[Jeroen]

Originally Posted by searchingheaven

It was at FSTC Delhi, for a duration of about 55 mins. But there was only a 10 min debriefing and no debriefing. Hence the questions. The details of the simulator are attached below.

Thanks, I checked their website. Can you just rent these SIMs yourself, I did not see anything like that on the website, only full courses.

I noticed these SIMs are manufactured in my home country the Netherlands. Never knew?

I have quite some sim hours on the CargoLux and Lufthansa full motion 747-400 simulators in Luxembourg and Frankfurt. Not sure of the going rate, but it used to be somewhere around euro 800-900 per hour. Luckily, I knew somebody at Lufthansa who used to get us in for free on the few hours the SIM was not in use.

Even for my Private Pilot License I accumulated some SIM time as well, which counts towards flight/training time. Just a simple Cessna 172 desktop SIM, but still certified by the FAA for specific (instrument) training.

There is a static flight simulator at Delhi International airport in the departure hall. Boeing 737. I rented it a few weeks ago for half an hour or so. Bit wonky and the instructor, although he claimed to be a pilot, wasn't particularly knowledgable. Still, if you are interested in aviation, getting a SIM ride on any type of SIM is always a great experience!

Jeroen

[searchingheaven]

Originally Posted by Jeroen

Thanks, I checked their website. Can you just rent these SIMs yourself, I did not see anything like that on the website, only full courses.

I noticed these SIMs are manufactured in my home country the Netherlands. Never knew?

Luckily, I knew somebody at Lufthansa who used to get us in for free on the few hours the SIM was not in use.

There is a static flight simulator at Delhi International airport in the departure hall. Boeing 737. Still, if you are interested in aviation, getting a SIM ride on any type of SIM is always a great experience!

Jeroen

These SIMs are manufactured by SIM INDUSTRIES, Sassenheim, Netherlands. This company was recently acquired by Lockheed Martin in 2011 and has since been renamed to Lockheed Martin Commercial Flight Training.

I am really sorry to disappoint you, but no, the SIMs at FTSC Delhi aren't rented out commercially, as far as I know. My father knows some people there, who are very kind to allow me to use it for an hour in a week or two.

If you're really interested, then we could probably work something out. Although I gather that you're more a Boeing guy than an Airbus one. And for someone used to Boeing's, an Airbus is a big big change.

[Jeroen]

Originally Posted by searchingheaven

These SIMs are manufactured by SIM INDUSTRIES, Sassenheim, Netherlands. This company was recently acquired by Lockheed Martin in 2011 and has since been renamed to Lockheed Martin Commercial Flight Training.

I am really sorry to disappoint you, but no, the SIMs at FTSC Delhi aren't rented out commercially, as far as I know. My father knows some people there, who are very kind to allow me to use it for an hour in a week or two.

If you're really interested, then we could probably work something out. Although I gather that you're more a Boeing guy than an Airbus one. And for someone used to Boeing's, an Airbus is a big big change.

Thanks, just send you a PM

Jeroen

[Jeroen]

So I spend the last couple of days in Tallinn, Estonia. First time ever, very nice little town, very nice little airport with excellent facilities. We discussed in this thread (or another) planes using reverse thrust to back out of parking place and so. It’s very rare. I have never seen it, but there are a few YouTube video’s out there.

So I was pretty amazed and exited to see an actual plane using its reverse thrust to back out of its parking place at the gate in Tallinn. Now this is a propellor plane and they use adjustable pitch propellor, not jet engines with reversers. Still, I had never seen anything like it. It seemed this was the normal procedure, because literally a few minutes before they back out a tug had just pushed a Boeing 737 from the stand next to this one and the tug came back and was actually parked there.

So it looks, for this plane it is the normal operating procedure. Must save them the cost of the tug. With jet engines in reverse there is a lot more air being thrown around. I’m not aware that jets ever reverse out of their parking stand, except under very special circumstances.

Enjoy:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8pyWMv2pWiM

Jeroen

[Gansan]

Similar to ships having bow thrusters to save the cost on tugs, I suppose! It should be possible on turboprop aircraft too, they have variable pitch propellers, but I haven't seen it being done.

[Jeroen]

Originally Posted by Gansan

Similar to ships having bow thrusters to save the cost on tugs, I suppose! It should be possible on turboprop aircraft too, they have variable pitch propellers, but I haven't seen it being done.

This is a turbo prop if I'm not mistaken

[cjt2012]

https://youtu.be/XkzXzDdkdf8

[searchingheaven]

Originally Posted by Jeroen

With jet engines in reverse there is a lot more air being thrown around. I’m not aware that jets ever reverse out of their parking stand, except under very special circumstances.

Jeroen

This procedure is called a 'Power Back'. Any commercial aircraft with reverse thrusters can do this. But it is almost unheard of because of the high safety risk of ingesting debris and damaging the engines. Also, there's a risk to people on the ramp from jet blast or of being sucked into an engine at a high power setting. In addition to all of that, it wastes a lot of fuel and creates a huge amount of noise. A tug is definitely cheaper for us. Specifically for the 777, powerback is an absolute no-no. Ground operations in aircraft fitted with high-bypass engines is usually restricted to idle and low-idle operations. However, I remember Northwest's DC-9's at Minneapolis and Memphis being allowed to powerback since they had engines at the rear. They have stopped doing this now though.

[Jeroen]

Originally Posted by searchingheaven

Also, there's a risk to people on the ramp from jet blast or of being sucked into an engine at a high power setting. In addition to all of that, it wastes a lot of fuel and creates a huge amount of noise. Specifically for the 777, powerback is an absolute no-no. Ground operations in aircraft fitted with high-bypass engines is usually restricted to idle and low-idle operations. However, I remember Northwest's DC-9's at Minneapolis and Memphis being allowed to powerback since they had engines at the rear. They have stopped doing this now though.

There are still some 9-10 year old video's of DC9 doing this powerback on YouTube. They also have the typical bucker reversers which are more effective in producing reverse thrust from standstill then your typical high bypass engine I would think?

Jeroen

[bejoy]

Originally Posted by Jeroen

planes using reverse thrust to back out of parking place and so.

Another emerging tech is to use electric motors on the main wheels driven by APU for taxing.

https://www.greentaxiing.com/overview.html

This was 'hot' when the fuel prices were high, but now the Airlines are not very keen to invest on them immediately.

[searchingheaven]

Originally Posted by bejoy

Another emerging tech is to use electric motors on the main wheels driven by APU for taxing.

https://www.greentaxiing.com/overview.html

This was 'hot' when the fuel prices were high, but now the Airlines are not very keen to invest on them immediately.

Jeroen and me discussed this topic in this post : Link to post

Quoting from my post on that thread.

Boeing and Airbus both have been researching these systems for a long time. Boeing is going with Wheeltug® and Airbus is going with EGTS®. The difference is that Wheeltug® pulls the main gear while EGTS® pushes the main gear. Boeing isn't too interested in this. Their main argument is that if they wanted a dual-engine out taxi, they could just use tugs to position for takeoff which will be cheaper than fitting every aircraft with the gear, both from a complexity and weight POV. This tech is in a very early phase right now and nothing can be said about its future. Boeing will, in probability, drop it. A few questions that have been raised are:

1. First off, this will be used probably only on single aisle aircraft like the A320 and the B737. Will it have enough power to taxi the wide body heavies like the B777/A380. No.
   
   
2. Who's going to tell me about a fuel leak after engine start and other problems which I cannot monitor on the EICAS? An year ago I had a fuel leak on engine 2 and only knew about it from the ground crew who were monitoring the start.
   
   
3. The EGTS is a heat source. EGTS uses 50kw electric motors which will generate heat as the airplane taxis. All that heat is located inside the wheel. Brake hydraulic fluid has to stay below its flash point or there is a fire risk. So the EGTS will require some time to cool down and that is going to increase the holding time, since takeoff cannot be performed unless brakes have cooled sufficiently. EGTS hardware covers the axle-side of the wheel and hence blocks the cool holes in the flange of the wheel to permit the air pass through.
   
   
4. The warm-up period is another concern. High bypass engines require warm up prior to applying takeoff thrust and cool down prior to shutting down. If the engine has been shut down for several hours, it is desirable to operate at as low a thrust setting as practical for several minutes prior to takeoff. Add to that the wake turbulence separation after a 777 departs i.e 2 mins and we are looking at a 8 to 10 min delay at the holding point for the aircrafts holding behind you. At an airport like Atlanta, pilots would get down from their aircraft and beat you to pulp if you hold for this much time.
   
   
5. The weight of the motors will mean that the hydraulics that pull up the gear will have to be beefed up. That is going to add complexity.
   

[Jeroen]

An interesting occurrence with an Air India Airbus:

http://avherald.com/h?article=4a48d162&opt=0

I don’t know much about the Airbus, but some of the question raised on AVHerald are similar to mine. How can a bird strike cause a fuel shortage without the crew noticing until the very last moment.

Maybe some of our Airbus drivers can enlighten us here.


Jeroen

[createrkid]

I've always seen a couple of airplanes flying low at night in circles and I've always wondered, what do they actually do? Do they train newbies in an empty plane? Do they conduct maintenance checks? I'm attaching a picture, does any Guru have an analysis into this? I'd really appreciate it

Thanks again,
Zo.

[RohanDheman]

Originally Posted by createrkid

I've always seen a couple of airplanes flying low at night in circles and I've always wondered, what do they actually do? Do they train newbies in an empty plane? Do they conduct maintenance checks? I'm attaching a picture, does any Guru have an analysis into this? I'd really appreciate it

Thanks again,
Zo.

At the outset, let me thank you for sharing this. I showed this to my brother (just started working with Spicejet) and this was indeed their training flight. They did a total of 18 touch and go (3 trainee pilots on board for 6 times each). He recognized this from the aircraft registration and sends across his thank you as well!

Rohan

[Jeroen]

Originally Posted by RohanDheman

At the outset, let me thank you for sharing this. I showed this to my brother (just started working with Spicejet) and this was indeed their training flight. They did a total of 18 touch and go (3 trainee pilots on board for 6 times each). He recognized this from the aircraft registration and sends across his thank you as well!

Interesting they are allowed to do so at night. These days in most western town night flights are forbidden or at least extremely restricted due to noise abatement rules. But pilots do need to practice!

Jeroen