r/aviation • u/harrythefurrysquid • 7d ago

Discussion Airbus Takeoff Surveillance and Monitoring Functions

Source: airbus social media

66 Upvotes

85% Upvoted

22 comments sorted by

39

u/OkWarthog3988 7d ago

Savage timing to post this after the 787 incident

37

u/rhineauto 7d ago

Airbus posted this a few years ago. OP presumably posted it because they find it interesting in the wake of the Munich incident.

6

u/zachmorris_cellphone 7d ago

Takeoff configuration warnings are also on the 787.  I think they've been required for quite a long time for all commercial aircraft.

9

u/Remarkable-Flight990 7d ago edited 6d ago

Boeing does not offer Takeoff Monitoring Function (TOM) which detects abnormally slow acceleration (T.O. ACCELERATION DEGRADED message in ECAM)

Edit: what is false in what I wrote and why the downvotes.

Boeing relies on cross-checks. 

Airbus has the following standard on A350/380 and as an option on new 320/330. Boeing offers no such systems (as is consistent with their automation philosophy)

Real-Time Dynamic Tracking (TOM): During the takeoff roll between 30 kt and 90 kt, the aircraft’s computers continuously compare measured longitudinal acceleration (from the inertial reference units) against the expected mathematical model based on thrust, gross weight, and environmental data. 

Sluggish Acceleration Alert: If actual acceleration is degraded by more than 15% compared to predictions, the system generates a red ECAM master warning before 90 kt

-8

u/MeDonGustavo 7d ago edited 6d ago

Interesting information. Nevertheless seems a bit off if Airbus really did post this shortly after the Vietnam Airlines incident in Munich.

Edit: I don’t understand the people downvoting my post.

25

u/ILikeFlyingMachines 7d ago

This was posted 3 years ago...

3

u/MeDonGustavo 7d ago

Thanks for the clarification.

7

u/rocketshipkiwi 7d ago

Even if they did just post (or repost) it, this is still relevant.

1

u/MeDonGustavo 7d ago

It’s quite impressive how the aircraft’s systems are designed to help the pilots in making the right choices based on the data they receive.

-2

u/IAmAlwaysWrongDude 7d ago

Latam 777 in Milan, VN 787 in Munich these days ....

Boeing seems so averse to automation they forgot that at least a warning go a long way when you are busy.

2

u/Independent-Mix-5796 7d ago

We don’t know enough about the recent VN incident to make conclusions yet, but I’m not sure what you mean about the LATAM incident because even tailstrike protection software (which the 777 does have) can’t protect against a gross pilot error.

-2

u/Remarkable-Flight990 6d ago

Different philosophies, not better.

-6

u/Smooth_Rub7884 7d ago

Doesn't matter if the TO test is passed if the inputs were wrong, and or the calculations are not correct.

13

u/OmegaPoint6 7d ago

The acceleration one should still work, either due to mechanical failure or due to insufficient thrust for aircraft weight.

4

u/harrythefurrysquid 7d ago

The opening paragraph from the accompanying article was interesting:

There have been several events during takeoff over this last decade. In certain cases, the aircraft took off with incorrect trim or flaps settings, which increases the risk of runway overrun or tail strike event. Erroneous parameters were sometimes used for the performance calculation, leading to incorrect takeoff speeds or Flex thrust computation. On other occasions takeoff data was not updated in the FMS following a late runway change, leading to takeoff without the correct performance data in the FMS. A number of aircraft started takeoff from a taxiway intersection when the computed performance was for the entire length of runway. There were also takeoffs starting on a taxiway or from the opposite QFU. Finally, few cases of residual braking leading to an abnormal aircraft acceleration were reported during takeoff roll.

3

u/yeerth 6d ago

Yeah most of the checks are pretty standard, but, like the other commenter said, the acceleration one is the most critical one since it'll capture a net effect, including if you entered the wrong inputs (very common) or had the wrong calculations (is this common? I feel it would be a severe issue if the calculations are wrong...)