skelsey

member
  • Content count

    231
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

103 Excellent

About skelsey

  • Rank
    Flight Student - Crosscountry

Recent Profile Visitors

1423 profile views
  1. skelsey

    Automated SID Entry Causing Incorrect Flight

    The SID you refer to is a radar vectored departure. Therefore the route is not, as you suggest, direct VTU after the SMO 154 radial: rather ATC will issue you headings and altitudes to fly and eventually send you to VTU. This is reflected in the coding of the departure in the nav database, because automatically flying direct VTU after the SMO 154 radial is exactly what ATC do not expect you to do! The only restriction is that you must not climb above 3000 ft until you are beyond the SMO 156 radial. I would be very surprised if this was not what was coded in the nav database (156 being a point on the 156 radial with a restriction of -3000) but I have not ever flown that departure so I cannot say for certain. You can quite easily use the FIX INFO page to enter SMO as a fix and enter the 154 radial to draw this on the ND: you can also back up with raw data and the RMI needles as you have done. In any case I am slightly surprised at your struggle: all that is required to get the aeroplane flying to VTU at any point is two button clicks in the MCDU: DIR then select VTU and ensure NAV is annunciated in green on the FMA (push the knob for managed NAV if you need to). Certainly seems a lot easier than the lengths you have gone to?
  2. I'm curious as to the reference for this (I will have a dig through the books tomorrow myself) as I wasn't aware of that either. I presume the definition of 'calculated by the pilot' must be loose enough to include 'pilot sends numbers to a computer at home base and waits for results of calculation to come back'!
  3. Roger! We're allowed our (documented) BA foibles where PM calls the armed modes and does the reversers etc though, right? Or are you going to make us go back to Airbus OEM?
  4. Sounds like a challenge to me! . Challenge accepted: give us a bit of time to develop a course once the aircraft is out, but I'm confident my team will be able to deliver you a route-check standard crew (and I won't cheat and use any of our RW pilots either ).
  5. There's undoubtedly some truth in that, though you haven't seen our training courses! I do think there's a great deal of CRM training value in even the odd straightforward non-normal - no need to make the wings fall off - but as I say I do appreciate that including them would be a departure from the "SOP-only" approach, and there's always the opportunity to be creative without 'breaking' the aeroplane . Just a shame as there's nothing less realistic than practicing non-normals in a complex airliner as a single pilot, but maybe one day! Simon
  6. I suspected that might be the case! Shame in a way as this is where CFD really comes in to its own -- but I do understand it wouldn't be in fitting with the AS philosophy for the Airbus fleet. Still, I expect there'll be some sighs of relief around the VA
  7. One further question on the CFD aspect: Are there any plans to simulate any (even basic) failures, and if so is there scope for an instructor "in the back" to set up/initiate a scenario for a crew? ...or are my BAV charges safe from my "TRI fingers" ?
  8. I see! Would have been good for members of individual VAs to quickly be able to see which fellow members are available rather than having to hunt through a large public list or come up with some internal system for pairing pilots but nonetheless a great step forward.
  9. Looks very interesting! I'd be interested to know how this is likely to work with VAs -- will there be a way for VAs to have "members only" areas or is it just one big public area for all CFD users? Simon
  10. skelsey

    Practising Go-Rounds - Where?

    Hi Clive, There are two (actually three) separate aspects here: the go-around actions (i.e. the actual aviating, flying the aeroplane bit), navigating a missed approach procedure, and finally diversion planning/execution, and I would suggest breaking them down as such. Firstly, the go-around actions themselves: you are absolutely right to want to practice as the all-engines-operating go-around is probably one of the most commonly stuffed-up manoeuvres in aviation! At typical landing weights the average jet is very sprightly when full thrust is applied and things can happen very quickly. It is well worth rehearsing the go-around actions (by touch) as part of your approach preparation/briefing, before you start your descent: if you do so every time you fly you will soon have committed the actions to memory. You should ensure that you have set the initial missed approach altitude on the FCU once you are established on the approach (i.e. GS green on the FMA). Assuming you are going around from relatively low height (as this is ironically the most straightforward scenario), the sequence is very simple: On the decision to go around, the call is "Go around flaps" Set the thrust levers to TOGA, verify that the thrust increases and you get SRS | GA TRK on the FMA and rotate towards 15 degrees (and follow the FD SRS commands). Retract the flaps by one step Once you have a positive rate of climb (and not before!) - gear up Verify that the missed approach route is being tracked (i.e. select NAV or HDG as appropriate and verify on the FMA) At the Missed Approach Acceleration Altitude, select climb thrust (LVR CLB will start flashing, just as on takeoff). The speed target will now change to Green Dot and you can clean the aircraft up as appropriate. Verify that the missed approach altitude is captured (ALT*/ALT annunciates on the FMA). The aircraft will automatically re-string the approach in the FMGC for another go if so desired. As for tracking the missed approach route: this really is just the same as tracking any other procedure. Like anything else you do you should brief/plan the missed approach procedure as part of your approach briefing so that you know what to expect and can anticipate any potential traps (e.g. a very low missed approach altitude, complex tracking requirements etc). The missed approach procedure should be automatically selected and available when you select the approach in the FMGC and nine times out of ten you can simply track it in NAV mode (obviously ensure that the database matches the chart and that what the aircraft actually does matches with that!). Note that often ATC may give you a heading or other instructions if the traffic situation means that the standard missed approach procedure on the chart would bring you in to conflict with another aircraft, so be prepared to follow such instructions if necessary. Finally, when it comes to diversions -- again this is a question of prior planning; again as part of your approach briefing you should have an idea of where you might go if for some reason you are unable to get in to your intended destination and how much fuel you will require to get there, and don't forget you can also enter the alternate route in to the FMGC. If there is ATC available they may just give you vectors or a direct to a convenient point. As far as the aircraft is concerned, simply do a LAT REV and enter your new destination. After that, it just becomes a case of planning and executing an approach at the new destination, so it will be very busy but otherwise exactly the same as planning an approach anywhere else! The main thing to bear in mind is your fuel situation as you will likely be running close to final reserves at this point. As for your question about planning for a practice detail -- all you need to do is load sufficient fuel for whatever it is you are planning to do. There is certainly no need to do anything with PFPX etc -- indeed if you are planning to fly a number of go-arounds/circuits then PFPX is not really set up for this at all as it is designed to give you a plan for a point-to-point flight.
  11. skelsey

    MCDU PERF APPR page

    The short answer is -- yes, the aeroplane uses this data for various reasons, not just the VApp calculation. How much is functional in the Aerosoft bus, I'm not sure! The QNH value is used to compute the cabin pressurisation schedule, and the temperature is used to refine the VNAV descent profile (as it gives an indication of ISA deviation). The entered wind is very important (and I am sure that this is modelled on the AS A320); this is used for the VApp and Ground Speed Mini calculations. Vapp is defined as VLS + 1/3 of the headwind component based on the entered wind with a minimum of VLS + 5 and maximum of VLS +15 (of interest -- note that the aircraft expects an entry in degrees magnetic, as would be passed by the tower; METAR winds are in degrees true and depending on where you are in the world there may be a significant difference). Because the minimum value of VApp is VLS +5, you won't see any effect until the entered headwind component exceeds 15 kt (in practice obviously a headwind component of 18 kt is required before you get a VApp value of VLS +6).
  12. skelsey

    Tiller Sensitivity

    Personally I find the tiller quite comfortable (using the twist on my MS Sidewinder) but I guess it may depend on your hardware. Remember that in the real aeroplane the tiller NWS is by wire and the forces are very light. The response is also non-linear and increases in sensitivity with tiller deflection. The key is being smooth, holding the input and waiting for the aeroplane to respond and making small smooth adjustments as necessary. If you are aggressive with the tiller, move it or let it spring back rapidly or apply lots of lock quickly you will destabilise the aeroplane. Never let it 'snap' back to the centre and you hardly ever need to apply full lock: if you do then you should get there smoothly and progressively, and the same as you 'unwind' the steering back to centre as well. Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk
  13. The issue here is that you are seeing the Overspeed protection in action. For some reason (most likely a wind shift) the airspeed has increased in to the overspeed band. In this situation the aeroplane will pitch the nose up in order to reduce the speed. As mentioned above, the most likely issue is not with the Aerosoft Airbus per se, which is operating exactly as designed and as the real aeroplane would, but with the FSX weather model.