Project Tupolev Team :: View topic

Ap0pHiS · ÊÂÑ

Hello,

This year is the official France-Russia year, so I decided to finally begin the flight school.

I tried to do the first exercise.
I used the Tu-154b-2 ; TOW=80t ; LW=79t ; CAX=30,2 ; USHH rwy 06.

Thank you instructors! Õèòðûé

Bell · ÊÂÑ

So... this is a very good flight! Õîðîøî

There are some mistakes, of course, but generally it's really good.

Start using MET after rotation.

Standard take off procedure is executed with flaps 28*. You done it with 15*. Though, IAS for flaps moving from 15 to 0 should not be less than 350 km/h in the beginning of retraction and not less than 380 km/h at 0* flaps. Your speeds 332 and 378 km/h accordingly.

Beginning of crosswind turn at height of 265 meters that's too high.

Standard approach procedure on Tu-154B2 requires extract gear on downwind, flaps to 28* on base, flaps to 45* on final before inteception the glide slope.

You've done it as a standard approach on Tu-154M or "The late landing gear and flaps extension approach procedure" on Tu-154B2. Next time try to perform the standard approach on Tu-154B2 (it's named "Approach procedure in normal conditions" in the flight manual). See the difference? Óëûáêà

Do not extend flaps to 15* on approach, just from 0 to 28* directly.

On the glide slope as well as in horizontal flight you need to get the trimmed flight. For this you shoudl use MET, of course, and constant thrust.

In the horizontal flight all was done perfectly, but on the glide slope you were changing engines regime constantly that's why you did not get the trimmed flight. The indicator of the trimmed flight is when you move hands from the yoke, the aircraft keeps the set parameters whether it's altitude in horizontal flight or vertical speed on descent. Therefore, on the glide slope your target is avoid using MET below decision height and do not move the yoke until flare height, i.e. from decision height to flare the a/c should fly itself keeping vertical speed you set above DH.

G-force twice exceed value 1.2 but let's discuss how to avoid it after you perform standard take off with flaps 28*.

And I'll repeat, in general, your flight is very good! Õîðîøî

Ap0pHiS · ÊÂÑ

Hi Bell,

First, thank you very much for your wise advices, it's really great to be corrected by a Tupolev professional Óëûáêà

About my first attempt, taking-off with flaps 15 was a mistake ; I did a lot of stop-and-go's, and certainly forgot to set flaps 28 :s
I got the difference between the different types of approaches ; I guess I was used to the Tu-154M patterns.

I know that the unstability of the final approach is due to changing thrust, but I find it hard on this aircraft to set a thrust which keeps a constant Vz and IAS. But I'm working on it!

Now, here's another attempt, where I tried to correct the things you pointed out on the first one. I had some altitude problems at the end of the turns, and the final wasn't stabilized enough I think. I'm now waiting for your comments!

Ah, I almost forgot : same parameters as before, ie Tu-154b-2 ; TOW=80t ; LW=79t ; CAX=30,2 ; USHH rwy 06.

Thanks again Óëûáêà

Bell · ÊÂÑ

Druhin · ÊÂÑ

Hello!
Please forgive me my English... Ñìóùåíèå

I've found several inaccuracies in your flight and I'll try to give you some advice how to avoid them in future:
- you pulled control column at 230 kmph, but you Vr at 80t should be 240 kmph;
- gear retraction was at 3m - it should be at least at 5m, the best heght for this procedure is 5...10m, you can control it by radio altimeter;
- flaps were set at 0* at 214m during first turn - reduce Vy between 120...200m;
- thrust between 260...450m should be nominal - 92.5% RPM - you set less;
- height in horizontal flight was 585...620m - we ask for +/- 10m;
- you had not enough space for flaps 28* issue because your lateral removal was 6.5 km - it should be 8 and you can control it by NVU (navigational computing device);
- during glideslope thrust should be 82% - you set less so Vref was insufficient;
- next time while landing pull control column a bit more to reduce Vy - this time it was -0.74 meters per second, it's not critical, but this not be considered as soft landing.

I'll repeat Bell - in general you flight is very good, so I guess that next time if you take into consideration our advices you'll get a credit!

Once more, plaese!

Ap0pHiS · ÊÂÑ

Hello!

Thanks for your analysis Druhin, and no problem with your English! Õèòðûé

About the exercise, I tried to take your comments into account.
Keeping the same thrust (about 82+/-1%)) during level flight with flaps 28 and on GS with flaps 45 works perfectly, that was a great help.

Here's the new attempt, with the same parameters than before. (Tu-154b-2 ; TOW=80t ; LW=79t ; CAX=30,2 ; USHH rwy 06)

I hope it'll do it this time!

Thank you very much!

Druhin · ÊÂÑ

Ap0pHiS
I'll try to analyse your flight tomorrow. Maybe it'll be Bell.
I've got one question: why're U trying to flight B2 with middle centering?
It's known that's good for M, but for B2 is more efficient to fly with front centering.

Ap0pHiS · ÊÂÑ

Hello Druhin,

No problem for the analyse, do it when you can! Õèòðûé

About the centering, I thought it was the same as for M. From now on, I'll fly it with front centering then! Thank you for that information Óëûáêà

Bell · ÊÂÑ

Flaps retracted from the height of 111 meters that is below than 120 meters. 2 conditions should be performed simultaneously, IAS > 330 km/h, height >120 meters.

No need to change the thrust on GS constantly, overwise you will not get the stabilized descent. Acceptable range for Vref is -5/+10 km/h from required value that's why once you set the thrust just correct it rarely predicting Vref changes.

No need pre-flare. You've done it from 30 meters. Just keep the stabilized flight until 6 meters and start flare by pulling the control column and setting the idle thrust on the height from 6 to 4 meters.

The remaining parts of the flight are perfect! Õîðîøî

Ap0pHiS · ÊÂÑ

Hello Bell,

Thanks for that analysis. I've tried to take your advices into account; here is another try. Maybe it'll do it one day! Õèòðûé

Parameters for this flight are : Tu-154B-2, TOW=80t, LW=79t, CAX=27,2, USHH rwy 06.

And by the way, just one question : you wrote in another topic that MET has to be used alone as much as possible (except for quick changes in trajectory). Is that also the case for other Russian aircraft? Is it the way you learn to fly in flight schools in Russia? I'm asking that because flight schools here (France) teach students to control the trajectory with the yoke first, and then use the trim to cancel the force put on the yoke, but never use the trim first.

Thank you!

WalterLeo · ÊÂÑ

Ap0pHiS

I had the pleasure to be once a real pilot (PPL land day VFR less than 2000 kg) and learned to fly in Austria, but I think there is no difference in that was Bell told us with the way we learned it. Trim away the stickforce after a significant change in trajectory yes and stabilise the altitude with trim.

Bell · ÊÂÑ

ApOpHis

Walter has already answered. Using MET you do not need to drag the column with force about 20-30 kg on hands. If you need to change trajectory quickly move yoke then trim. If you need to change trajectory with low G-force, slow, or stabilize a/c at the level flight on GS, use the trimmer.
The instructor when I was flying Tu-154B2 simulator told that I should use MET only, but for my first time it was difficult not to drag the control column and after first circuit I felt some tiredness on my hands.

Re flight...

Set nominal thrust more precisely.

You lost speed prior to base turn. It was 355 km/h but should not be less than 360 km/h.

Vref mainly was about 7 km/h less than it is required. When you were setting 82% RPM IAS was fine, when 81,5% - it dropped to 260 km/h.

Unstable flight on GS from the height of 160 meters. Overdoes with MET.

High flare and hold-off over the runaway caused by unstable GS below 160 meters.

I think a couple more flights and you can proceed with ex 2.

Ap0pHiS · ÊÂÑ

Hello!

Thanks for the information.
About the trimming, I've been taught to use always the yoke and after the trim, even for the slightest changes. (for example, for a 50ft/min change on final, we first set the correct Vz with the yoke, and after trim to cancel the stick force)
We're maybe saying the same thing differently, but I want to be sure about that point. Óëûáêà

About the flight itself, I've done it again, paying special attention to the speeds and to the thrust on final. This time, I almost didn't change the thrust since I had set flaps 28° on level flight until flare. This made the final surpisingly (for me of course!) smooth and easy. It shows that even a minor change in thrust (1%) changes the pitch directly.

The main problem I get on this pattern is remaining between 0.80 and 1.20 G, especially on the 120m-600m part. I've got to try several times before I get it OK.

The parameters are the same. (Tu-154B-2, TOW=80t, LW=79t, CAX=27,2, USHH rwy 06)

Thank you instructors Óëûáêà

WalterLeo · ÊÂÑ

Ap0pHiS

As the professional pilots always tell to the "sportspilots" " in a big airplane everthing is differnt!". Yes and no, but seems the russian transportplanes have very heavy controls compared with their "western" siblings, at least western pilots who flew in Tushkas report that. At the other hand in a B 747 the pilots put their arms on the armrest while flying manually for not overcontrolling, so light are the ailerons.

Regards

Walter

Bell · ÊÂÑ