AWAC Hiring Spring 2010
11-19-2009, 04:21 PM
#41
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2006
Posts: 2,918
Thanks for the replies.
Johnso... the reverse blast hitting the rudder and rendering it useless is a different issue. It resulted in AA not allowing us to go above 1.3 EPR any time on the reverse. That was a contributing factor in the loss of directional control in our accident in LIT in '98.
We could never deploy the buckets until the nosewheel was on the ground. However I haven't been on the -80 in a couple years, someone told me they changed it where you could deploy them as long as the nosewheel is heading down.
Johnso... the reverse blast hitting the rudder and rendering it useless is a different issue. It resulted in AA not allowing us to go above 1.3 EPR any time on the reverse. That was a contributing factor in the loss of directional control in our accident in LIT in '98.
We could never deploy the buckets until the nosewheel was on the ground. However I haven't been on the -80 in a couple years, someone told me they changed it where you could deploy them as long as the nosewheel is heading down.
11-19-2009, 04:44 PM
#42
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2006
Position: 330 B
Posts: 1,629
We do not, but a limitation was just recently changed and I think it is to line up with the DAL Mad Dog procedures.
If the runway is NOT contaminated we can deploy them before the nosewheel touches down, but have to wait for the nosewheel to touch in order to spool them.
If the runway IS contaminated we must wait until the nosewheel is down before we can deploy them.
My guess is it has to do with how the clamshells can hinder the aerodynamic effectiveness of the rudder. I don't know if DAL has the same limitation as AA on their Mad Dogs, as they are much longer then even a DC-9-50.
If the runway is NOT contaminated we can deploy them before the nosewheel touches down, but have to wait for the nosewheel to touch in order to spool them.
If the runway IS contaminated we must wait until the nosewheel is down before we can deploy them.
My guess is it has to do with how the clamshells can hinder the aerodynamic effectiveness of the rudder. I don't know if DAL has the same limitation as AA on their Mad Dogs, as they are much longer then even a DC-9-50.
11-19-2009, 05:13 PM
#43
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2006
Posts: 2,918
True statement, but IIRC you had to be at around 10.5 degrees nose up. That is pretty extreme for an -80. In any case, AA had quite a few clamshell strikes, so they adopted the "lowest common denominator training - no deploying until nosewheel touchdown. But I believe they just changed it, now you can deploy them as long as you start the nose down.
11-20-2009, 05:00 AM
#45
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2005
Position: EMJ CA
Posts: 115
11-20-2009, 07:18 AM
#46
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2007
Position: CRJ 200/700/900 CA & Instructor
Posts: 658
11-20-2009, 10:12 AM
#47
Moderator
Joined APC: Oct 2006
Position: B757/767
Posts: 13,088
11-20-2009, 10:15 AM
#48
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2008
Posts: 299
Because where AWAC seeks growth, PSA seeks reduction. I mean, really Bradeku, didn't you know PSA's plan for next summer is to furlough down to one Captain, one FO and a checkairmen on reserve to fly both seats? That's all you need to run a properly staffed airline isn't it?
11-20-2009, 10:15 AM
#49
Moderator
Joined APC: Oct 2006
Position: B757/767
Posts: 13,088
Thanks for the replies.
Johnso... the reverse blast hitting the rudder and rendering it useless is a different issue. It resulted in AA not allowing us to go above 1.3 EPR any time on the reverse. That was a contributing factor in the loss of directional control in our accident in LIT in '98.
We could never deploy the buckets until the nosewheel was on the ground. However I haven't been on the -80 in a couple years, someone told me they changed it where you could deploy them as long as the nosewheel is heading down.
Johnso... the reverse blast hitting the rudder and rendering it useless is a different issue. It resulted in AA not allowing us to go above 1.3 EPR any time on the reverse. That was a contributing factor in the loss of directional control in our accident in LIT in '98.
We could never deploy the buckets until the nosewheel was on the ground. However I haven't been on the -80 in a couple years, someone told me they changed it where you could deploy them as long as the nosewheel is heading down.
Gotcha. We're limited to 1.6 EPR, but I think that has more to do with preventing us from coughing one!
Now let's hear about some more hiring!
11-20-2009, 10:30 AM
#50
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2008
Position: 756 FO
Posts: 319
Because where AWAC seeks growth, PSA seeks reduction. I mean, really Bradeku, didn't you know PSA's plan for next summer is to furlough down to one Captain, one FO and a checkairmen on reserve to fly both seats? That's all you need to run a properly staffed airline isn't it?
In 2015 AWAC won't be here so any "New Hire" will have a 4-5 yr job max
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
