra-Long-Haul Flights: A Case Study for Flights...Jump to post
Great to see how both Airbus and Boeing are able to dig out more range incrementally for their flagship twins in their larger iteration. I do wonder whether if this is true we might see some airlines walking away from A359 and 779X orders to go 78J or A35K as they seem to be the most efficient in t...Jump to post
Looks like significant overspeed if the plane got grounded. Normally these events are sorted quickly by maintenance. There’s a ‘gotcha’ an all Airbus a/c during a go-around - if you leave the thrust levers in TOGA detent, the A/THR remains inactive and during a level off the plane will happily accel...Jump to post
I flew for one in Asia, that did use this system. Interestingly, flexible MTOW was based on airport - we had a list of airports, where our MTOW was reduced. Very clever IMO. The same plane flying eg. to Sydney had a full MTOW, whereas flying to HKG, the MTOW was lower by 25tons. Loadsheets were prep...Jump to post
More often than not, the pilot won’t know the parking stand until after vacating the runway and receiving ATC instructions.
In some cases stand information will be sent by ACARS, or by radio from the handling agent
Great stuff, indeed. That's a fantastic virtual walk through! A few questions: 1. The 787 cockpit has four windows. Is it any less restricted in viewing than other aircraft with more windows? Are there regulations that govern the minimum viewing area outside from the cockpit? The 787 has great cockp...Jump to post
Is the drag from a potential RAT deployment considered when calculating ETOPS flight time and fuel consumption? I doubt it. ETOPS scenarios ale clearly specified and account for the most critical case out of: engine failure, decompression, or engine failure+decompression. Nonhe of these conditions ...Jump to post
To make a real ULH aircraft, the 787 would need extra tankage - another 10 tons or so. MTOW bump to 260 would increase payload, but actually decrease range at the extremes of the envelope. The 788 ULH version would be great - the OEW is almost 10 tons less and it burns ~5% less fuel than the 789. Gi...Jump to post
4.8t-5.0t/hour depending on trip length. I am somewhat skeptical but perhaps you have a better idea. Sounds pretty good, the classic A330 burns around 5.5-6 ton/hr, the 787 somewhat less and it flies faster. Then again it’s all very weight dependent, we’d either need FCOM data, or at least some dat...Jump to post
Hearing some silly fuel burn numbers for the a330-900. Neither the 787-9/10 and a359 are even close but both are faster to the tune of an hour on really long flights. The much narrower fuselage probably helps a lot. Care to share some numbers? I have flown both the 330-ceo and 787, would love to se...Jump to post
I have recently moved from A330 to 787 and didn’t notice much difference. I feel equally knackered at the end of a longhaul flight...Jump to post
I am wondering if they have to increase the thrust for that. Is it declared how they managed to get such a boast? I think current thrust should be just enough, at least for airports close to Sea Level and long runways. Funny enough, current 789 FCOM performance data is already published for weights...Jump to post
Well yes and no. The crosswind limits are so that it is But that having been said, I've seen the requirements when Airbus hired pilots for the Beluga fleet. They are extremely high. Think it was a minimum of 10.000 hours, plus a lot of extras. Actually, there were advertising for pilots a couple of...Jump to post
Thanks for the data. My concern all along was the assumed 40t payload when comparing the 789 vs the A359. To me, a much more realistic payload comparison would be in the 30-35t range. This would generally include full pax and bags and a few tons of cargo. On ULH sectors i would think cargo is much ...Jump to post
Definitely not a technical thing. I guess there’s just not many 787s in Europe. Mainline carriers are BA, AF and LO. DY and VS have them too, but they generally fly transatlantic routes. LO does WAW-SIN, WAW-NRT and occasionally WAW-DPS on the 788. Norwegian did LGW-SIN, but I guess they dropped itJump to post
trex8 wrote:So from the FG article the cockpit layout of the neo and ceo are identical?
40 T payload is indeed on the high side for ULR flights. If anyone’s interested, here’s trip fuel burn data for [email protected] 25T payload, which is more or less what QF9/10 carries. Incidentally, 25T is also where the 789 becomes fuel volume limited. At higher ranges/lower payloads it will run out of fuel vo...Jump to post
If the issue is the alternate airports, this is troubling and does indicate performance issues with the 350. BNE and MEL are approximately 1 hour away from SYD - that’s not very close, but not very far either for an alternate. I reckon, the A350 needs around 5 tons of alternate fuel + approx 4t of f...Jump to post
FWIW, as a new PPL, I was able to quite decently fly a 767 simulator. The flying part isn’t that different from a small plane, you just need to be a bit smoother on the controls. This was however under supervision of a qualified pilot and after several hours on the jumpseat observing - so I kinda kn...Jump to post
It’s really hard to give a single meaningful number for range, as it depends on many factors, like payload, tank configuration, MTOW, winds. The longest flight an A321 NEO non LR has successfully operated was KEF-LAX by WOW with up to 200 PAX and 2 ACT’s. If the winds were unfavorable though, they n...Jump to post
AFAIK it is a bit of a problem, as there’s an unexpected glitch affecting the planes that were powered down during the rollover. On some frames the date remains stuck in the year 99 affecting things like Nav DB validity, CPDLC and even WX radar - they are all fed by GPS clock and reportedly there’s ...Jump to post
The high force is there to prevent pilot from breaking up the airplane at high speed due to excessive control deflections - so you can’t just switch it off.
Airbus airplanes have no force feedback, but they have load factor protection in their FBW system instead.
Same here. Unfortunately, there’s very few beacons outside of the US and visually identifying the airport at night can be tricky, especially if you don’t know where to look fo it. I have always wondered why such a simple and cheap solution as the beacon wasn’t adapted as a worldwide standard... So, ...Jump to post
Thanks for posting this. I was about to ask, "has anyone thought of alternating the brakes applied?" Yup, it’s a pretty neat solution and a relatively simple one. Mind you, 787 brakes are all electric. I wonder if alternating brakes could easily be introduced on a traditional hydraulic br...Jump to post
Boeing has come with an interesting solution to reduce brake wear on the 787. If brakes pedals are pressed below certain speed during taxi (30 or 70 Kt depending if it’s -8 or -9), only two out of four brakes on each bogie activate. On a subsequent pedal application they alternate, ie the other two ...Jump to post
Thanks, googled it. So, basically Bendix Compass was an un-slaved DG with latitude correction, which could be used to maintain a constant griid track, right?
Were there any Universal tables, which could give grid tracks, or did one need to obtain Initial True Track and convert it into Grid Tracks?
Thanks for info on the tables - I’ve used those when flying through Atlantic and Pacific (and still sometimes do), thought there was something else when doing Polar Ops. As for “all other info on Polar Nav”, my post was towards Yikes!, who volunteered to provide further info on navigating over the p...Jump to post
In one of my previous airlines, if you were operating into high altitude airport, sterile cockpit was belo 18000’. For normal airports it was 10000. Then again, this was Asia, so they needed to have everything written down in their manuals. As others said the bottom line is not to get distracted dur...Jump to post
Update - had a look into FCOM data. 2.5T extra fuel close to the edge of range envelope yields slightly less than 200Nm extra range. Also this 2.5 extra could be used towards lifting higher payload, probably 15-20 more pax at longer ranges (taking into account extra burn from higher weight)Jump to post
At the edge of the 789’s range (like LAX-SIN) how much extra time/distance does 2.5t actually give you? The aircraft is carrying fuel to carry fuel after all. In practice the 2.5t would buy you rather less than 280nm, surely? My (somewhat educated) guess is 150-200Nm. It would also depend on the pa...Jump to post
B764er wrote:That's around 750 gallons more. Wonder how much further it will go on that.
I can only confirm what others said above - once you start flying Longhaul you discover completely new levels of fatigue - and no, flying 4 sectors/day LCC style, while tiring, come nowhere near that. Fortunately, my employer allows controlled rest, and I don’t hesitate to use it. Previously, howeve...Jump to post
On top of that it can fly with complete los of hydraulic systems thanks to hydro/electro static actuators.
I read it as in „they are not selling enough a/c to break even”, rather than “they are losing money on each airframe”Jump to post