• Home
  • Aircraft
    • Proud to fly a Turboprop: Q400 vs ATR72
    • Spicejet unveils the Q400s
  • FlightDeck & Systems
    • Airbus A320 Experience
    • Boeing’s MAX, Southwest’s 737
    • Cockpit Design: EPR v/s N1 indication
    • Evolution
    • Winglets and Sharklets
  • Training
    • A320 FFS LOFT Session
    • IGRUA
    • Aerospace Engineering in India: the Gaps
    • NFTI: Rising to the Top, and how
  • Out Of the Blue
    • Captain Dad and kid First Officer
    • GPS to the rescue!
    • Iran Air 743: Landing Without Nose Gear
    • LOT 767 Gear Up Landing
    • Love is in “the air”
    • Cathay’s Young Cabin Crew!
  • In Photos
    • Aero India 2011
    • Aero India 2009
  • Projects
    • General Aviation Flight Simulator
    • Airbus Tech
      • About PAT
      • AIRCON/PRESSURIZATION/VENTILATION
      • COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS
      • ELECTRICAL SYSTEMS
      • FIRE PROTECTION SYSTEMS
      • FUEL SYSTEMS
      • HYDRAULIC SYSTEMS
    • Making a Lynx Micro Headset Charger on the Go!
  • People
    • Radka Máchová
  • About

The Flying Engineer

~ Technically and Operationally Commercial Aviation

The Flying Engineer

Category Archives: Airport Operations

Jet Blasting Away Operating Profits at Mumbai airport

01 Friday Feb 2013

Posted by theflyingengineer in Airport Operations, General Aviation Interest, Manufacturer, Operations

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

27, A319, Airbus, Blast Shield, Blastwall, Jet, Mumbai, N1, Runway, Taxiway, VABB

A Jet Blast Shield, installed at Queenstown Airport, NZ. Image taken from Blastwall.

A Jet Blast Shield, installed at Queenstown Airport, NZ. Image taken from Blastwall.

A common practice at India is the misunderstanding of technical specifications. This leads to field failures. Further effort is spent into a turtle-paced probe of the failure, and till the probe is completed, inconveniences are caused; the inconveniences leading to losses, and the losses finally blamed upon the manufacturer whose specifications were misunderstood.

VABB_ARPTChhatrapati Shivaji International Airport, Mumbai (ICAO: VABB, IATA: BOM) has two physical runways, one running east-west (09-27), and the other one running north-west-south-east (32-14). The east end of 09-27 is very close to a road, and the Jhari Mari slum. The proximity to the road and slum poses a safety issue, when airplanes open power for takeoff.

The jet blast, from aircraft jet engines, have been demonstrated to cause significant damage to proximate objects, such as cars, and houses. (view the video towards the end of this article) The problem is amplified in larger, and heavier airplanes, that require a significantly greater amount of takeoff thrust.

For example, on an Airbus A320 (180 passengers, maximum takeoff weight up to 78 tonnes), with the CFM 56 Engines, exhaust velocities of upto 144km/h may be recorded at 500ft behind the aircraft. On an Airbus A330 (typically 335 passengers, maximum takeoff weight up to 235 tonnes), with the GE CF6-80E1 engines, exhaust velocities of upto 169km/h may be recorded at 500ft behind the aircraft. On an Airbus A380 (typically 525 passengers, maximum takeoff weight up to 560 tonnes), with the GP 7200 Engines, exhaust velocities of upto 169km/h may be recorded upto 720ft behind the aircraft. The A380, unlike the previous examples, has four engines, pushing a larger mass of air, and causing more potential damage.

Engine Exhaust Velocities at takeoff, Airbus A380

Engine Exhaust Velocities at takeoff, Airbus A380 with Trent 900 Engines

According to the Beaufort Scale of wind speeds, wind speeds in excess of 119 km/h cause “Severe structural damage to buildings”.

At Mumbai airport, when aircraft line up on runway 27 (easterly end) for a departure (takeoff), the closest approximate distance between the aircraft and a sufficiently busy road named “Magan Nathuram” is 500ft. With all sorts of vehicles: cars and tall, loaded trucks plying on the road, the risk of a jet blast’s direct and indirect damage to vehicles, and the adjacent slums, is very high, every time an aircraft takes off.

The Jet Blast shield located near the threshold of Runway 27. The visible gap in the centre is the portion that was jet-blasted away in 2012.

The Jet Blast shield located near the threshold of Runway 27. The visible gap in the centre is the portion that was jet-blasted away in 2012.

This necessitates a Jet Blast shield: a well designed barrier between the aircraft and the road. In 2011, a new Jet blast barrier from Blastwall, a Canadian firm, was installed. A year later, in the July of 2012, the shield gave way when a cargo plane tookoff. Along with the shield, the ILS Localizer array, located right behind the shield and responsible for Runway 09 operations, was damaged.

The Times of India brought out an article on this damaged shield, which may be read HERE.

N1_NOT_AVBL_FOR_OPSSince the July of 2012, the jet blast shield has been left damaged. Satellite images show the central section of the Jet Blast shield missing. The risk of a jet blast affecting civilians outside the airport perimeter has forced Mumbai airport to shut a part of taxiway “N1”, with the NOTAM A0900/12 stating: “PORTION OF TWY ‘N1′ EAST OF TWY ‘N3′ NOT AVBL FOR OPS”. While the ILS has been repaired, the Jet blast shield hasn’t  and as such, aircraft can line up on Runway 27 only via taxiway N3, displacing the take off point almost 1000ft ahead: a requirement to prevent Jet Blasting the locals away.

Interestingly, Blastwall has installed their shields at Toronto Pearson International Airport, and at Queenstown Airport. At Both airports, the installed jet blast shield is located greater than 530ft behind the estimated closest aircraft line up position. At Mumbai, the shield is located only about 400ft behind, subjecting it to greater stresses.

A statement from Peter Roston, President of Blastwall Ltd:

“We have provided frangible fibreglass blast walls to airports all over the world since 1998 and have never had a failure including here in Mumbai. Our specifications are clearly outlined on our web site and in fact were quoted in the purchase order we received for this wall originally. Unfortunately someone misunderstood the limitations as expressed on our site. As a result, once placed in operation, the wall was overstressed almost 100% from the specifications. Being frangible, it did as required and collapsed. In fact the wall performed exactly as designed. Both the president of our engineering company and myself flew to Mumbai to discuss the collapse , review the misunderstanding, and determine a path to correct this problem for the future. We suggested a drastically reinforced model. Eventually, after review of our specifications by the purchaser’s own engineers, this was approved and purchased. It was shipped some time ago and is at the site awaiting installation.”

The very fact that a new, reinforced jet blast shield was purchased is proof that the company was not held liable for a defective product. Peter agreed with the Flying Engineer’s view, stating, “There are only really two solutions: 1- build a stronger wall to contain a higher velocity and/or 2- move the aircraft further from the wall.”

The most frequently used runway for operations, 09-27, is 11,312ft long. A fully laden Boeing 747-400ER Freighter, at 412 Tonnes, requires around 11,000ft of runway to take off at sea level, at 32°C. With almost 1,000ft knocked off, the smaller available take off distance when departing from runway 27 (westerly direction), lowers the permissible takeoff weight of the 747-400ER by 10 tonnes.

TAKEOFF RUNWAY LENGTH REQUIREMENTS - 747-400ER (CF6-80C2B5F ENGINES)

TAKEOFF RUNWAY LENGTH REQUIREMENTS – 747-400ER (CF6-80C2B5F ENGINES)

NOTAM A0900/12 is still in effect, and this introduces a payload penalty for long haul operations of large aircraft.

To better appreciate what a Jetblast can do to a vehicle, watch this 50 second video, involving an Airbus A319 (Upto 75.5 Tonnes Maximum Take Off Weight, 156 Pasengers maximum seating capacity, 2 CFM 56-5 Engines producing a max thrust of around 12,000 kg force each):

Delhi-Bangalore: A321 Flight Details (NAV & PERF)

20 Saturday Oct 2012

Posted by theflyingengineer in Airport Operations, General Aviation Interest, Manufacturer, Aerodynamics

≈ 4 Comments

Tags

Airbus, fuel burn, A321, Kingfisher, Airlines, VT-KFY, Airspace, BIA, HIA, DPN, BPL, W20S, W57S, MAC, Cruise, Fuel Flow, RVSM, Flaps, Cost Index

VT-KFY (Airbus A321 MSN 3302). Photo by Vivek Kaul, used with permission.

My flight on the 20th of December 2009 was a memorable experience. My friend, who was a first officer with the then 5 star airline, Kingfisher, had informed the captain (an ex-IAF officer) and the lady first officer that I was their passenger on their Delhi – Bangalore flight. Comfortably seated on 37A, I found the orange juice stain I had left behind on the same seat when flying from Bangalore to Delhi a couple of days earlier.

Having been part of a huge “makeover” program at Honeywell, I was keen to gather flight data that I could possibly use for my training at the company. I sent out the “In flight form” to the crew members, scribbled on sheets from the hotel where the company had accommodated me. Most of the data is, as you will notice, from the FMS pages of the Airbus A320 family.

VT-KFY, the Airbus A321, was the first, and till date, the only A321 that I have flown on. Branded with MSN 3302, and fitted with IAE V2500 engines, I was all too interested in the then 2 year old airplane.

With the DGCA Cancelling the license of Kingfisher Airlines, this article is a tribute to an airline whose employees and flights taught me so much.

Capt M and F/O F were kind enough to fill in all requested details for IT-207 Operated by an A321, VT-KFY

Flight Plan & Navigation

VT-KFY, operating as IT-207 was planned to fly Delhi  to Bangalore via airway W20S and W57S. W20S starts from the VOR at Delhi (DPN), and runs south-south east till Hyderabad International Airport’s VOR, HIA. W57S starts at HIA, and terminates at Bangalore International Airport’s VOR, BIA.

Our take off was from Runway 28, which is westerly in its orientation. After take off, the aircraft has to join the airway, for which the Air Traffic System at busy airports provide what are known as a SIDs: (standard instrument departure), which are laid down procedures that specify how an airplane taking off from a particular runway may intercept and join a particular airway. In our case, the then effective AKELA 3B SID was applicable, which details how the airplane, after takeoff from Runway 28, may turn left to intercept waypoint AKELA, which lies on W20S.

Airspace restrictions make W20S head south-south-west till waypoint KALNA, before changing direction to south-south-east towards Bhopal. This non-direct route between the two radio stations at Delhi and Bhopal makes an airplane fly 15NM extra. However, in practice, pilots request for a direct-to from AKELA to BPL, which, more often than not, is granted, saving around 10NM of ground distance. Upto waypoint IBANI, the aircraft flies  in the Delhi Flight Information Region (FIR). Passing IBANI, the aircraft enters Mumbai FlR.

Mumbai is around 420NM from waypoint IBANI, and yet, the airplane must be in contact with Mumbai Control, which is physically located at Mumbai. Communication link between the airplane and the centre, through direct VHF will not be possible, as a VHF radio’s range is limited to line of sight: around 200NM. Overcoming this problem are VHF transmitters positioned in the Mumbai FIR such that when a voice transmission over VHF occurs at Mumbai, the same VHF signal is broadcasted from multiple ground transmitters. This ensures sufficient coverage throughout a FIR.

From BPL, pilots are often granted a direct-to all the way to waypoint VABDI, which saves hardly anything.

RVSM Cruising Levels

Since the route is easterly, even though slightly, ICAO specified RVSM cruising levels have to be adhered to. Airplanes flying easterly, must fly at “Odd” flight levels (FL). Example, FL 290, FL 310, FL 330, and so on. FL 290 stands for Flight Level 290, which is 29,000ft above sea level at an assumed barometric pressure of 1013.25hPa (hector Pascal) at sea level. Since it is an “assumption” that is followed by every airplane at the flight levels, all airplanes with their altimeters displaying 29,000ft with the assumption set in the altimeter, are flying at the same altitude, through the true altitude may differ by as much as 2000ft from the displayed altitude at this “Standard Barometric” pressure of 1013.25 hPa.

About 20NM from waypoint BUSBO, the aircraft is “released” from Mumbai control and “handed over” to Chennai Control, where pilots may contact the physical centre at Chennai (approximately 400NM away from BUSBO) on one of 11 VHF frequencies.

Observing the route, the direction changes toward the west (south south west) over waypoint VABDI. However, back then, when Chennai did not have sufficient radar coverage, airplanes on W57S needed to either climb 1000ft or descend 1000ft over Hyderabad. This was to change the cruise altitude from an ODD flight level to an EVEN flight level earlier than VABDI, for surveillance reasons. As far as our flight was concerned, we descended from our cruise level of FL 350 to FL 340 over Hyderabad.

We approached Bangalore from the north east, and the active runway at that time was 09, which is east facing. We were “vectored” (given compass headings to follow) by air traffic control, and “broke off” from W57S in a divergent heading. This was to take us further west, before directing us to intercept the ILS for runway 09.

The airway distance between Delhi and Bangalore is 950NM. However, with the standard instrument departure and the arrival into the airfield, the total ground distance  increases to 980NM, which is an extra of 30NM. With the soon to be introduced RNP route between Delhi and Bangalore, this sector’s ground distance shall reduce significantly.

Performance

VT-KFY, for that day’s flight to Bangalore, weighed 79 tonnes, as against its all up weight of 89 tonnes. 14.5 Tonnes of fuel was uplifted, and the centre of gravity was determined at 24.7% of the Mean Aero Dynamic Chord (MAC). Permissible range is 15% to 35%, with a preference for a rear CG to improve fuel burn performance. Corresponding to this CG, the horizontal stabilizer was trimmed for nose UP to an Airbus defined position of 1 unit. This is to keep stick forces (on the pitch axis) almost neutral during takeoff.

A quick look at the Flight Crew Operating Manual for the A321 reveals that for a 980NM flight at FL350 (assumption: no winds, wind data on that day wasn’t collected), the A321 with a takeoff weight of 79 Tonnes burns approximately 6600kg of fuel for the entire flight from takeoff to landing. Approximately 200kg is burnt during startup and taxi, raising the estimated fuel burn to 6800kg. The estimated flight time between take off and landing is 2 hours 22 minutes.

The difference between the uplifted fuel (14,500kg) and the trip fuel (6800kg) was huge: 7,700kg. Bangalore’s ATF rates being higher than Delhi’s, 7.7T of fuel was “tankered” to Bangalore, which was to be used up for the next day’s flight to Delhi out of Bangalore.

A Cost Index of 18 was used for the flight. The Cost Index is a measure of the cost of time v/s the cost of fuel. The unspecified unit is kg/min, which in this case translates to 18kg of fuel being as costly as 1 minute of flight time. If the cost of fuel was low, the cost of time relatively goes up, which increases the numerical value of the cost index. If the cost of fuel goes up, the cost of time in comparison pales, lowering the numerical value of CI. Last year, most flights by Kingfisher were operated at around Cost Index 10. Lower the cost index, slower the airplane flies. For our flight that day, CI 18 corresponded to a cruise speed of Mach 0.775 under no wind conditions. There must not have been any significant winds, as the aircraft’s FMS targeted the same Mach number for cruise.

Takeoff was planned with “Flap configuration” 1+F, which is the first of four selectable “configurations” on all in-production Airbus commercial airplanes. 1+F corresponds to 18° of slats and 10° of flaps on the A321. Lower flap settings provide better fuel burn and climb performance.

Because the airplane was taking off 10 tonnes lighter than its maximum, full engine thrust for take off wasn’t required. Although the outside air temperature that night was 15°, the engine was told to produce a thrust corresponding to an outside air temperature of 44°C. Specifying a higher temperature reduces the generated thrust, saving engine life through reduced operation at the extremes. The thrust was “flex(ed) to” 44°.

With this thrust setting, the specifics of Runway 28 at Delhi, weather and the weight of the airplane, the aircraft’s take off speeds were determined as V1 : 152kts, VR : 152kts, and V2 : 156kts. V1 is the decision speed. If anything was to have happened that demanded the take off to be rejected, the decision to reject must have been made before the airplane reached the decision speed of 152kts. Attempting to stop the airplane beyond this speed is unwise, as the combination of aircraft energy and remaining runway length will prevent the airplane from stopping before the end of the runway. Vr is when the pilot pulls back on the stick to “rotate” the nose up into the air. V2 is the takeoff climb speed: the speed that is maintained on the initial climb out phase (when gaining altitude is important) before building up further speed.

Delhi’s airport is at an elevation of 777ft MSL. Takeoff thrust and take off speed (usually V2 + 10, 166kts in this case) was maintained till 1000ft above ground level, or 1720ft above MSL. At that point, the thrust was lowered to climb thrust, and the nose pitched down to maintain the same speed (V2 + 10), till 1500ft above airport elevation, or 2277ft in this case. Passing this altitude, the nose was further lowered, to build up airspeed. As the airspeed built, the flaps were retracted to “clean up” the aircraft, allowing for further acceleration. The best lift to drag speed is realised at the “O” speed, which was 217kts on that day for the given aircraft weight.

The Cruise Altitude of FL350 was determined by looking for the optimal cruise altitude at the aircraft’s weight and weather conditions. Least fuel burn is expected at the cruise altitude. Since the aircraft was flying east, the ODD flight level closest to the optimum altitude is chosen, which, in our case, was 350.

For the A321, the time to this cruise altitude, under ideal conditions at 79 tonnes, takes 25 minutes over 160 NM , burning 2000kg of fuel. Air Traffic Restrictions normally prevent most airplanes climbing out of Delhi from reaching their cruise altitude this early.

Reaching cruise, the aircraft became lighter by 2 tonnes, reducing its weight to 77 tonnes. At this weight, at FL350 under ideal conditions, the airplane guzzles around 2800kg of fuel per hour, at Mach 0.78 (450kts ground speed). Considering that the aircraft needs at minimum around 100NM to descend, and 160NM to climb, 720NM at best is traversed at cruise. This implies approximately 1hr 30 minutes in cruise, burning 3,200kg of fuel.

Starting descent, VT-KFY might have been around 73,800kg heavy. Interestingly, a light airplane descends faster. Descent from FL350 at continuous IDLE thrust takes about 17 minutes over 100NM by an A321, under ideal conditions, at the specified weight.

Our A321, for landing, was configured with full FLAPS, which corresponds to a slats of 27° and flaps of 25°. The approach speed, at the estimated landing weight of 73,000 tonnes, was 142kts. Kingfihser later adopted CONFIG 3 landings, which extends slats / flaps to 22°/21°, offering lower drag and saving fuel.

The autobrakes were set to Low (LO), one of three positions: LO, MED, HIGH. No Thrust reversers were used for landing, which was, and still is part of fuel saving procedures the world over.

RNAV and RNP in India – Airways

07 Sunday Oct 2012

Posted by theflyingengineer in Airport Operations, Flight Safety, Operations

≈ 11 Comments

Tags

AIPS, Air India, Air Traffic System, AIS, ANP, Delhi, ENR, Fuel Saving, ICAO, India, Indigo, Mumbai, Navigation, Q1, RNAV 5, RNP, W13N

Change in aviation is met with heavy resistance, and even a ten year old technology is considered relatively new. With the introduction of Performance Based Navigation (PBN) in the Indian Airspace, confusion still exists on RNAV (aRea NAVigation), RNP (Required Navigation Performance), and where this RNAV/RNP are implemented in the Indian ATS.

Waypoint LATID, seen as referenced to Bangalore International Airport’s VOR (BIA).
LATID = BIA/012deg/77NM or N14 28.6 E077 56.9

The basic airway system (in India and the world over) was constructed based on sensors: the VOR and the NDB stations and receivers on board the airplane, which provide the capability to fly to, or from a radio station along one of its “radials”. These radio stations are scattered, purposely, across the country, and the airway system is constructed by simply “connecting the dots”, and an aircraft’s position is always relative to one of these stations. Example: Waypoint LATID is 77NM from Bangalore International Airport’s VOR (BIA), on a radial of 012°of BIA.

When an aircraft’s navigation system has a little more intelligence: the ability to scan and receive signals from multiple such radio ground stations, or from self contained navigation aids, such as the Inertial Reference System (IRS), or from the globally available GPS satellite constellation, and determine the aircraft’s position in terms of the World Geodesic System 1984 (WGS-84) coordinates, it provides the ability to determine the aircraft’s absolute position, rather than referencing it to a sparse set of radio stations. Example: Waypoint LATID is N14° 28.6’ E077° 56.9’.

The advantage with absolute position is freedom in the lateral: an aircraft can determine its absolute position, and fly to another waypoint whose absolute position is known, without having to stick to a “radial” or a VOR station. The ability to fly “Direct-To” another waypoint from the present position offers an easily comprehendible advantage: fuel savings through shorter, more direct routes. This freedom in the lateral, and the ability to navigate freely in an area, gives rise to RNAV, or Area Navigation.

Indian airspace is comprised mostly of “W” routes, which are, as per AAI, exclusively available for domestic operators only. According to ICAO Annex 11, a “W” route is NOT an Area Navigation Route, which means, the airway is constructed with reference to ground radio beacons, and are mostly direct from one beacon to another.

The other airways in India are “A”, “B”, “G”, “L”, “M”, “N”, “P”, “Q”, “R”, “UL”, “UM”. Of these, “L”, “M”, “N”, “P” and “Q” are area navigation routes. This means that these routes are not constrained to fly between ground based radio stations, but are instead optimised, more direct routes that save fuel. The “Q” routes were recently introduced in 2012, in July.

Since flying these routes implies a reliance on the aircraft’s complex navigation system (which authorities have no operational control of) rather than the simpler ground referenced navigation system (which authorities maintain), it is imperative that in the interest of safety, the complex area navigation system be capable of a certain navigation accuracy, also termed the navigation performance.

Certain routes, and certain procedures may require a higher navigation accuracy and its associated certainty, while others may be less demanding. To quantify these “higher and lesser” accuracies, the term “Required Navigation Performance” (RNP) was introduced, which stipulates the minimum navigational accuracy that must be guaranteed, with a certainty of 95% availability.

With RNP, of the many requirements, the aircraft must be capable of displaying the Actual Navigation Performance (ANP). As long as the actual navigation performance is within the limits of the RNP, everyone’s happy. But if the ANP gets worse than the RNP, that’s when Air Traffic Control must be notified so they can keep  close eye on you and other airplanes in relation to your aircraft, and direct you based on conventional navigational practices.

The Area Navigation Routes – “L”, “M”, “N”, “P” – are all RNP 10 in India. The newly introduced “Q” routes, are all RNP 5. This means that your aircraft’s navigation accuracy must be better than 5 NM if it is to fly along the newly introduced 7 “Q” routes: Q1 – Q7. If however the ANP of the aircraft is 5.5 NM, then the accuracy is not enough to fly the “Q” routes, but accurate enough to fly thee RNP 10 routes: “L”, “M”, “N”, “P”.

Q1, W13N, and a Direct route as shown between Mumbai (BBB) and Delhi (DPN) VORs

The benefits of the RNP routes are evident. The newly introduced “Q” routes connect Delhi to Mumbai, Ahmedabad, Udaipur, and Vadodra. Picking “Q1”, which is Mumbai to Delhi (BBB- DPN), there are 13 waypoints in between the starting (BBB) VOR and the ending (DPN) VOR. Except for one, none of the other waypoints are ground based radio aids. The total ground distance between Mumbai and Delhi along Q1 is 633NM. The domestic non-RNAV “W13N” route between Mumbai and Delhi, has 5 waypoints in between, three of which are ground based radio aids (VOR). The ground distance along W13N is 653NM. A347, another non-RNAV route between Mumbai and Delhi, has 9 waypoints in between, three of which are ground based radio aids. The ground distance along A347 is 735NM. Compared to W13N and A347, Q1 saves 20NM and 102NM of ground distance, which translates to a saving of between 2 minutes and 14 minutes of flying time. A heavy Airbus A320, flying at FL350 at 76Tonnes, can save between 124 kg and 634 kg of fuel, which translates to a saving of between INR 11,000 and INR 56,227 per Mumbai-Delhi flight. Another advantage is the smooth flight path, as opposed to the zig-zag of non-RNAV routes.

Indigo’s 11 daily direct flights from Mumbai to the capital can save the airline about INR 1,21,000 per day, one way alone! Air India, with 12 direct flights, saves INR 1,32,000 one way, per day.

Aircraft with high navigation performance are allowed to fly the RNP routes. With higher accuracy, more airplanes can be squeezed on an airway. The “Q” routes allow aircraft to aircraft longitudinal separation of 50NM, while W13N allowed for a 10 minute separation, which translates to around 75NM. Theoretically, up to 13 airplanes may now fly on Q1, at any point of time, as compared to 9 on W13N. The capacity of the Indian Air Traffic System (ATS) has increased 44% on this route alone.

RNP and RNAV arrivals and departures are already in use, explained in another article which shall follow soon.

Jet Airways: ATR 72-500s, 600s, and Training Flights

19 Wednesday Sep 2012

Posted by theflyingengineer in Aircraft Production, Airport Operations, General Aviation Interest, Manufacturer, Operations

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

ATR 72-500, ATR 72-600, ATR72, cross utilization, fuel burn, Jet Airways, procedures, Training Flight, Visual Pattern

A 15″ shutter lets VT-JCM streak through the sky, with its all white anti-collision light system.

Turboprop, again. Flying over the geographical south Bangalore, with multiple flight crew on a FAM (Familiarization) course, VT-JCM, an ATR-72-500, has been flying from the last few hours, performing around 15 touch-and-goes, and atleast one ILS approach for runway 27, VOBG.

JCM, the 4 year 3 month old leased airplane flying for Jet Airways, India, is part of a dwindling fleet of ATR 72-500s at Jet Airways. The once 20 strong fleet is now down to 18, with VT-JCF and VT-JCH having been sent back to the lessors.

Another 4 ATR 72-500s are on their way out, and this will bring the fleet down to 14 ATR 72-500. Why then would you have a FAM flight for first officers when the fleet is being downsized?

Because the 6 ATR-72-500s are being replaced by 6 ATR 72-600s from GECAS, possibly in November 2012.

The sad part is, that although ATR took great pains to ensure near identical cockpits for absolutely identical airplanes (the only significant difference is the cockpit, operationally speaking), the DGCA does not allow the cross-utilization of crew flying the two variants of the ATR 72. This will drive the turboprop crew to be further broken up into two sets.

Cockpits of the ATR 72-500 (left) and ATR 72-600 (right). While the -600 is a full glass cockpit, essentially they’re the same cockpits of the same airplane.

As of today, only two examiners in the company have been trained (rated) on the ATR 72-600, one of whom is the Chief Pilot of the turboprop fleet.

So maybe, to cater to this new spilt of DGCA recognized “incompatible” crew, training flights are underway on the ATR 72-500 to make up for first officers who will be moved to the -600 fleet.

The Training Flight

Training flights are interesting. Today’s training flight was being conducted by a “very, very senior” Bangalore based examiner.

Typically, the airplane is topped up to 4 tonnes of fuel, and the duration of a FAM flight for each crew member is typically around 45 minutes, with about 10 minutes per visual circuit. Each circuit burns around 200 kgs of fuel.

Conditions (18th-Sept-2012, 2300 local): Winds 290/06kts, Runway 27, Visibility 8km, Clouds 1500ft Scattered 8000ft, Temperature 22°, Dew point 19°, Qnh 1014.

So how do you go about flying the airplane on a circuit?

The visual pattern is performed at 1500ft AGL, which is 4500ft in the case of Bangalore. After takeoff and cleaning up the aircraft (gear up, flaps retract from 15°), the aircraft power is reduced to maintain 170kts on the downwind. Abeam the threshold (touchdown threshold), extend flaps to 15°, take the gear down, and start the timer. When 45 seconds elapses on the timer (+/- 1 second for every kt of headwind), the aircraft is turned to base, descending at about 500ft/min. The Autopilot, if ON, is disconnected for the turn, and the crew checks the vertical situation of the airplane in relation to the airfield, and adjusts the descent rate based on either the glide slope indication or the PAPI. When turning for finals, flaps are extended to 30°, and the approach speed maintained at around 100kts for a light aircraft in nil winds. With the main landing gear touching down, the nose is gently lowered while the flaps are retracted to 15° by the pilot not flying (captain in the case of FAM flights), and the take off config button pressed. Due to the immense aerodynamic braking of the ATR 72’s 12 propeller blades even at flight-idle-blade-pitch, the drag causes the speed to descend to around or below 70 kts. If below 70 kts, the captain takes over via the nose wheel steering, applies take off power, and the first officer has controls at 70kts and above. Rotate, and repeat.

Visual Pattern for the ATR 72, taken from a public site publishing a section of the FCOM.

 

 

 

The ATR 72 Experience: Bangalore to Hyderabad, with operational information!

12 Wednesday Sep 2012

Posted by theflyingengineer in Airport Operations, General Aviation Interest, Operations

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

500, ACCEL Altitude, Aircraft C.G., Aircraft configuration, ATR 72, Autobrake, Block Fuel, Climb Profile, CRZ FL, CRZ IAS, Descent Profile, ILS Approach, Landing Flaps, NTOP, Passengers, reversers, Scheduled Descent, SID, STAR, STAR Vectors, T.O. Flaps, Take Off Weight, Taxi Fuel, THR RED Altitude, Torque, Transistion Altitude, transition FL, Trim units, Trip Fuel, Trip Time, VT-KAD

VT-KAD, taken immediately after the flight!

I was rummaging through my “precious” stuff, when I found two “in-flight forms”  that I had prepared for the flight crew operating my flights. I knew the crew well, so it wasn’t an issue back then. Today, the story is different: requesting for technical information in-flight may not be taken in the right light, and those responsible for airport security may be waiting for you at your destination!

But if done carefully, you may be in for a technical treat! Below is the scan from an ATR 72-500 flight from Bangalore (VOBL) to Hyderabad (VOHS), via airway W57N, which was flown sometime in 2011. I got the F/O to fill the form for me, which he did with a nice smile!

[Background Information: W57N is a unidirectional airway that originates at BIA (VOR, Bangalore International), and terminates at HIA (VOR, Hyderabad International), as follows:

BIA(N13° 12.4 E077° 43.9) – LATID (BIA/012°/77NM) – VIRAM (LATID/011°/54NM) – HIA (VIRAM/011°/113NM)]

Page 1 of 2

Page 2 of 2

Fixed Wing Aircraft at India Aviation 2012

15 Thursday Mar 2012

Posted by theflyingengineer in Aircraft Production, Airport Operations, Airshow, Exhibitors, General Aviation Interest, India Aviation 2012, Manufacturer

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

2012, Airbus, Airshow, beechcraft, Boeing, Bombardeir, Embraer, Gulfstream, Hawker, Hyderabad, India Aviation 2012, March, Piaggio, Sukhoi

Making your presence felt goes a long way in winning customer confidence in the product. They can see it, feel it, and fly it, and decide on the spot. The pampering really can make a huge difference.

Here is the listing of 18 fixed wing aircraft on static/flying demo at India Aviation 2012, arranged by the manufacturer, in alphabetical order:

Airbus

Airbus ACJ (Regn: A6-AJC)

Boeing

Boeing 787-8 (Regn: N1015B)

Bombardier

Challenger 300 (Regn: N305CL)

Global 5000 (Regn: A7-CEE)

Learjet 60XR (Regn: N383LJ)

Q400 (Regn: VT-SUG) Note: On display for 2 hours only

Dassault 

Falcon 7X (Regn: VT-RGX)

Falcon 2000LX (F-HBIP)

Embraer

Legacy 650 (Regn: PT-TIE)

Phenom 100 (Regn; VT-AJI)

Phenom 300 (Regn: PT-TRT)

Gulfstream

Gulfstream G150 (Regn: N150GV)

Gulfstream G450 (Regn: N450GD)

Hawker-Beechcraft

Beechcraft King Air C90GTX (Regn: N8020J)

Hawker 900XP (Regn: N964XP)

Hawker 4000 (Regn: N860AP)

Piaggio Aero

P-180 AVANTI II (Regn: VT-RNB)

Sukhoi

Sukhoi Superjet 100 (Regn: RA97005)

Parallel “Runway” at Hyderabad Shamshabad (VOHS)

10 Saturday Mar 2012

Posted by theflyingengineer in Airport Operations, Flight Safety, Operations

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

Hyderabad Shamshabad, Parallel Runway, Scheduled Airport Maintenance, Taxiway, VOHS

Google Map Image of VOHS, with the parallel taxiway now serving as a parallel runway just once a week.

It is weird when a flight crew member calls you up and asks, “Did you know that Hyderabad has a parallel runway?” Well, being off the line for some time can have its effects.

The GMR-Group’s Ragiv Gandhi International Airport (RGIA, ICAO: VOHS) at Hyderabad proudly boasts off as ” the first greenfield airport in the region with two runways”. While that is true, a closer look reveals what it really is.

The AIP Supplement AAI/ATM/AIS/09-09/201 (click to view) from the Airport Authority of India, effective 09th February 2012 (a month back) details that the parallel taxiway-”A”- has been converted  to runway 09L-27R for day VFR operations and the current main runway is re-designated as 09R-27L.

The new runway is 3707 meters long (in comparison to the 4260 meter long 09R-27L), and is 145 feet wide (in comparison to 195 feet of the main runway) and is certified for operations by Code-E aircraft. Code E includes aircraft such as the A340 and B747, and is defined by wingspan between 52m & less than 65m, and the outer main gear wheel span between 9m & less than 14m.

The new secondary RWY shall be a dependant RWY (operating with restrictions), and available only for day operations in visual flight rules. No precision approaches (ILS) are available. At a time, either RWY 09L-27R (new runway) or RWY 09R-27L (old runway) shall be used for the purpose of landing and take- off, but both may not be operational at any point of time.

Notice the delsignators on the runway: 27R, and 27L (not clear)

The distance between the centrelines of both parallel runways is just 224 meters (736ft), and cannot support parallel runway operations.

The main purpose of opening the new runway was to prevent disruptions in flight operations during scheduled maintenance. Every Tuesday between 1330-1530 hrs local the main runway (09R/27L) is closed for maintenance work. RGIA can continue flight operations uninterrupted during this period. Also, in the event of a mishap closing one runway, the other runway may remain operational to prevent a disruption in flight schedules.

The Flying Engineer’s tweets

  • A beautiful flight at Bijapur: Post the crazy winds, and long wait! wp.me/pRsSu-nQ 3 weeks ago
  • Flying over the Office of the Deputy Comissioner, Karwar wp.me/pRsSu-nF 1 month ago
  • Making a Lynx Micro Headset Charger on the Go! wp.me/pRsSu-nC 1 month ago
  • Air Asia: Hiring Indian Captains and First Officers wp.me/pRsSu-nd 1 month ago
  • Powered Para Gliding! wp.me/pRsSu-n0 1 month ago
  • Radio Etiquette wp.me/pRsSu-mX 1 month ago
  • Peeling away ten Thousand dots, for British Airways' first A380! wp.me/pRsSu-mS 1 month ago
  • Flying just 200ft over the heart of Bangalore! wp.me/pRsSu-mG 1 month ago
  • A330 Production Ramps up, but Patrick Piedrafita isn't quite right. wp.me/pRsSu-mv 1 month ago
  • Welcoming the Day wp.me/pRsSu-mp 1 month ago
Follow @TheFlyingEnggnr

Blog archives of The Flying Engineer

  • April 2013
  • March 2013
  • February 2013
  • January 2013
  • December 2012
  • October 2012
  • September 2012
  • April 2012
  • March 2012
  • February 2012
  • January 2012
  • December 2011
  • November 2011

Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 6,824 other followers

Recent Posts!

  • A beautiful flight at Bijapur: Post the crazy winds, and long wait!
  • Flying over the Office of the Deputy Commissioner, Karwar
  • Making a Lynx Micro Headset Charger on the Go!
  • Air Asia: Hiring Indian Captains and First Officers
  • Powered Para Gliding!
  • Radio Etiquette
  • Peeling away ten Thousand dots, for British Airways’ first A380!
  • Flying just 200ft over the heart of Bangalore!
  • A330 Production Ramps up, but Patrick Piedrafita isn’t quite right.
  • Welcoming the Day

Blog at WordPress.com. Theme: Chateau by Ignacio Ricci.