quote:

---

> Perhaps one for Mr Oskar??
>
> I just received a few more MyWorld DVD's for Airbus A320 and A340.
> Amazing aircraft I have to say.
> In both DVD's the pilots are explaining the cockpit controls and both
> mention the Auto Thrust control as being different to the usual Auto
> Throttle control. They didn't go into detail so I didn't get to hear what
> the actual difference is.
> Can someone clarify this for me please ?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Al

quote:

---

> "Al Fraser" <A-C.Fraser@shaw.ca> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
> news:VI8Sd.444959$Xk.169076@pd7tw3no...
>
>
> There IS a significant difference. The Airbus has so called "fixed
> throttle" levers which simply means that they act (in normal system
> operation) like thrust limit switches. They have 5 position detents
> corresponding (from below) to: REVERSE, IDLE, CLIMB, MCT/FLEX, TOGA.
>
> It's not easy to describe the system in two words as - as said before - it
> is completely different to other systems. The most significant thing is
> that the throttle lever do not move when the autothrust system is working.
> They will be in the climb detent throughout the whole flight. The throttle
> levers have no mechanical linkage to the engines.
>
> To clarify things a bit let's got through a normal flight sequence to
> understand the operation.
> After engine start everything is like in a conventional A/C. You move the
> trottle levers and the engines will respond to it. So taxiing is as usual.
>
> For T/O you set the throttle levers to the TOGA or - if reduced T/O thrust
> is used - to MCT/FLEX detent.
> The FADEC (Full Authority Digital Engine Control) will now supply Max T/O
> thrust or reduced T/O thrust according to the FLEX temperature entered
> into the FMGC. Furthermore setting the levers to the aforementioned detent
> will set the FMGC in SRS mode (Speed Reference System) thus the Flight
> Director will command V2 after take-off or speed at liftoff - whichever is
> greater.
>
> When reaching power reduction altitude (usually 1500 ft AGL) the throttle
> levers are retarded to the CLIMB detent. (one or two notches, depending on
> the Take-off setting). The FADEC will now command max. climb thrust and
> the Flight Guidance will revert to Managed Climb, which is basically an
> open climb. Open Climb in that context means that the engines will
> maintain a constant thrust setting (max. climb thrust) and the A/C speed
> is maintained through elevator inputs.
>
> As soon as cruising altitude is reached, the Flight Guidance reverts to
> speed hold mode. The throttle levers remain in CLIMB detent, however
> thrust is reduced to maintain the desired cruising speed. That's the
> strange part when there's no throttle movement is to observe although
> engines are throttling back to maintain the selected (or managed -> by
> FMGC) speed.
>
> For descent nothing will change as speed control is either by elevator
> (Open Descent, pwr idle) or by thrust when another descent schedule is
> required. Observe that the thrust limit is always max. climb thrust.
>
> Prior to touchdown there is a Radio Altimeter call-out "retard" at around
> 20 ft. (yes I know the joke about "retard" ;-)) ). That's where you just
> retard the throttles to IDLE detent, and after nosewheel touchdown to
> "REVERSE".
>
> Not retarding the throttles will have two different effects, depending on
> whether you're on Autoland or Manual Land.
>
> On Autoland the power will go to idle as it is commanded through the
> Autoland Sequence. However the throttle levers not being in Idle Position
> will prevent the (armend of course) ground spoliers from deploying.
>
> On a manual landing the speed will be maintained as long as the throttle
> levers are in the CLIMB detent thus upon flaring the engines would rev up
> and you could float down the runway for hours.. ;-)
>
> Ok, that's it in short and I know that it sounds a bit weird. But I can
> assure you that you get very quickly familiar with the system and then
> it's not so weird anymore....
>
> I must add however that it is of course possible to use manual throttle.
> It is often used on final approach in gusty weather as no computer can
> match the "feeling by the pants". It is then a very accurate manual thrust
> system as there's no asymmetry due to improper cable tension or so.....
>
> Sorry, it's been a bit lenghty but as I said at the beginning, it's not
> possible to explain it in two words.. ;-))
> --
> Oskar
> (retired captain)
> Remember, in the great scheme of things, we're all small potatoes...
>

quote:

---

> Hi Oskar, may I ask you what A/C you flew? You just gave such a detailed
> descritption of the Airbus thrust system, before you explained things
> about
> Boeings. So I wonder which A/Cs you flew.
> Thx!
> Steve
>
>

quote:

---

> Around 100 different models of Beech, Cessna, Piper, Socata,
> Pilatus,.....etc. but my guess is that these are not the ones you want to
> know.. ;-)
>
> During my airline career I flew the following types:
>
> Douglas DC9-32/34/51
> Fokker 100
> B747-300 (only for 4 months due to misplanning of the crew

quote:

---

> Airbus A319/320/321
> Airbus A330
> As to my knowledge we were the only company who operated cross-qualified

quote:

---

> short- and longrange Airbuses. So we could do 2 or 3 days of shortrange

quote:

---

> and immediately thereafter go for a nice shopping trip to JFK.. ;-)
> Although most pilots unions would nowadays oppose to that it was the most
> interesting and enjoyable part of my flying career.
> --
> Oskar
> (retired captain)
> Remember, in the great scheme of things, we're all small potatoes...

quote:

---

> Thanks for the information!
> I can imagine it was interesting to fly long- and shortrange at the same
> time. And that's something Airbus advertised with - the Cross Crew
> Qualification due to similiar cockpit layout.
> Don't you think that's somehow dangerous? As the 320-family ACs differ
> quite
> a lot from the 330/340-Family ACs. Many, many details you have to know
> about
> the different models! I think that even flying the A330-200 -300,
> A340-200 -300 -600 as a pilot is a little too much. So many minor details
> which are different, but which of course you have to know (e.g. different
> call-outs in 330 and the 340 - to give only one example)!! And then even
> thinking of different company deliveries (e.g. with center tank or not -
> 330), I think that all these many "minor" differences can be hard to
> remember and therefore be dangerous. What do you think?
> steve
>
> "Oskar Wagner" <rengaw@swissonline.ch> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
> news:cvghgo$da3$1@news.hispeed.ch...
> requirements....)
> on
> hops
>
>

quote:

---

> Well Steve, it's not that hard. I don't think that you would do a cross
> qualification over the whole range A320 to A340 but merely over two sub
> ranges. We were intended to have a cross qualification A320/330 and later

quote:

---

> A330/A340, but not A320/A340.
> According to my experience we never came across any difficulties of mixing
> up different types although there are - as you state correctly - some

quote:

---

> differences. We even had different layouts e.g. of aux. center tanks

quote:

---

> the same sub-type (A321) but this was perfectly handled through

quote:

---

> sidenotes in the crew briefing documents. IMHO it's all a matter of
> preparation to always be aware of the A/C under your pants.... ;-)
> The most impressive difference shows up anyway when starting to taxi. You
> have to make sure very quickly whether there are 17 or 30 m of wing

quote:

---

> out each side.... ;-))))
> --
> Oskar
> (retired captain)
> Remember, in the great scheme of things, we're all small potatoes...
>
>

quote:

---

> Hi Oskar, thanks again for your answer.
> Is it theoretically possible to have cross crew A320/A340? I thought
> Airbus
> tried to make this possible as well, but I'm not quite sure anymore.
> I just generally think that there are already so many details pilots need
> to
> know about and be aware of (even when you just want to completely know all
> the systems in a modern AC - Airbus - with all its computers and how they
> work and interact) that you could easily live w/out having to focus on
> minor
> differences of different AC models or even within one type. But I guess
> you're right, it just depends on your preperation!
> steve
>
> on
> minor
> within
> informative
> sticking
>