[jhb_airlines] Re: B350

  • From: Gerry Winskill <gwinsk@xxxxxxx>
  • To: jhb_airlines@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2008 15:35:50 +0100

Quite right, it was the first allowed to make blind auto landings, in fog. It was used on the Manchester to Heathrow shuttle too and a landing was often followed by an announcement from the captain, that we had just taken part in a completely automatic landing. Occasionally there would bo only the Tridents getting in.


Flights to Rome were sometimes in Alitalia's B727. Same config but it always seemed much larger, inside. Of the two, it was the only one where landings caused the passengers to clap and cheer. Often they'd been quieter taking off, since they said their Rosary silently!

Gerry Winskill.

tom smith wrote:
when I was working in the middle east and flying Teesside to Heathrow on a dc9 to pick up an onwards flight which I missed a few times because of fog at Heathrow. where as the lads flying from Newcastle on the Trident made it. as the trident had a better landing system so as the fog started to clear the tridents where some of the first in. or so we were told
tom
----- Original Message ----- From: "Bones" <bones@xxxxxxx>
To: <jhb_airlines@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Friday, August 22, 2008 2:59 PM
Subject: [jhb_airlines] Re: B350


Well known as a groundhog the Trident compensated by being a real bullet in
the air. It's turning radius was awful and ATC had to compensate for that
and pilot's had to start turns some 5nm before the turning point -
especially if it was a sharp corner like JSY SAM MID.

I think it was one of the last large aircraft to use leading edge droop
rather than proper slats which results in a less draggy wing. This would not help on landing and would require a greater AoA on take off too. It wasn't
our best design from that era.

bones
bones@xxxxxxx
http://woodair.net


-----Original Message-----
From: jhb_airlines-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:jhb_airlines-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Gerry Winskill
Sent: 22 August 2008 14:16
To: jhb_airlines@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [jhb_airlines] Re: B350

In my previous existence I often flew Manchester to Aberdeen, when the
route was flown with the Trident. It was disconcerting to hear the
engines go into reverse thrust before the wheels connected with the
runway! It seemed reluctant, perhaps because of ground effect, to cease
flying.

When I discussed it with a driver he said it wasn't half as
disconcerting as its reluctance to let go of the runway and start
flying, during takeoff!

Gerry Winskill

Bones wrote:
"I will give that try, but those idents are quite meaty, you need a hefty
push to get over them."

Welcome to real life. There's a good reason the indents are difficult to
get
over - you don't want to get into reverse by accident.

A brand new Commander 680 was delivered to FlightLine at Dublin and all
the
charter pilots were being checked out on it. The second pilot doing the
conversion had completed the general handling and was in the circuit. On
his
first approach he crossed the threshold and pulled the power levers
straight
back into reverse. The aircraft stopped as if it had hit a brick wall an
dropped 40ft onto the runway - it was a complete write off and only two
days
old. Luckily only minor injuries were sustained but the pilot was sacked
on
the spot.

bones
bones@xxxxxxx
http://woodair.net


-----Original Message-----
From: jhb_airlines-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:jhb_airlines-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of F FISHER
Sent: 22 August 2008 13:32
To: jhb_airlines@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [jhb_airlines] Re: B350

Ok Bones

I will give that try, bu those idents are quite meaty, you need a hefty
push

to get over them.

Will have to look at the right mixture/condition lever, below the ident it

shifts the views, instead of cutting the fuel, the left does cut on both
anyway, not a big deal.

Frank F
----- Original Message ----- From: "Bones" <bones@xxxxxxx>
To: <jhb_airlines@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Friday, August 22, 2008 12:41 PM
Subject: [jhb_airlines] Re: B350


As Gerry mentioned in his post a few days ago quite a lot of turoboprops produce too much thrust even when throttled right back. Condition levers
don't affect prop thrust - just engine thrust - so they are not
responsible.


Taxying in a turboprop leads to two different options for a pilot. Some
will
counteract the excess thrust with constant braking. This is the lazy mans
approach as it is costly (brake pads are horribly expensive) and you
overheat the brakes by doing so which would affect stopping distance on
an
aborted take off.

The better way to keep speed down during taxy is to move the power levers
back to the zero thrust detent from time to time or even back into
reverse
slightly. If you think that's awkward in FS it's worse in real life
because
you have to keep lifting the levers over the detent to get them into
beta.

The worst aircraft for this (in my limited experience) was the Rockwell
Commander 690. At idle it would accelerate quite quickly - you would be
over
20kts in a second or two. If you lifted the levers into beta the reverse
thrust was equally powerful and it would bring you to a halt just as
quickly. Taxying was a constant juggling match. By comparison the Twin
Otter
was much more well behaved - not that I'm saying I handled one ;)

bones
bones@xxxxxxx
http://woodair.net


-----Original Message-----
From: jhb_airlines-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:jhb_airlines-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of F FISHER
Sent: 22 August 2008 12:17
To: jhb_airlines@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [jhb_airlines] Re: B350

Bones

Many thanks to you and others for advice, Making my flight experiance
more
varied.

I still do not think the condition lever are doing their job, could be I
am
still on high idle, as evident with the high taxi speed.

I have a payware Dash 8 for FS9, and bringing the levers down makes a
difference, taxi speed is controllable with throttles only, on the ident
the

Dash stops without brakes.

Will have a look through the AC config file and see if I can spot it.

Frank F
----- Original Message ----- From: "Bones" <bones@xxxxxxx>
To: <jhb_airlines@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2008 10:33 PM
Subject: [jhb_airlines] Re: B350


Looking better. If you can keep fuel burn down to those figures it
should
give you a 6.1hr endurance which is roughly a 1500nm range.

bones
bones@xxxxxxx
http://woodair.net

-----Original Message-----
From: jhb_airlines-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:jhb_airlines-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of F FISHER
Sent: 21 August 2008 21:55
To: jhb_airlines@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [jhb_airlines] B350

EGHI-EGEC

FSX + IVAO and online WX.

Startup 18.47 Fuel 533G 6 onboard WX 180/10 Q1015

Distance 345nm ETE 01:23

Shutdown at 20:30 Fuel remain 381

Trip time 01:43 block to block

Fuel used 152G (a 15kt headwind all the way)

Climb power 1600/torque 80/FF 4.7
Cruise power 1400/torque 64/FF3.1

With CAVOK or tailwind, willhave improvedthe above.

Compared to

FS9 offline CAVOK

Trip time 01:37  fuel used 160G.

climb power 1600/torque 90/FF4.8
Cruise power 1400/torque 70/FF3.5

Note: for power levers on 1400, they are on the bottom Ident, not tried
pulling right down to feather

Idle levers on low for TO and cruise and descent, on high for landing

Many thanks for instruction and advise, much appreciated, results will
be
logged.

Will now go for the long trip 800-1000nm, and see how the fuel burn
stacks
up.

Frank F.




No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com
Version: 8.0.138 / Virus Database: 270.6.6/1627 - Release Date:
22/08/2008
06:48






No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com
Version: 8.0.138 / Virus Database: 270.6.6/1627 - Release Date:
22/08/2008

06:48















Other related posts: