User avatar
scbriml
Posts: 17477
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2003 10:37 pm

Re: Lufthansa Pulling Last Economy Row On A320neo

Thu Sep 12, 2019 1:30 pm

rouelan wrote:
Quite serious indeed.


No, it's not "quite serious".

It would be if the entire A320neo fleet was grounded. :wink2:
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana!
There are 10 types of people in the World - those that understand binary and those that don't.
 
Noshow
Posts: 1014
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 3:20 pm

Re: Lufthansa Pulling Last Economy Row On A320neo

Thu Sep 12, 2019 1:31 pm

Practically it was way to tight anyway. In the last economy seatrows you could not completely lower that tiny table as your body/stomach would be in the same place. And I am not overly fat or something.

The weight and balance issue seems to come from the heavy galley/double lav combi now being moved to the very last inches next to the end of the cabin.
 
Blerg
Posts: 2362
Joined: Tue Jan 09, 2018 11:42 am

Re: Lufthansa Pulling Last Economy Row On A320neo

Thu Sep 12, 2019 1:39 pm

So what will be the legroom now? Will all seats get an improvement or just those inthe front?
 
Weatherwatcher1
Posts: 265
Joined: Sun Mar 03, 2019 5:14 pm

Re: Lufthansa Pulling Last Economy Row On A320neo

Thu Sep 12, 2019 1:42 pm

BAeRJ100 wrote:

Weatherwatcher1 wrote:
Fascinating that a center if gravity problem is being caused by the space flex interior


It's not rocket science to understand why. It's not the existence of the Space Flex interior itself that is causing the CoG issues. Rather it's the ability to have more rows installed, which equals more passenger and hand baggage weight, which then has the potential to cause a CoG issue if not distributed properly.


I agree that it isn’t rocket science to understand why, but fascinating nonetheless since airplanes have been flying with spaceflex interiors for a few years. It is good that this was found before something serious happened.
 
Weatherwatcher1
Posts: 265
Joined: Sun Mar 03, 2019 5:14 pm

Re: Lufthansa Pulling Last Economy Row On A320neo

Thu Sep 12, 2019 1:42 pm

Blerg wrote:
So what will be the legroom now? Will all seats get an improvement or just those inthe front?


I think they are just blocking the seats waiting for a software fix
 
User avatar
Revelation
Topic Author
Posts: 21414
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Lufthansa Pulling Last Economy Row On A320neo

Thu Sep 12, 2019 1:53 pm

gatibosgru wrote:
Good, maybe we can get rid of SpaceFlex now :duck:

The idea of LH pulling seats from A320s is almost as shocking as the idea that BER may open some day! :biggrin:
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
 
oldannyboy
Posts: 2383
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 8:28 am

Re: Lufthansa Pulling Last Economy Row On A320neo

Thu Sep 12, 2019 1:55 pm

Clearly it's because all of the extra weight that would otherwise be more evenly distributed over say a 2-to-3 meters section, gets all squashed in that 'over-the-edge' final fuselage oval, so it's not really "the extra row" itself creating the problem. The weight of two toilets, plus the galley equipment, is quite considerable, and it is being pushed wayyyy too far back.

For those of you who have watched the video on the simpleflying.com page, how many have found the twist and emphasis put on toilet wheelchair accessibility irritating, given that we all clearly know that the ONE and ONLY raison d'etre of the Spce Flex cabin is to precisely squeeze six more seats in???
 
Jamie514
Posts: 148
Joined: Thu May 18, 2017 4:36 pm

Re: Lufthansa Pulling Last Economy Row On A320neo

Thu Sep 12, 2019 1:57 pm

They will not get rid of money making seats.

Airbus will fix the ELAC system code, and then airlines will again release those money making seats for revenue sale.

In the meantime, for anyone still too lazy to go read the link, the risks of anything happening are virtually none because this isnt an MCAS style kamikaze override sending planes to a nose dive and rendering basic pilot pitch control useless. This is the ELAC system not automatically re-trimming for go-around while pilots remain in full authority over all controls.
 
9Patch
Posts: 341
Joined: Wed Mar 13, 2019 10:38 pm

Re: Lufthansa Pulling Last Economy Row On A320neo

Thu Sep 12, 2019 2:00 pm

Aviation Week has an article on this:

Lufthansa Blocks Last Row Of A320neo Seats; Cites CG Issues

Lufthansa told pilots in an internal memo that it made the decision as an ad-hoc measure to comply with regulatory demands—referring to a recent EASA airworthiness directive (AD) limiting the aft CG to 37% mean aerodynamic chord (MAC), up to 4% less than the previous CG limit at which the airline operated the Neos. The AD is based on Airbus testing and is to ensure angle of attack protection works even during aggressive go-around maneuvers.


It expects CG limitations to stay in place until Airbus introduces new flight control software in mid-2020.

https://aviationweek.com/commercial-avi ... -cg-issues
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 18136
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

Re: Lufthansa Pulling Last Economy Row On A320neo

Thu Sep 12, 2019 2:16 pm

Weatherwatcher1 wrote:
Blerg wrote:
So what will be the legroom now? Will all seats get an improvement or just those inthe front?


I think they are just blocking the seats waiting for a software fix

Exactly. However, the MAX issue forced a deep dive into all aircraft stability at what was called the 'coffin corners'. I find it laudable the certification engineers at EASA take their job seriously and published the appropriate concerns.

Ironically, this means adding some MCAS functionality to the A320/321. :stirthepot:

Minor. Notba global grounding, but many configurations just temporarily lost use of the worst six seats. Meh...


Lightsaber
IM messages to mods on warnings and bans will be ignored and nasty ones will result in a ban.
 
LY777
Posts: 2532
Joined: Fri Nov 25, 2005 6:58 pm

Re: Lufthansa Pulling Last Economy Row On A320neo

Thu Sep 12, 2019 2:49 pm

It seems that there is really something wrong with these new generation planes
Flown:717,727,732,733,734,735,738,73H,742/744/748,752,753,762/2ER/763/3ER,772/77E/773/77W, 788, 789, DC8,DC10,E190,E195,MD83,MD88, L1011, A3B2,A319,A320-100/200,A321,A332/A333,A343,A388
 
User avatar
afterburner
Posts: 1355
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2005 11:38 am

Re: Lufthansa Pulling Last Economy Row On A320neo

Thu Sep 12, 2019 3:05 pm

Varsity1 wrote:
The A321neo has similar problems.

The article mentions that.
 
trijetsonly
Posts: 689
Joined: Tue Jul 21, 2009 10:38 pm

Re: Lufthansa Pulling Last Economy Row On A320neo

Thu Sep 12, 2019 3:16 pm

zeke wrote:
BAeRJ100 wrote:
It's not rocket science to understand why. It's not the existence of the Space Flex interior itself that is causing the CoG issues. Rather it's the ability to have more rows installed, which equals more passenger and hand baggage weight, which then has the potential to cause a CoG issue if not distributed properly.


It’s not that at all, the A320 series just has 3 zones for weight and balance, it is not dome on an individual row by row basis like a GA aircraft.

Airliners have two aft CG limits, one for takeoff and one for landing. My reading between the lines is this is an issue with the landing aft CG position.


Lufthansa uses seat row trim, so every row is regarded individually for weight and balance. Or you could say they use 30 zones in the A320, which would come to the same result.
Happy Landings
 
User avatar
ikolkyo
Posts: 2665
Joined: Tue Nov 05, 2013 8:43 pm

Re: A320neo Family 'Excessive Pitch' Issue Thread

Thu Sep 12, 2019 3:49 pm

LH also has to put sandbags to keep the aircraft from tipping back onto its tail, luggage can only be taken off the aircraft once the majority of passengers have disembarked.

Wonder what the people who made the big deal over the -900ER having tail tip issues are saying now.

Probably nothing.

edit: We also should remember the A320 was originally certified at at a max of 180 seats. Then Airbus started cramming in seats to get it to 189 to match the 738 seat count in a smaller aircraft. Now you slap on new engines that throw the CG off and here we are.


Source: https://aviationweek.com/commercial-avi ... ity-limits
 
rouelan
Posts: 74
Joined: Wed Jun 01, 2016 3:10 pm

Re: Lufthansa Pulling Last Economy Row On A320neo

Thu Sep 12, 2019 4:01 pm

scbriml wrote:
rouelan wrote:
Quite serious indeed.


No, it's not "quite serious".

It would be if the entire A320neo fleet was grounded. :wink2:


For sure!
I mean in terms of economics, losing 6 seats is a lot in a low margin industry. Plus the issue of waiting for pax to disembark before off loading bags (higher turnaround time, later delivery ).
NEO customers are certainly eager for a quick fix but maybe the ones that operate different configs like full Y are not impacted
 
User avatar
Revelation
Topic Author
Posts: 21414
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Lufthansa Pulling Last Economy Row On A320neo

Thu Sep 12, 2019 4:49 pm

lightsaber wrote:
I find it laudable the certification engineers at EASA take their job seriously and published the appropriate concerns.

This also gives EASA the cover / moral high ground needed to push similar or worse restrictions on to the 737.

lightsaber wrote:

Ironically, this means adding some MCAS functionality to the A320/321. :stirthepot:

Indeed, Maneuvering Characteristics are being Augmented by their Systems.

Weatherwatcher1 wrote:
I think they are just blocking the seats waiting for a software fix

Seems they might want to expedite the software rather than making the customers face restrictions till mid 2020?
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
 
User avatar
gatibosgru
Posts: 1575
Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2007 2:48 pm

Re: A320neo Family 'Excessive Pitch' Issue Thread

Thu Sep 12, 2019 5:59 pm

ikolkyo wrote:
LH also has to put sandbags to keep the aircraft from tipping back onto its tail, luggage can only be taken off the aircraft once the majority of passengers have disembarked.

Wonder what the people who made the big deal over the -900ER having tail tip issues are saying now.

Probably nothing.

edit: We also should remember the A320 was originally certified at at a max of 180 seats. Then Airbus started cramming in seats to get it to 189 to match the 738 seat count in a smaller aircraft. Now you slap on new engines that throw the CG off and here we are.


Source: https://aviationweek.com/commercial-avi ... ity-limits


Do you have a link for LH putting in sandbags to prevent the tail tipping? If it's under the AW link I cannot see.

As far as the -900ER issue, I'm sure most people who made a big deal about that would make a big deal about this too, not everything in life is A vs B.
@DadCelo
 
User avatar
ikolkyo
Posts: 2665
Joined: Tue Nov 05, 2013 8:43 pm

Re: A320neo Family 'Excessive Pitch' Issue Thread

Thu Sep 12, 2019 6:20 pm

gatibosgru wrote:
ikolkyo wrote:
LH also has to put sandbags to keep the aircraft from tipping back onto its tail, luggage can only be taken off the aircraft once the majority of passengers have disembarked.

Wonder what the people who made the big deal over the -900ER having tail tip issues are saying now.

Probably nothing.

edit: We also should remember the A320 was originally certified at at a max of 180 seats. Then Airbus started cramming in seats to get it to 189 to match the 738 seat count in a smaller aircraft. Now you slap on new engines that throw the CG off and here we are.


Source: https://aviationweek.com/commercial-avi ... ity-limits


Do you have a link for LH putting in sandbags to prevent the tail tipping? If it's under the AW link I cannot see.

As far as the -900ER issue, I'm sure most people who made a big deal about that would make a big deal about this too, not everything in life is A vs B.


Here is a twitter chain quoting the previous AW article on this subject, article also linked below.
https://twitter.com/avmrosean/status/11 ... 81664?s=21
http://aviationweek.com/commercial-avia ... ity-limits
 
User avatar
madpropsyo
Posts: 69
Joined: Sat Jun 09, 2018 2:02 am

Re: A320neo Family 'Excessive Pitch' Issue Thread

Fri Sep 13, 2019 9:21 pm

Although it's obviously not MCAS 1.0 bad it seems the NEO shares similar pitch issues as the MAX when it comes to strapping these larger, more powerful powerplants to an older airframe design.

Seems like LH would do better to mandate more forward loading of baggage to protect the CG envelope rather than block a row of seats though. Add a tailstand for deplaning like the -900ER and problem solved.
 
h1fl1er
Posts: 121
Joined: Thu Jun 06, 2019 5:58 pm

Re: A320neo Family 'Excessive Pitch' Issue Thread

Sat Sep 14, 2019 12:28 am

madpropsyo wrote:
Although it's obviously not MCAS 1.0 bad it seems the NEO shares similar pitch issues as the MAX when it comes to strapping these larger, more powerful powerplants to an older airframe design.

Seems like LH would do better to mandate more forward loading of baggage to protect the CG envelope rather than block a row of seats though. Add a tailstand for deplaning like the -900ER and problem solved.


definitely isn't as bad but it does underscore how software-dependent modern airliners are and how unforeseen code and logic errors can put aircraft into unsafe flight regimes

it still seems incomprehensible that a software developer thought it was a good idea to have MCAS repeat nose-down ad infinitum. It's like someone rushed to get something checked in before a long vacation then forgot about it. The system should have only ever deployed enough to create sufficient stick backpressure which is what it was designed for in the first place
 
flipdewaf
Posts: 2894
Joined: Thu Jul 20, 2006 6:28 am

Re: A320neo Family 'Excessive Pitch' Issue Thread

Sat Sep 14, 2019 7:31 am

madpropsyo wrote:
Seems like LH would do better to mandate more forward loading of baggage to protect the CG envelope rather than block a row of seats though. Add a tailstand for deplaning like the -900ER and problem solved.

Totally agree, this seems like it just moves a portion of the CoG envelope forward and as such the loading loops need a rejig and reissue? It’s not like this is a weird thing for aircraft, it’s known from the start and there is paperwork to deal with it.

Fred



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Image
 
User avatar
Francoflier
Posts: 4901
Joined: Wed Oct 31, 2001 12:27 pm

Re: A320neo Family 'Excessive Pitch' Issue Thread

Sat Sep 14, 2019 7:43 am

I'm glad that something is finally fighting back against manufacturers recklessly squeezing more and more seats into their designs instead of stretching them. And I'm looking squarely at Airbus in this case, although Boeing has followed suit.

The A320 family, both A320 and A321, have been screaming for a fuselage stretch for a long time. But, nOooOo, let's just squeeze the living hell out of those seats, make the galleys so tiny that they're essentially a sink in the door aisle, and render the toilets so ridiculously small that you may have to back into them depending on the nature of your business.

It's a shame that the laws of physics are the ones doing the pushing before the passengers do, as it seems we are willing to accept any level of discomfort for a cheaper ticket...
:hissyfit:

...serves Airbus right.
I'll do my own airline. With Blackjack. And hookers. In fact, forget the airline.
 
WIederling
Posts: 8888
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2015 2:15 pm

Re: A320neo Family 'Excessive Pitch' Issue Thread

Sat Sep 14, 2019 9:04 am

h1fl1er wrote:
madpropsyo wrote:
Although it's obviously not MCAS 1.0 bad it seems the NEO shares similar pitch issues as the MAX when it comes to strapping these larger, more powerful powerplants to an older airframe design.

Seems like LH would do better to mandate more forward loading of baggage to protect the CG envelope rather than block a row of seats though. Add a tailstand for deplaning like the -900ER and problem solved.


definitely isn't as bad but it does underscore how software-dependent modern airliners are and how unforeseen code and logic errors can put aircraft into unsafe flight regimes

it still seems incomprehensible that a software developer thought it was a good idea to have MCAS repeat nose-down ad infinitum.


you should not munge the cases.
For the A320 it was the manufacturer Airbus who, based on accumulated flight data analysis raised the topic with EASA
who then continued the official path of giving out notice to users.

Not really comparable to the MCAS case where the manufacturer added a stealth feature
in an extremely hamfisted way
and is still busy with smear campaigns to spread blame
in push to avoid responsibility and associated fallout.
Murphy is an optimist
 
eamondzhang
Posts: 1349
Joined: Thu Sep 23, 2010 8:23 am

Re: A320neo Family 'Excessive Pitch' Issue Thread

Sat Sep 14, 2019 11:43 am

Francoflier wrote:
I'm glad that something is finally fighting back against manufacturers recklessly squeezing more and more seats into their designs instead of stretching them. And I'm looking squarely at Airbus in this case, although Boeing has followed suit.

The A320 family, both A320 and A321, have been screaming for a fuselage stretch for a long time. But, nOooOo, let's just squeeze the living hell out of those seats, make the galleys so tiny that they're essentially a sink in the door aisle, and render the toilets so ridiculously small that you may have to back into them depending on the nature of your business.

It's a shame that the laws of physics are the ones doing the pushing before the passengers do, as it seems we are willing to accept any level of discomfort for a cheaper ticket...
:hissyfit:

...serves Airbus right.

At the end of the day, it's the airlines who pushed for these and 99.9999% of pax don't give it a damn, so long as they got their cheapest tickets available.

Michael
 
User avatar
Polot
Posts: 9478
Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2011 3:01 pm

Re: A320neo Family 'Excessive Pitch' Issue Thread

Sat Sep 14, 2019 12:00 pm

Francoflier wrote:
I'm glad that something is finally fighting back against manufacturers recklessly squeezing more and more seats into their designs instead of stretching them. And I'm looking squarely at Airbus in this case, although Boeing has followed suit.

The A320 family, both A320 and A321, have been screaming for a fuselage stretch for a long time. But, nOooOo, let's just squeeze the living hell out of those seats, make the galleys so tiny that they're essentially a sink in the door aisle, and render the toilets so ridiculously small that you may have to back into them depending on the nature of your business.

It's a shame that the laws of physics are the ones doing the pushing before the passengers do, as it seems we are willing to accept any level of discomfort for a cheaper ticket...
:hissyfit:

...serves Airbus right.

Who is “fighting back”?

Airbus will release a software change and it will be back to business as usual.

WIederling wrote:
h1fl1er wrote:
madpropsyo wrote:
Although it's obviously not MCAS 1.0 bad it seems the NEO shares similar pitch issues as the MAX when it comes to strapping these larger, more powerful powerplants to an older airframe design.

Seems like LH would do better to mandate more forward loading of baggage to protect the CG envelope rather than block a row of seats though. Add a tailstand for deplaning like the -900ER and problem solved.


definitely isn't as bad but it does underscore how software-dependent modern airliners are and how unforeseen code and logic errors can put aircraft into unsafe flight regimes

it still seems incomprehensible that a software developer thought it was a good idea to have MCAS repeat nose-down ad infinitum.


you should not munge the cases.
For the A320 it was the manufacturer Airbus who, based on accumulated flight data analysis raised the topic with EASA
who then continued the official path of giving out notice to users.


If it wasn’t for the whole MCAS 1.0 thing this probably never would have been discovered (or at least right now). MCAS 1.0 resulted in a deep dive into all control system data by both Airbus and EASA. Airbus wasn’t just poking around into this system 3.5 years after EIS because they were bored.
 
User avatar
ikolkyo
Posts: 2665
Joined: Tue Nov 05, 2013 8:43 pm

Re: A320neo Family 'Excessive Pitch' Issue Thread

Sat Sep 14, 2019 1:56 pm

Polot wrote:
Francoflier wrote:
I'm glad that something is finally fighting back against manufacturers recklessly squeezing more and more seats into their designs instead of stretching them. And I'm looking squarely at Airbus in this case, although Boeing has followed suit.

The A320 family, both A320 and A321, have been screaming for a fuselage stretch for a long time. But, nOooOo, let's just squeeze the living hell out of those seats, make the galleys so tiny that they're essentially a sink in the door aisle, and render the toilets so ridiculously small that you may have to back into them depending on the nature of your business.

It's a shame that the laws of physics are the ones doing the pushing before the passengers do, as it seems we are willing to accept any level of discomfort for a cheaper ticket...
:hissyfit:

...serves Airbus right.

Who is “fighting back”?

Airbus will release a software change and it will be back to business as usual.

WIederling wrote:
h1fl1er wrote:

definitely isn't as bad but it does underscore how software-dependent modern airliners are and how unforeseen code and logic errors can put aircraft into unsafe flight regimes

it still seems incomprehensible that a software developer thought it was a good idea to have MCAS repeat nose-down ad infinitum.


you should not munge the cases.
For the A320 it was the manufacturer Airbus who, based on accumulated flight data analysis raised the topic with EASA
who then continued the official path of giving out notice to users.


If it wasn’t for the whole MCAS 1.0 thing this probably never would have been discovered (or at least right now). MCAS 1.0 resulted in a deep dive into all control system data by both Airbus and EASA. Airbus wasn’t just poking around into this system 3.5 years after EIS because they were bored.



How would a software tweak fix tail tipping on the ground? I think that issue would still remain.
 
tommy1808
Posts: 10872
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2013 3:24 pm

Re: A320neo Family 'Excessive Pitch' Issue Thread

Sat Sep 14, 2019 2:16 pm

Polot wrote:
If it wasn’t for the whole MCAS 1.0 thing this probably never would have been discovered (or at least right now). MCAS 1.0 resulted in a deep dive into all control system data by both Airbus and EASA. Airbus wasn’t just poking around into this system 3.5 years after EIS because they were bored.


Airbus is always poking in its FBW system and reports every minor buggy thing they find transparently to authorities, airlines and pilots. Even decades after EIS.

Best regards
Thomas
This Singature is a safe space......
 
User avatar
Polot
Posts: 9478
Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2011 3:01 pm

Re: A320neo Family 'Excessive Pitch' Issue Thread

Sat Sep 14, 2019 4:13 pm

ikolkyo wrote:
Polot wrote:
Francoflier wrote:
I'm glad that something is finally fighting back against manufacturers recklessly squeezing more and more seats into their designs instead of stretching them. And I'm looking squarely at Airbus in this case, although Boeing has followed suit.

The A320 family, both A320 and A321, have been screaming for a fuselage stretch for a long time. But, nOooOo, let's just squeeze the living hell out of those seats, make the galleys so tiny that they're essentially a sink in the door aisle, and render the toilets so ridiculously small that you may have to back into them depending on the nature of your business.

It's a shame that the laws of physics are the ones doing the pushing before the passengers do, as it seems we are willing to accept any level of discomfort for a cheaper ticket...
:hissyfit:

...serves Airbus right.

Who is “fighting back”?

Airbus will release a software change and it will be back to business as usual.

WIederling wrote:

you should not munge the cases.
For the A320 it was the manufacturer Airbus who, based on accumulated flight data analysis raised the topic with EASA
who then continued the official path of giving out notice to users.


If it wasn’t for the whole MCAS 1.0 thing this probably never would have been discovered (or at least right now). MCAS 1.0 resulted in a deep dive into all control system data by both Airbus and EASA. Airbus wasn’t just poking around into this system 3.5 years after EIS because they were bored.



How would a software tweak fix tail tipping on the ground? I think that issue would still remain.


You stick a tail stand under it and there, problem solved. Other than the pride of some posters here (who have criticized the 739ER because some operators use a tail stand for its operations) no loss or major problem.
tommy1808 wrote:
Polot wrote:
If it wasn’t for the whole MCAS 1.0 thing this probably never would have been discovered (or at least right now). MCAS 1.0 resulted in a deep dive into all control system data by both Airbus and EASA. Airbus wasn’t just poking around into this system 3.5 years after EIS because they were bored.


Airbus is always poking in its FBW system and reports every minor buggy thing they find transparently to authorities, airlines and pilots. Even decades after EIS.

Best regards
Thomas

I mean I suppose it’s just a coincidence that a possible scenario in which could the A320neo could face a trim issue happened to be discovered at the same time its competitor is grounded because of scenarios which result in trim issues that ultimately crash the aircraft...

This isn’t a criticism of Airbus. But you can bet your last dollar (or euro, or whatever) that when more information about the 737Max came to light Airbus (and EASA) was quickly at work looking at the A320neo’s stall/trim systems and programming to make sure that that aircraft doesn’t have a fatal overlooked flaw in it either. Most software changes come about from reported flaws/incidents.

Companies are transparent, open, honest, etc, up until the moment we learn that oops, they were not actually as transparent, open, honest, etc as we thought. Those are meaningless buzzwords used to make you feel better about your preferred company. This applies to any industry.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Topic Author
Posts: 21414
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: A320neo Family 'Excessive Pitch' Issue Thread

Sat Sep 14, 2019 4:46 pm

Polot wrote:
You stick a tail stand under it and there, problem solved. Other than the pride of some posters here (who have criticized the 739ER because some operators use a tail stand for its operations) no loss or major problem.

Not a major problem, but 9ER is mostly used on longer routes and larger passenger volumes so it's not as much of a burden as A320neo which flies shorter routes that require quicker turn arounds.

Polot wrote:
This isn’t a criticism of Airbus. But you can bet your last dollar (or euro, or whatever) that when more information about the 737Max came to light Airbus (and EASA) was quickly at work looking at the A320neo’s stall/trim systems and programming to make sure that that aircraft doesn’t have a fatal overlooked flaw in it either. Most software changes come about from reported flaws/incidents.

Companies are transparent, open, honest, etc, up until the moment we learn that oops, they were not actually as transparent, open, honest, etc as we thought. Those are meaningless buzzwords used to make you feel better about your preferred company. This applies to any industry.

I agree totally, based on many experiences of such happening especially at my previous place of employment.
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
 
tommy1808
Posts: 10872
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2013 3:24 pm

Re: A320neo Family 'Excessive Pitch' Issue Thread

Sat Sep 14, 2019 6:44 pm

Polot wrote:
. Those are meaningless buzzwords used to make you feel better about your preferred company. This applies to any industry.


Assuming that just because all companies play buzzwords bingo all buzzwords are bring used in bingo is a faulty assumtion. Airbus already has a learning curve behind it. They learned that the computer flying the aircraft will always be suspected in each accident with the first A320 crash, and learned that assuming a state to be unreachable is not a good idea when pilots slammed on the breakes in WAW and nothing happened. The 737 crashes may have a role in the problem being discovered now, but not in it being discovered. Airbus does, and have a stream of advisories to pilots, operators and authorities to proof it, systematically test the fringes of the envelope under fringe conditions to figure out the tiniest deviation from the expected behaviour. Since this fault has rather minor effect it may have been one of those last, more fringy ones on the list of states considered unreachable. So just one of those things where finding them years after EIS is just what you would expect.

Best regards
Thomas
This Singature is a safe space......
 
marcogr12
Posts: 251
Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2018 2:36 pm

Re: A320neo Family 'Excessive Pitch' Issue Thread

Sat Sep 14, 2019 7:04 pm

So how come Easyjet hasn't reported any such problems with its Neos?And are they blocking rows too, since they have 186 seats?
Flying is breathing..no planes no life..
 
SamTheGeek
Posts: 42
Joined: Sun Jan 07, 2018 8:08 pm

Re: A320neo Family 'Excessive Pitch' Issue Thread

Sat Sep 14, 2019 7:20 pm

marcogr12 wrote:
So how come Easyjet hasn't reported any such problems with its Neos?And are they blocking rows too, since they have 186 seats?


I wonder if EasyJet has fewer checked bags because of their typical market, I’d bet that plays into this. LH likely has to trade off baggage delivery speed — especially relevant for international connections — and CG constraints.
 
marcogr12
Posts: 251
Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2018 2:36 pm

Re: A320neo Family 'Excessive Pitch' Issue Thread

Sat Sep 14, 2019 9:50 pm

Well not necessarily...I ve been on Easyjet flights to sun destinations and the amount of luggage carried was..enormous,not to mention that the flight was packed...But maybe not having cargo does play some role
Flying is breathing..no planes no life..
 
Amiga500
Posts: 2324
Joined: Tue Mar 03, 2015 8:22 am

Re: A320neo Family 'Excessive Pitch' Issue Thread

Tue Sep 17, 2019 4:30 pm

marcogr12 wrote:
Well not necessarily...I ve been on Easyjet flights to sun destinations and the amount of luggage carried was..enormous,not to mention that the flight was packed...But maybe not having cargo does play some role


No cargo in the main forward holds = baggage at the back of the aft hold.
 
User avatar
Lingon
Posts: 84
Joined: Sun Sep 03, 2017 4:18 pm

Re: A320neo Family 'Excessive Pitch' Issue Thread

Tue Sep 17, 2019 5:23 pm

ikolkyo wrote:
. How would a software tweak fix tail tipping on the ground? I think that issue would still remain.


A sensor will count how many passengers disembarked, and software will keep the cargo doors locked until enough people are out. :duck:
 
9Patch
Posts: 341
Joined: Wed Mar 13, 2019 10:38 pm

Re: A320neo Family 'Excessive Pitch' Issue Thread

Tue Sep 17, 2019 6:05 pm

Lingon wrote:
ikolkyo wrote:
. How would a software tweak fix tail tipping on the ground? I think that issue would still remain.


A sensor will count how many passengers disembarked, and software will keep the cargo doors locked until enough people are out. :duck:

They better have three sensors in case one of them disagrees.
 
User avatar
litz
Posts: 2299
Joined: Wed Dec 24, 2003 6:01 am

Re: A320neo Family 'Excessive Pitch' Issue Thread

Tue Sep 17, 2019 7:36 pm

marcogr12 wrote:
Well not necessarily...I ve been on Easyjet flights to sun destinations and the amount of luggage carried was..enormous,not to mention that the flight was packed...But maybe not having cargo does play some role


Man, that's one clear advantage to living in the southeastern US ... we just drive to the beach. Takes about 3 hours.
 
edealinfo
Posts: 1719
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2019 7:11 pm

Indigo Blocks ~30% of Seats on DEL-IST Flight per EASA Directive to Keep Tail-End of A320/A321neo Relatively Empty

Thu Sep 19, 2019 2:22 pm

Indigo pays a HUGE PENALTY for latest DCGA directive stemming from an EASA directive.

Indigo to leave 15% (29 of the 186) seats on A320 Neo and 29% (49 of the 222) seats on A321 Neo unsold, on the Delhi to Turkey flight!

How can an airline make such a flight financially work for them under such punishing mandates?

https://www.thehindu.com/business/Indus ... 452988.ece

https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/bus ... 176199.cms
Last edited by edealinfo on Thu Sep 19, 2019 2:38 pm, edited 2 times in total.
 
WIederling
Posts: 8888
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2015 2:15 pm

Re: EASA Directive Requires Indigo to Block ~30% of A321neo Seats on DEL-IST flight

Thu Sep 19, 2019 2:29 pm

Looks like reduced payload is mandated to allow enough fuel for alternates and headwind considerations.
Prohibiting some airline from doing dumb things is now deemed punishment?
Interesting.
Murphy is an optimist
 
User avatar
Polot
Posts: 9478
Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2011 3:01 pm

Re: EASA Directive Requires Indigo to Block ~30% of A321neo Seats on DEL-IST flight

Thu Sep 19, 2019 2:31 pm

It’s actually not because of the recent directive but because apparently to meet weight restrictions to make the route Indigo previously just didn’t bring the passenger’s checked bags. After discussions with DCGA they agreed to block seats instead.

The EASA thing is only that DCGA did a surprise audit to see if Indian airlines were complying.
Last edited by Polot on Thu Sep 19, 2019 2:32 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
edealinfo
Posts: 1719
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2019 7:11 pm

Re: EASA Directive Requires Indigo to Block ~30% of A321neo Seats on DEL-IST flight

Thu Sep 19, 2019 2:32 pm

WIederling wrote:
Looks like reduced payload is mandated to allow enough fuel for alternates and headwind considerations.
Prohibiting some airline from doing dumb things is now deemed punishment?
Interesting.


indigo had no issues on the DEL to IST flight prior to the EASA directive.
 
edealinfo
Posts: 1719
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2019 7:11 pm

Re: EASA Directive Requires Indigo to Block ~30% of A321neo Seats on DEL-IST flight

Thu Sep 19, 2019 2:36 pm

Polot wrote:
It’s actually not because of the recent directive but because apparently to meet weight restrictions to make the route Indigo previously just didn’t bring the passenger’s checked bags. After discussions with DCGA they agreed to block seats instead.

The EASA thing is only that DCGA did a surprise audit to see if Indian airlines were complying.


"Airlines play safe with A320Neo, lighten load"

https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/bus ... 176199.cms
 
WIederling
Posts: 8888
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2015 2:15 pm

Re: EASA Directive Requires Indigo to Block ~30% of A321neo Seats on DEL-IST flight

Thu Sep 19, 2019 2:46 pm

edealinfo wrote:
WIederling wrote:
Looks like reduced payload is mandated to allow enough fuel for alternates and headwind considerations.
Prohibiting some airline from doing dumb things is now deemed punishment?
Interesting.


indigo had no issues on the DEL to IST flight prior to the EASA directive.


fuel reserves are taken on for contigency.
arriving with fuel under the legal limit is uneventful in 99% of flights, isn't it?
Murphy is an optimist
 
edealinfo
Posts: 1719
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2019 7:11 pm

Re: EASA Directive Requires Indigo to Block ~30% of A321neo Seats on DEL-IST flight

Thu Sep 19, 2019 2:58 pm

WIederling wrote:
edealinfo wrote:
WIederling wrote:
Looks like reduced payload is mandated to allow enough fuel for alternates and headwind considerations.
Prohibiting some airline from doing dumb things is now deemed punishment?
Interesting.


indigo had no issues on the DEL to IST flight prior to the EASA directive.


fuel reserves are taken on for contigency.
arriving with fuel under the legal limit is uneventful in 99% of flights, isn't it?


If it wasn't for the EASA directive, they wouldn't have to limit the number of sold seats. Note that Indigo has been operating the A320neo to Istanbul from late March 2019 and had zero issues until the recent EASA directive which changed everything for them.
 
oldannyboy
Posts: 2383
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 8:28 am

Re: EASA Directive Requires Indigo to Block ~30% of A321neo Seats on DEL-IST flight

Thu Sep 19, 2019 3:04 pm

edealinfo wrote:
Polot wrote:
It’s actually not because of the recent directive but because apparently to meet weight restrictions to make the route Indigo previously just didn’t bring the passenger’s checked bags. After discussions with DCGA they agreed to block seats instead.

The EASA thing is only that DCGA did a surprise audit to see if Indian airlines were complying.


"Airlines play safe with A320Neo, lighten load"

https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/bus ... 176199.cms


Read your own link. Indian airlines are supposedly only leaving the last cargo hold empty, and no-one is dictating them to block all the seats you are mentioning.... That has nothing to do with the COG issues.
 
edealinfo
Posts: 1719
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2019 7:11 pm

Re: EASA Directive Requires Indigo to Block ~30% of A321neo Seats on DEL-IST flight

Thu Sep 19, 2019 3:47 pm

oldannyboy wrote:
Indian airlines are supposedly only leaving the last cargo hold empty, and no-one is dictating them to block all the seats you are mentioning.... That has nothing to do with the COG issues.


They leave the last cargo section empty because there is no bags to carry for the seats that have been blocked!
 
User avatar
unrave
Posts: 2640
Joined: Tue Jan 06, 2015 6:37 am

Re: EASA Directive Requires Indigo to Block ~30% of A321neo Seats on DEL-IST flight

Thu Sep 19, 2019 3:47 pm

edealinfo wrote:
WIederling wrote:
Looks like reduced payload is mandated to allow enough fuel for alternates and headwind considerations.
Prohibiting some airline from doing dumb things is now deemed punishment?
Interesting.


indigo had no issues on the DEL to IST flight prior to the EASA directive.

You are mixing two different issues here. IndiGo would have had to block those seats during the strong headwind season irrespective of the EASA directive. It was a coincidence that the directive arrived at this time. If you look at the flight times for 6E11, you'd notice that the flight times have been touching the 7 hr mark only recently, which means the headwinds weren't quite strong earlier.
Denial of racism is as egregious as racism itself
 
WIederling
Posts: 8888
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2015 2:15 pm

Re: A320neo Family 'Excessive Pitch' Issue Thread

Thu Sep 19, 2019 4:02 pm

marcogr12 wrote:
So how come Easyjet hasn't reported any such problems with its Neos?And are they blocking rows too, since they have 186 seats?

No airline has reported issues.
Murphy is an optimist
 
WIederling
Posts: 8888
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2015 2:15 pm

Re: EASA Directive Requires Indigo to Block ~30% of A321neo Seats on DEL-IST flight

Thu Sep 19, 2019 4:06 pm

edealinfo wrote:
If it wasn't for the EASA directive, they wouldn't have to limit the number of sold seats. Note that Indigo has been operating the A320neo to Istanbul from late March 2019 and had zero issues until the recent EASA directive which changed everything for them.


Which directive?

The Airbus instigated one that is intended to cope with potential CoG issues?
No connection.

Going over your links it is all about having enough fuel for legally reaching a destination up wind ( rather strong headwinds currently ).
Murphy is an optimist
 
mrbots
Posts: 36
Joined: Tue Mar 12, 2019 5:31 pm

Re: A320neo Family 'Excessive Pitch' Issue Thread

Thu Sep 19, 2019 4:28 pm

It really just seems like these 50 and 30 year old mid-capacity, mid-range NBs are just being modified and pushed into capacities and ranges they were never intended for leading to these pitch/trim issues. Though I don't see anyone claiming the A320 is "inherently unstable" like they were throwing around at the Max even though the flight behavior seems fairly similar. They're both at a point they require software intervention at extreme edges of the flight envelope. Though, I will also admit I have no qualms about flying either the Neo or the Max (once ungrounded). Hopefully these issues just teach both manufactures they need more thorough testing during the development phase and these pitch/trim issues don't pop up on future updated models (777X, 787-10, etc.) after EIS.

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos