Boeing Flight Operations SyBoeing Flight Operations Symposiummposium

航空

游客，如果您要查看本帖隐藏内容请回复

航空

Boeing Flight Operations Symposium March 30 - April 1, 1999 Seattle, Washington 737 Caucus Summary Report 1 July 7, 1999 AIR SYSTEMS 1. Why is the step “Isolation Valve........AUTO” included in the Before Start checklist on 737 airplanes? Two APUs, the GTCP36-280(B) installed on some 737 current generation (CG) airplanes and the Allied Signal 131-9(B) installed on the 737NG, can be used to operate both air conditioning packs on the ground. 737 Technical Bulletin 99-1 dated 12 February 99, provided details about APU Operating Practices. The isolation valve must be open in order for both packs to operate on the ground. However, for takeoff, the isolation valve must be closed. To ensure the isolation valve switch is correctly positioned to “Auto” for takeoff after two pack operation, we added the “Isolation Valve........AUTO” step to the After Start Checklist. ANTI-ICE, RAIN 2. Is it possible to design a bleed air or hydraulic fluid heat exchanger to heat fuel on the 737 NG instead of using the electrical blankets to deal with non-environmental wing icing? Boeing has entered this issue into the Service Related Problem (SRP) system, which is a formal system for tracking and resolving service issues. As a routine part of the process, all possible methods of warming the fuel and other possible approaches are being evaluated. Periodic coordination with affected customer airlines is a routine part of the SRP process. An airline working group meeting on Wing Upper Surface Non-Environmental Icing took place in Seattle on June 10, 1999. 3. Is preliminary data on the cold-soak fuel wing icing issue for the 737NG available at this time? If not, when will this data be available? Preliminary data is being compiled at this time and is not available for release. The SRP board is considering creating a “predicted icing table” with the data available. An airline working group meeting on Wing Upper Surface Non- Environmental Icing took place in Seattle on June 10, 1999. 4. What level of wing tank fuel will result in no contact with the wing upper surface skin on the 737 NG? Wing tank fuel will not contact the upper wing surface when quantity is less that approximately 400 gallons (2600 lbs. / 1180 kgs.) per tank. Boeing Flight Operations Symposium March 30 - April 1, 1999 Seattle, Washington 737 Caucus Summary Report 2 July 7, 1999 5. What is the status of the aerodynamics study on the effects of inflight cold-soak fuel wing icing for the 737NG? The study is in work. Final numbers are not yet available but the study has identified no safety issue. Normal maneuvering capability and stick shaker stall warning continues to be available using normal approach speeds. 6. Boeing hasn’t addressed frost/ice on vertical fin near body juncture on the 737NG. What is status? Although we lack adequate data at this time, Boeing is currently reviewing this issue as a potential SRP candidate. If accepted, the issue will be dealt with as a separate SRP item. Operators who have experienced this type of icing, should send all pertinent data to Boeing. 7. Can Boeing provide comments on rain repellent replacements and possibility of an NTO for new the Airbus product? Boeing is aware that a replacement rain repellent developed by Le Bozec has been certified by Airbus and is currently being delivered on Airbus model airplanes. Additionally, Boeing is aware that Airbus has developed retrofit instructions for their models. Boeing does not plan to continue the review and/or certification effort for a replacement rain repellent fluid for Boeing model airplanes. This decision has been made for the following reasons: 1) All Boeing model airplanes are certified to operate with windshield wipers only. 2) Rain repellents are considered an enhancement and Boeing no longer delivers fluid rain repellent systems on production airplanes except for the 737-300/-400/- 500 models. 3) Boeing delivers external rain repellent coatings on all production model airplanes and feels this configuration is the most appropriate direction for rain repellent systems in the future. This determination takes into account multiple design and economic considerations for this issue. Boeing service letter 737-30-009C dated 28 June 1996 provides further information regarding external coatings. 4) In order for Boeing to provide technical comments on a fluid Rainboe replacement system, similar testing to that discussed in Boeing Document, D6-81867 (26 November 1996) - Assessment Of Rainboe Rain Repellent Systems Installed On Boeing Commercial Airplanes must be conducted. Boeing developed this document for Rainboe after significant study and testing. The document was prepared by a team of experts that included Boeing personnel and industrial hygiene consultants. The team examined the Rainboe distribution system, crew compartment air flow characteristics, toxicity information on the chemical constituents of Rainboe and known reports of Boeing Flight Operations Symposium March 30 - April 1, 1999 Seattle, Washington 737 Caucus Summary Report 3 July 7, 1999 Rainboe leakage. Events associated with the reports were analyzed to identify potential leak location, leak characteristics and associated health concerns. Analysis results were used to consider plausible worst-case scenarios of Rainboe leakage. Once determined, the types of leaks associated with these scenarios were simulated in a controlled laboratory environment utilizing production rain repellent hardware. At this time, Boeing does not plan to further pursue this level of study and testing on the Le Bozec rain repellent product. Boeing will provide a copy of Document, D6-81867 (26 November 1996) upon request for review and information. Two alternatives exist to certify the replacement fluid and Boeing has communicated these items directly to Le Bozec: 1) Le Bozec could fund the testing and development of a study and publication similar to the Boeing document. 2) Le Bozec could independently obtain their own supplemental type certificate for the replacement product to be installed on Boeing model airplanes. COMMUNICATIONS 8. When will VHF/HF frequency limitations contained in the 737NG AFM be eliminated? The VHF limitation is the result of interference caused by the EEC that affects frequency 120.00. The interference is eliminated by installing an overbraided EEC wire bundle. Airplanes with line number LN147 and beyond have the new wire bundles installe d at delivery. Airplanes with line numbers preceding LN147 must be modified by service bulletin #SB 737-73-1010 before the AFM limitation can be removed. Operators should notify Boeing when fleet modifications are complete so that manuals can be updated. HF frequency limitations are the result of interference caused by cabin entertainment systems. Boeing is working with the vendors who provide these systems in an effort to reduce this interference to acceptable levels. No relief from these limitations is available at this time. ELECTRICAL 9. If a generator fails during approach, is the corresponding flight director automatically removed following autopilot disengagement? Boeing Flight Operations Symposium March 30 - April 1, 1999 Seattle, Washington 737 Caucus Summary Report 4 July 7, 1999 Yes, the power transfer associated with a generator failure causes the autopilot to disconnect and lets the FCCs know that there is only one source of power. If the generator fails during approach, the autopilot disconnects and the flight director (F/D) on the failed side will bias out of view. However, if the generator failure occurs below 800 feet during a dual F/D approach (autopilot not engaged), the F/D on the failed side will not bias out of view because the FCC on the side with the operating generator will provide guidance outputs to both flight directors. 10. If the battery switch is positioned to “OFF” on ground and with normal power sources available, will AC transfer busses remain powered? The AC transfer busses behave differently on the 737 “classic” and the 737NG as follows: Case 1: Airplane powered from Ground Power (Grnd Pwr) and Batt Sw turned OFF: 737-3/4/500: Grnd Pwr drops off. Transfer Busses not powered. 737-6/7/800: Grnd Pwr stays on. Transfer Busses powered. Reason for difference: On 737-3/4/500, Bus Protection Panel depends on DC backup power from ship's battery for protection circuits to operate in event of a major AC fault. On 737-6/7/800, Bus Power Control Unit is specified to “...be capable of normal .... operation (control and protection) without the need for a backup supply.” Case 2: Airplane powered from APU generator and Batt Sw turned OFF: 737-3/4/5/6/7/800: APU shuts down (Ground ops only). Transfer Busses not powered. Reason: With Batt Sw OFF, APU fire detection is inop and airplane may be unattended. Case 3: Airplane powered from engine generators and Batt Sw turned OFF: 737-3/4/5/6/7/800: Transfer busses powered. ENGINES, APU Boeing Flight Operations Symposium March 30 - April 1, 1999 Seattle, Washington 737 Caucus Summary Report 5 July 7, 1999 11. The 737 Shutdown checklist states “Pumps..........OFF”. How does Boeing reconcile this step with the recommendation that a fuel pump be left on when the APU is running? As stated in the Operations Manual, Supplementary Procedures Section, in the notes under the APU Start Procedure, there are two reasons to have a fuel pump on while the APU is running: 1) If extended APU operation is required on the ground and fuel is loaded in the center tank, place the left center tank fuel pump switch ON to prevent a fuel imbalance before takeoff. 2) Whenever the APU is operating and AC electrical power is on the airplane busses, extended service life of the APU fuel control unit can be realized by operating at least one fuel boost pump to supply fuel under pressure to the APU. If the APU is to be left running for an extended period of time, a fuel boost pump should be left on. 12. Does Boeing have a recommendation concerning starting engines in tailwind situations? When starting the engines in tailwind conditions, Boeing recommends making a normal start, expecting a longer cranking time to ensure N1 is rotating in the correct direction before moving the start lever. A higher than normal EGT should be expected, yet the same limits and procedures should apply. 13. New HMU production installation at line number 268 equates to what date? The new (PO7) HMU will be incorporated on production aircraft starting with line No. 264 (YC607) which delivered in the middle of May, 1999. All aircraft after Line No. 264 will deliver with PO7 HMUs. 14. What about cost of retrofit? Retrofit replacement of the PO6 with the PO7 HMU will be completed at no cost to the customer. 15. What is the EEC temperature crossover for flight idle? EEC software version 7.B.J increased the minimum inflight idle speed to the lesser of a constant physical 10,400 rpm (71.9%) N2 speed or the approach idle schedule. The approach idle schedule provides a constant corrected N2C25 speed which is a function of altitude and airspeed. Since the approach idle schedule provides constant corrected (N2C25) speed, the associated physical approach idle N2 speed is proportional the square root of the station 2.5 temperature. The approach idle schedule also increases as a function of altitude. The combination of cold day temperatures and low altitude operation can result in physical approach idle speeds near or below 10,400 rpm, resulting in little or no approach idle shift being observable. Boeing Flight Operations Symposium March 30 - April 1, 1999 Seattle, Washington 737 Caucus Summary Report 6 July 7, 1999 16. The 7BJ EEC software modification does not appear to fix N2 tone if encountered above FL200. Why? The idle N2 increase starts at FL200 and is ramped up to a maximum increase at 15,000 ft MSL. This was done to minimize the impact on descent performance and because most of the documented cases of N2 tone occurred at altitudes below FL200. 17. Has Boeing looked at a soft pylon (isolation mounts) to help reduce engine noise and vibration? Isolation mounts were removed from the 737NG to reduce maintenance costs (replacement). The current design does not have the capability for installation of isolation mounts. 18. What is the purpose of the proposed AVM coefficient schedule change? The current CFM 56-7 AVM coefficients are the same ones used on the CFM 56-3 engines. The core vibration sensors on the -7 are more sensitive than those on the -3. For a similar level of core vibration, the -7 would show twice the amount of AVM gage reading as the -3. Since flight and maintenance procedures are based upon AVM indications, it was felt that changing the coefficients would make the indications and thus procedures more consistent between the engines. FLIGHT CONTROLS 19. Why does the Speed Trim system sometimes appear to trim opposite the desired direction? The Speed Trim System (STS) is used to increase the column forces needed for speed stability. The purpose of the STS is to provide positive speed stability characteristics to the pilot. In other words, the STS adjusts stick force so the pilot must provide significant amount of pull force to reduce airspeed or a significant amount of push force to increase airspeed. The flight regime where the STS is needed is low airspeeds, aft cg, high power settings and light gross weights. The inputs to the STS are: stabilizer position to estimate cg, N1 to estimate thrust and airspeed to determine how much stabilizer trim is needed to provide the desired speed stability characteristics. The speed trim system begins to trim the stabilizer in the direction calculated to provide the pilot positive speed stability characteristics. Since pilots typically attempt to trim stick force to zero and the STS is attempting to trim to positive Boeing Flight Operations Symposium March 30 - April 1, 1999 Seattle, Washington 737 Caucus Summary Report 7 July 7, 1999 stick force, STS trim direction may be opposite the direction the pilot is trimming. 20. Would using a higher flap setting for very low take off weights (B737-400 T.O. Wt < 45000 kgs., B737-800 T.O. Wt < 55000 kgs.) help in minimizing the risk of tail strike? Would using flap 15 help in minimizing? The 737 Flight Crew Training Manual (FCTM) revision dated 1April 99 contains considerable data concerning this issue in Section 2, pages 2.21 - 2.22. For example, the charts show that 3 additional inches of tail clearance can be gained by using a flaps 15 takeoff configuration on a 737-800. Operational notes in this section state, “Flaps 1 and flaps 5 takeoffs have the least clearance. Consider using a larger flap setting for takeoffs at light gross weights.” As always, airport takeoff analysis data must be considered in making a determination of appropriate takeoff flap settings. FLIGHT INSTRUMENTS, DISPLAYS 21. With a dual display unit failure (737NG with EFIS/MAP format), compacted display is shown on both sides. Is LNAV still available or is HDG SEL and conventional navigation preferred? LNAV guidance will still be available through the autopilot or flight director. Due to lack of MAP display, pilot must monitor cross-track error on the FMC CDU. Progress Page 3/3 displays wind, track, path and speed data. This page displays present cross-track error from the FMC flight plan course. 22. The 737 MMEL does not provide any dispatch relief for a CDS FAULT annunciation on the 737NG. What is the status of Boeing’s efforts to obtain dispatch relief for this annunciation? The CDS FAULT annunciation indicates system faults that do not allow dispatch under the certification basis for the 737NG. Therefore, Boeing has not asked for and does not anticipate receiving any dispatch relief for the CDS FAULT annunciation. However, Boeing is pursuing a software upgrade that will allow MMEL relief for the CDS MAINT annunciation on the 737NG. The upgrade designated, “CDS Blockpoint 99”, should be available during the last quarter of 1999. The 737 MMEL will be revised accordingly when software certification is complete. Boeing Flight Operations Symposium March 30 - April 1, 1999 Seattle, Washington 737 Caucus Summary Report 8 July 7, 1999 FLIGHT MANAGEMENT, NAVIGATION 23. 737NG speed limit in the FMC is Mach 0.805 - this is too slow. This penalizes cruise speed. Speed limit to prevent getting clacker on older 737 models is Mach 0.82. Why are these values different? Mach .805 speed limit (approximately 7 kts below Mach .82) was imposed to prevent the airplane from exceeding Mach .82 limit speed as it starts to descend from cruise in VNAV. Engineering is reviewing this limit to determine if a change can be accommodated. 24. Is FMC software upgrade 10 also available for the 737 “classic”? Yes, 737CG FMCs may be upgraded to U10.X software. For airplanes equipped with U1.XX, U5 or U6, both a hardware and software change is required. For airplanes with U7 or U8, memory upgrades may be required if not previously incorporated, as well as a software change. Boeing’s Service Bulletin Organization should be contacted about software upgrades. Smith Industries should be contacted for specific details about upgrading FMC hardware. 25. What is the latest information regarding software restart anomalies on U10 FMC operating systems? Does Boeing have any data on fleet experiences? Although software restarts and downmodes to single FMC operation are undesirable, they probably cannot be totally eliminated with current technology. However, in each FMC update, improvements are made to eliminate as many of these events as possible. U10.2A should have fewer events than U10.1, which has fewer than U10.0. Additional improvements will be incorporated into U10.3. A critical tool in the reduction of these events is built in test equipment (BITE) data that can be downloaded from the FMC via the data loader. Software has been incorporated in the FMC to record data during these events to help in identifying the causes. After any event, especially software restarts, data should be downloaded from the FMCs and forwarded to Smiths Industries and Boeing. In dual FMC Boeing Flight Operations Symposium March 30 - April 1, 1999 Seattle, Washington 737 Caucus Summary Report 9 July 7, 1999 installations, it is important to download the data from both FMCs. To date, Boeing has received data from 44 software restart events in the field. We have identified 15 different causes for these 44 events. Data from one airline indicates 1.6 restarts per airplane-month for U10.1 on 737 “classic” airplanes. Another operator has provided data from U10.2 that indicates a software restart every time an aircraft lands while the flight plan contains a missed approach consisting of a single vector leg. The same operator has had one other software restart on the ground where a problem was encountered when a STAR was entered along with a certain company route. FUEL 26. Can Boeing provide more background information on alert bulletin regarding center tank float switch deactivation? Alert Bulletin 737-28A1132 addresses AD 99-05-12. This airworthiness directive (AD) is applicable to certain Boeing Model 737-100, -200, -300, - 400, and -500 series airplanes. The AD requires removal of the float switch and wiring and inspection of the float switch wiring in the center fuel tank to detect discrepancies, and either reinstallation of the existing float switch and wiring, or replacement of the float switch and wiring with a new float switch and wiring. This action also requires installation of Teflon sleeving over the wiring of the float switch. In lieu of the above mentioned requirements, this AD requires deactivation of the float switch, accomplishment of specific fueling procedures, and installation of caution signs. The AD was released in response to reports indicating that chafing of the direct current (DC) powered float switch wiring insulation in the center fuel tank has occurred on several airplanes. The AD is intended to detect and correct the chafing and prevent arcing from the wiring to the in-tank conduit which could present an ignition source inside the fuel tank. 27. What information is available on 737NG center tank fuel boost pump loss of prime characteristics? Have any Operations Manual revisions been incorporated? The location of the fuel pump inlets in the 737NG center fuel tank can cause one pump inlet to “uncover” before the other. Steeper than normal body attitudes during climb and descent can increase the delay between the forward and aft pump low pressure indications. Engineering data indicate that a pump must be uncovered for 8 -15 minutes before loss of prime will occur. Predicted fuel burn analysis during normal flight profiles shows minimum risk of this loss of prime phenomenon occurring. Boeing continues to receive occasional reports of loss of prime incidents and is investigating each one to determine if a system design change is required. The reports have tended to occur during initial model Boeing Flight Operations Symposium March 30 - April 1, 1999 Seattle, Washington 737 Caucus Summary Report 10 July 7, 1999 introduction when the airplane may be flown with light loads and non-standard fuel loads and routes. As operators gain familiarity with the fuel burn characteristics of the airplane, incident reports have diminished. The following note has been added to the fuel systems chapter in the Operations Manual, “Fuel pump LOW PRESSURE lights may flicker when tank quantity is low and the airplane is in a climb, descent, or on the ground with a nose-down attitude.” 28. The 737 FUEL PUMP LOW PRESSURE checklist does not include a step which turns off the pump associated with the LOW PRESSURE light. Why? We do not recommend turning the fuel boost pump OFF unless required by the Operations Manual Normal or Supplementary procedure. The low pressure light is activated by a pressure sensor located in the fuel line. When the fuel pump low pressure light illuminates with significant fuel still in the tank, the pilot cannot determine the cause of the light. Several cases exist where fuel is still being pumped but the light illuminates. A Flight Operations Review Article, 737 Fuel Pump Low Pressure Indications After Takeoff dated April 10, 1991 contains further details about this subject. LANDING GEAR 29. At very low gross weights the 737 classic encounters what seems like a longitudinal resonance when taxiing at 17 kts. Changing taxi speed causes this speed oscillation to disappear. Why? Occasionally during taxi-out, the 737-Classics experience “vibration/shudder” at approximately 17-18 knots and the 737NGs at approximately 24 knots. The cause of this vibration/shudder is attributed to tire 'cold set'. All tires using nylon chord are susceptible to cold set and all airplane tires certified on Boeing airplanes today use nylon chord. Tire cold set is a temporary flat spot that occurs when an airplane with hot tires is parked and the tires cool to ambient temperature. As noted in Goodyear's, Comprehensive Guide to Aircraft Tire Care and Maintenance: “Loaded tires that are left stationary for any length of time can develop temporary flat spots. The degree of this flat spotting depends upon the load, tire deflection and temperature. Flat spotting is most severe and more difficult to work out during cold weather. Under normal conditions, a flat spot will disappear by the end of the taxi run.” The effects of cold set tires can be felt in the airplane during taxi as speed dependent vibration. This is because, at a particular speed, the revolutions of the tire (and therefore the frequency of the flat spot induced vibration) equal the Boeing Flight Operations Symposium March 30 - April 1, 1999 Seattle, Washington 737 Caucus Summary Report 11 July 7, 1999 natural frequency of the landing gear structure. This causes resonance that results in a noticeable vibration/shudder in the airplane. On the 737-Classics, this occurs at approximately 17-18 knots. This vibration/shudder will reduce when the taxi speed is either increased or decreased or as the tires warm during taxi and the cold set is eliminated. 30. Does Boeing recommend not using autoland mode until the (737 NG) shimmy damper is installed? No such limitation exists at this time. Certification limitations for the 737-600/- 700/-800 autopilot are not dependent on shimmy damper installation. 31. What is the duration of the wheel shudder? Shudder is described as fore and aft vibration of the main landing gear that couples with the fuselage and typically lasts for less than a second. 32. Is the shudder data presented only for 737NG or “classic” also? Shudder is a vibration phenomena peculiar to the 737 NG. It should only be seen on the -700 because of the unique combination of structural modes. Main landing gear shimmy can occur on the 737 “classic” if the shimmy damper malfunctions or is not maintained properly. 33. What’s the difference in shudder type between the -700 and -800? Shudder is defined as a -700 vibration mode only. It is considered a “signature” of the -700 and should not occur on the -800 or -600. The gear motion on all models is the same, but structural coupling does not occur because of the different fuselage lengths. 34. Is Main Landing Gear shimmy a -700 problem or does it affect the -800 and -600? The 737-700 appears to be most susceptible to shimmy but because of the gear design, all models of the 737NG have the potential to incur shimmy. 737-800 has had one reported incident. 737-600 has had 3 reported incidents. 35. Can Boeing address the different landing techniques to avoid shimmy? Shimmy occurs during low sink rate (< 1.5 fps) landings where the main landing gear struts remain extended longer than normal. This is exacerbated if a “bunt” technique is used where the pilot applies light forward pressure on the control column just prior to touchdown. This technique results in the airplane floating with the gear struts extended for a longer period of time than if a normal flare technique is used. Pilots do not need to make “firm” touchdowns to avoid Boeing Flight Operations Symposium March 30 - April 1, 1999 Seattle, Washington 737 Caucus Summary Report 12 July 7, 1999 shimmy and can still strive for soft touchdowns if a normal flare technique is used. 36. Does installation of the shimmy damper apply to all 737NG models? As currently planned, all -700 model aircraft will be fitted with shimmy dampers. The schedule for incorporation on the -600 and -800 is under study at Boeing. 37. Is the 737NG Shimmy Damper part number common with those installed on other Boeing models? The original design for the 737 NG shimmy damper has been revised based upon flight test results. The new design will have a unique part number that is specific to the 737-600/700/800. 38. When will 737NG Shimmy Damper be installed on production airplanes? Incorporation of shimmy dampers on 737-700 production aircraft will start with Line No. 406 and subsequent (delivers in November, 1999). Incorporation on -600 and -800 aircraft is still under study but will be after Line No. 406. 39. Will this fix (damper) help the shudder problem? Shudder and shimmy involve different landing gear modes of motion. Based upon engineering analysis, the dampers will not improve or eliminate main landing gear shudder on the 737 NG. Shudder is defined by Boeing Engineering as primarily a 737-700 phenomena that should not occur on the -600 and -800 models. Although Boeing and customer flight crews have reported shudder on the -600 and -800, these reports of shudder may be attributed to heavily damped shimmy vibration which is being erroneously identified as “shudder.” If this is the case, the shimmy dampers should help eliminate vibration upon landing. 40. Is the 737-700 certified for operation with 737-800 tires and brakes installed? The 737-700 is certificated for operation and can be delivered with 737-800 tires and brakes. This modification will require changes to the performance documentation for the airplane including takeoff, landing and FMC data. If high capacity brakes (Allied-Signal or BF Goodrich) are installed on the 737-700, the brake category is “F.” Accordingly, the AFM and Ops Manual must be changed to reflect category “F” performance. In addition, the Flight Management Computer must be changed to reflect category “F” performance. WARNING SYSTEMS Boeing Flight Operations Symposium March 30 - April 1, 1999 Seattle, Washington 737 Caucus Summary Report 13 July 7, 1999 41. Does Boeing have any plans to update the alert inhibit logic on 737 airplanes to more closely match takeoff alert inhibit logic on EICAS equipped airplanes? Boeing currently has no plans to update 737 alert inhibit logic to more closely match takeoff alert logic on EICAS equipped airplanes. PERFORMANCE 42. When will 737 “classic” wet runway takeoff data be available? Wet runway data is available for the classics in the new QRH Performance Inflight chapter. However, it was not part of the FAA certification requirements for those airplane models so we do not present the data the same way it is currently presented in the NG manuals. If Operators choose to account for wet runway (remember, it is not required under the older FAA certifications), they should use the advisory Slippery Runway corrections to adjust their dry runway performance. The data presented for “good” braking action approximates 1/2 of the dry braking force (relative to dry) and is roughly equivalent to the wet runway data that was required under CAA rules. Note there are differences between advisory wet and CAA wet. PROCEDURES 43. Why have through flight items with an asterisk been eliminated from normal checklists in new format operations manuals? In developing the standardized new format (Jeppesen sized) Operations Manual for all Boeing models, the asterisk was deleted for commonality. Also, we observed on through flights, that many flight crews read the complete checklist regardless of the asterisked items. Consequently, we decided to remove them. 44. Does Boeing have a procedure for a flap 15 “normal” landing? Although the 737 is certified for flap 15 “normal” landings, Boeing does not publish a special procedure for this configuration. Operators who require flap 15 “normal” landing procedures should submit a proposed procedure to Boeing for an NTO (no technical objection) consideration and then coordinate Boeing Flight Operations Symposium March 30 - April 1, 1999 Seattle, Washington 737 Caucus Summary Report 14 July 7, 1999 approval with their regulatory authority. The JAA does not allow flap 15 “normal” landings for the 737NG (AFM limitation). 45. Is the crosswind chart from the symposium presentation in the AFM and are the values in this chart crosswind limits? The crosswind information chart contains guidelines not limits. The guidelines were determined from analysis and piloted simulations not flight tests. This information is not in the AFM since it is not a limit. This information is in the latest version (April 1, 1999) of the Flight Crew Training Manual (FCTM) and will be incorporated in the Operations Manual in a future revision. 46. What are Boeing guidelines for use of reverse thrust on crosswind landings? The Boeing crosswind guidelines include the effect of reverse thrust, including reduction in recommended crosswind operation for asymmetric reverse thrust conditions on contaminated runways. The 737 FCTM states, “To correct back to the centerline, reduce reverse thrust to reverse idle and release the brakes. This will minimize the reverse thrust side force component without the requirement to go through a full reverser actuation cycle, and improve tire cornering forces for realignment with the runway centerline. Use rudder pedal steering and differential braking as required, to prevent over correcting past the runway centerline. When re-established near the runway centerline, apply maximum braking and symmetrical reverse thrust to stop the airplane.” This modulation of reverse thrust may be necessary, particularly on slippery runways. 47. 17 knot crosswind on icy runway - was this demonstrated or analytical? The 17 kt landing crosswind guideline for the ice-no melting runway condition was determined from analysis and piloted simulation evaluations. 48. Will Boeing delete the Flight Crew Training Manual (FCTM) recommendations about “Crab Landings” in X-wind situations? Boeing has no plan to delete these recommendations from the 737 FCTM. The recommendations are validated by flight test data, analysis and piloted simulations and considered appropriate for use in the situations described. 49. Is crosswind (limits) information available for 30 meter runways? Yes, crosswind guidelines for operation on 30 meter runways have been established for the 737-200 ADV, the 737-3/400, and the 737-6/7/800. This data will be provided to customers who request a 30 meter runway performance package appendix to the AFM. 50. Can Boeing provide a relationship between reported braking action reports and crosswind limits? Boeing Flight Operations Symposium March 30 - April 1, 1999 Seattle, Washington 737 Caucus Summary Report 15 July 7, 1999 No, a relationship between reported braking action and crosswinds has not been established. Pilot reported braking action is subjective. Because of the variability in reported braking action, there is no clear correlation between reported braking action and the runway conditions used to establish the airplane crosswind guidelines. It is believed that the runway condition categories of Dry, Wet, Standing Water/Slush, Snow-No Melting, and Ice-No Melting, which were used to establish our crosswind guidelines, provide the most technically consistent means for relating runway condition and crosswind capability. Boeing currently supports the industry/government efforts to improve the understanding of runway contamination and the relationships to airplane operation. 51. During flap retraction, can we still use the speed tape “F” for flap retraction if airplane is subject to revised block maneuver speeds? If it is the airline’s intent to comply with the revised maneuver speeds during takeoff, then the speed tape “F” cannot be used. If you follow Boeing's recommendation and only apply the revised maneuvering speeds to the approach, then the “F” speeds can be used for flap retraction during takeoff. 52. Is it possible to display the “F” on the speed tape (737CG) for flap extension? If so, can the display incorporate the revised speeds so that ‘block speeds’ would no longer be required? This modification would require a large scale redesign of the display system architecture and cannot be justified due to the temporary nature of the block speed revisions. 53. In the “revised” block maneuver speeds for the 737 “classic”, was 20 knots added for all flaps settings? No, 20 kts was only added to flaps 5 maneuvering speeds. At flap settings UP, 1 and 10, only 10 kts was required to keep the maneuvering speed above the crossover speed. 54. On airplanes with speed tape, do we still need to make speed adjustments? Can we use “green circle” +20 knots for example? Yes, speed adjustments are still required for approach maneuvering since the FMC computed speeds are VREF based and for some combinations of weights and flap settings, the FMC target speed will be below the crossover speed. We do recommend that FMC target speeds, “F” symbol on the speed tape, can be used for takeoff maneuvering and flap retraction since the exposure time to a rudder event is typically of short duration. 55. Can we go back to the original speeds after the Rudder Pressure Reducer (RPR) is installed? Boeing Flight Operations Symposium March 30 - April 1, 1999 Seattle, Washington 737 Caucus Summary Report 16 July 7, 1999 The final analysis of the effects of the RPR will be completed in August, 1999. Maneuver speeds for RPR equipped airplanes will be based on this analysis. We will revise the Operations Manual Bulletin (OMB) as soon as the analysis is complete to advise operators of the results of the testing and the final recommendations about block maneuvering speeds. 56. Revised 737 simulator data promised 6 months ago - when will it be available? The following dates are planned for the availability of updated simulator software with full rudder side slip data: 737-200 - 11 Jun 99, 737-300 - 30 Apr 99, 737-400 - 27 Aug 99, 737-500 - 30 Jul 99. 57. How does the pilot decelerate with the new speeds bumping up against flap placard speeds? There should be no significant impact to flap placard speeds when applying the increased maneuver speeds to normal landing weights. There is a 30 to 40 knot difference between the flaps 1 placard of 230 knots (-200,-300,-500) or 250 knots (-400) and the revised speeds of 200 kts and 210 kts respectively. In the event of an inflight malfunction, we recommend following speeds defined by the non-normal checklist and not following the revised maneuvering speeds. 58. Will these new speeds cause the airplane to go to Category “D” circling minimums? Circling minimums depend on the speed the operator uses to fly the circling approach. Most approach charts are published today with these speed dependent minimums in a matrix titled, CIRCLE-TO-LAND. When flying a circling approach, the pilots must enter the matrix at the actual circling speed to determine the appropriate minimums. It is interesting to note that the “C” and “D” categories have different speeds in different parts of the world. 59. Are the new speeds law or a Boeing recommendation? The revised maneuvering speeds are a Boeing recommendation in compliance with the FAA recommendations published in Flight Standards Information Bulletin, FSAT 99-02. 60. Are the flap maneuver speeds in the AFM? Minimum flap maneuvering speeds are not published in the AFM. However, the block maneuver speeds are contained in the Flap Retraction Schedule, found in the Performance section (Sec. 4) of the AFM. See question #51 for a Boeing Flight Operations Symposium March 30 - April 1, 1999 Seattle, Washington 737 Caucus Summary Report 17 July 7, 1999 discussion of the effects of revised maneuvering speeds on the Flap Retraction Schedule. 61. Can operators who use amber band +20 knots for flap maneuvering speeds on 737 “classic” airplanes modify their procedure to amber band +30 to 40 knots to meet the requirements of the “revised maneuver speeds” guidelines? An operator can use this technique to comply with the revised maneuvering speeds contained in 737 Information Bulletin 99-1 by adding 40 kts to the amber band speed. 62. For rudder hardovers, why not change flap setting instead of increasing speed? As per the Boeing Uncommanded Yaw or Roll procedure, decreasing pitch attitude and increasing airspeed is the most effective means of upset recovery. Boeing does not recommend configuration changes during upset recovery. 63. Have we looked at the impact the revised maneuver speeds will have on noise limits? Unfortunately, noise restrictions may be affected when using the revised block speeds. We would encourage operators who are confronted with this concern to consider installing the RPR at their earliest convenience. As soon as Boeing engineering completes the analysis of RPR flight test data, we will advise operators about returning to the use of original block maneuvering speeds. 64. Won’t the new block maneuvering speeds increase wear on hardware? We do not believe hardware will be affected since the revised speeds will be primarily be applied at normal landing weights. See question # 56. 65. Does Boeing have the RPR kits available? Yes, digital Yaw Damper Coupler (DYDC) and Rudder Pressure Reducer (RPR) kits are available now. Arrangements for procurement can be made via Boeing Spares. 66. Will these revised speeds affect the Performance Engineer’s Manual (PEM)? Since these revised speeds are temporary until the RPR is installed, they will not affect the PEM. 67. Can airlines get the aero chart showing crossover speeds? Yes, charts showing maneuvering speed versus the crossover speed are being prepared for distribution. This information should be available in the very near future. We will disseminate this information to all 737 operators by one of Boeing's normal communications channels when available. Boeing Flight Operations Symposium March 30 - April 1, 1999 Seattle, Washington 737 Caucus Summary Report 18 July 7, 1999 68. If center of gravity (CG) is not considered, can we use the original block maneuvering speeds? Although CG does affect the crossover speed, weight is also a factor. Eliminating CG considerations does not remove the need for the revised maneuver speeds. 69. When airplane is dispatched with RPR inoperative or the RPR fails to return to normal pressure, do you return to the higher revised maneuver speeds? We will address this issue when the Operations Manual Bulletin (OMB) is reissued after RPR test results are available. 70. Why didn’t Boeing use a separate light to indicate an RPR failure? The A-System Flight-Controls Low-Pressure Light was chosen to annunciate certain failures of the RPR system because it met the requirements for providing crew awareness without adding a new indication and therefore a new crew procedure to the flight deck. 71. What’s the effect of a radio altimeter failure on the RPR? The RPR is electrically controlled by the Digital Yaw Damper coupler (DYDC). On single radio altimeter (RA) installations, the RPR returns to normal pressure with the loss of the RA. If two RAs are installed, the DYDC will average the reported altitudes if they differ by a small amount. If RA differences are large, the DYDC will not use the altitudes and the RPR will remain at full pressure. If one RA is inoperative, the DYDC will use the other RA. If both RAs are inoperative, the RPR will return to normal pressure. 72. Has the JAA accepted these new maneuver speeds? Boeing has not reviewed the revised maneuvering speeds with the JAA. Boeing is not aware of any “official” JAA position regarding the revised maneuvering speeds. 73. Will the 737 simulators operated by Flight Safety Boeing (FSB) be brought up to date and include the non-normals to allow training in Jammed/Hardover Rudder events and Unusual Attitude Training? Once the RPR Flight Test data analysis has been completed by Boeing engineering, 737-200/300/400/500 simulator aero data will be updated to reflect new full rudder side slip effects. This data will be available to all operators. The FSB simulators will be upgraded with this new software. FSB does not intend to train a specific rudder hardover event but will provide Upset Recovery Training as part of recurrent training. Since an upset is much Boeing Flight Operations Symposium March 30 - April 1, 1999 Seattle, Washington 737 Caucus Summary Report 19 July 7, 1999 more likely to be caused by a problem other than a full rudder hardover, we believe training the upset recovery technique regardless of the reason for the upset is more important than training to a specific malfunction. The preamble to the Uncommanded Yaw and Roll non-normal procedure found in both the 737 AFM and QRH was written to provide general guidance for recovering from any event that upsets the airplane. The upset recovery technique as defined by the Airplane Upset Training Aid released in Oct 1998, provides more detailed recovery techniques that an operator can use to develop upset recovery training. If an operator desires to train the Jammed or Restricted Rudder non-normal checklist, we believe it should be presented not as an upset event but to ensure pilots understand the reason for each step and are trained to follow the steps carefully and accurately. MISCELLANOUS 74. Is the 737 Flight Crew Training Manual (FCTM) available in a digital format? Is it possible to get the FCTM on CD-ROM? Yes, the FCTM is available on a CD-ROM. It comes in 3 different formats. If your airline receives 5 or less paper copies of the FCTM there is no charge for the CD-ROM. If you receive more than 5 copies, there is a charge. To order a CD-ROM, contact Boeing Flight Technical Publications at (206) 662-7700 (ph) or (206) 662-7812 (fax). 75. Does the term “turbulence penetration speed” mean a “maximum” or “recommended” turbulence penetration speed? Recommended. The turbulent air penetration speed must be at least 35 kts below Vmo/Mmo for structural loads requirements. In addition, for maneuverability, the speed must be above minimum maneuvering speed. Therefore, the recommended turbulent air penetration speed is between these two requirements. The recommended turbulent air penetration speed is the speed which provides the greatest margin to initial buffet unless the requirement to be 35 kts below Vmo/Mmo forces it lower. 76. Why is no consideration given to the use of VNAV, geometrical vertical path angles coded in the navigation database? Prior to U7.1, vertical angles from the data base were not used by the FMC to calculate the VNAV path, since VNAV disconnected when flaps were extended beyond 15 degrees, and VNAV was not certified for approach operations. Beginning with U7.1, navigation data base vertical angles are included in VNAV descent path construction if coded by the navigation data Boeing Flight Operations Symposium March 30 - April 1, 1999 Seattle, Washington 737 Caucus Summary Report 20 July 7, 1999 base supplier. The vertical angle is flown into the waypoint, which is typically the runway for approaches. Since the angle is flown into the waypoint, there may be a short level segment after the FAF, until the vertical angle is intercepted. On U7.1 and later FMCs, VNAV is certified for approach operations and remains valid for all flap settings. Boeing is currently in the process of developing a nonprecision approach procedure which will utilize VNAV to track these vertical path angles for the 737NG.

bocome

Boeing Flight Operations SyBoeing Flight Operations Symposiummposium