Page 1 of 1

Neo vs Ceo cockpit differences

Posted: Sat Apr 06, 2019 1:40 pm
by FabDiva
Apologies if this has already been covered with all the 737Max stuff.

As part of the fallout from the crashes of the Max it has emerged that there has been very little crew training, which struck me somewhat as the Max has a very different cockpit to an NG.

Now I know Airbus haven't made any major changes to the flight deck with the Neo, but are there any less obvious changes in the cockpit between CEO and NEO?

Thanks

Re: Neo vs Ceo cockpit differences

Posted: Sat Apr 06, 2019 2:35 pm
by zeke
Nope, just another engine type.

Re: Neo vs Ceo cockpit differences

Posted: Sat Apr 06, 2019 2:53 pm
by FabDiva
Thanks :) So just EPR/N1 on the displays as appropriate :)

Re: Neo vs Ceo cockpit differences

Posted: Sat Apr 06, 2019 3:07 pm
by Agent
They added the „DUAL COOL“ Button on the Overhead Panel for use at engine start and some changes to the fuel system (A319/320 only). All minor changes to the flight crew.

Re: Neo vs Ceo cockpit differences

Posted: Sat Apr 06, 2019 5:38 pm
by Woodreau
Don’t know why they bothered with DUAL COOL button. Every time we've used it to attempt to shorten the amount of time required for engine start, we always get the ECAM caution “ENG DUAL COOL UNAVAIL” of which the first item on the ECAM is DUAL COOL ... OFF and it still takes us 10 minutes to get an engine started.

That and having to manually select continuous ignition when you select engine anti ice.

Re: Neo vs Ceo cockpit differences

Posted: Sat Apr 06, 2019 5:41 pm
by akiss20
What is dual cool theoretically supposed to do?

Re: Neo vs Ceo cockpit differences

Posted: Sat Apr 06, 2019 9:19 pm
by tb727
akiss20 wrote:
What is dual cool theoretically supposed to do?


Use bleed air to turn both engines at the same time so get the computed cool down period done at the same time. In the summer it can be a couple minutes(upwards of 5)of motoring while just sitting there.

Woodreau wrote:
Don’t know why they bothered with DUAL COOL button. Every time we've used it to attempt to shorten the amount of time required for engine start, we always get the ECAM caution “ENG DUAL COOL UNAVAIL” of which the first item on the ECAM is DUAL COOL ... OFF and it still takes us 10 minutes to get an engine started.

That and having to manually select continuous ignition when you select engine anti ice.


Yeah, when I have remembered to try it, it has never worked.

The difference I like the most, while not really a cockpit thing, is that you don't get the higher "approach idle" until you go Flaps 3. The CEO gives it to you at Flaps 1 which makes it that much harder to descend when you are assigned 210 on the airspeed.

Re: Neo vs Ceo cockpit differences

Posted: Sat Apr 06, 2019 10:57 pm
by Woodreau
I like that “feature” of not getting approach idle until landing flap configuration as well.

Because of the potentially long dry motoring times before the FADEC initiates the engine start sequence, I don’t bother trying to single engine taxi a NEO either. It’s always start both engines so that I have the 5 minute engine warmup before takeoff.

Re: Neo vs Ceo cockpit differences

Posted: Sun Apr 07, 2019 12:01 pm
by AECM
The DUAL COOL feature that seems to not be working most of the time is in both engines type (Leap and GTF)?

Re: Neo vs Ceo cockpit differences

Posted: Tue Apr 09, 2019 2:50 pm
by greg85
AECM wrote:
The DUAL COOL feature that seems to not be working most of the time is in both engines type (Leap and GTF)?


My airline certainly does not have this on the LEAP 1-A powered A320 or A321.