Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
CONTENT:
q Airbus New Operational
Landing Distances
q The Go Around Procedure
q The Circling Approach
q VMU Tests on A380
q Automatic Landings
in Daily Operation
Issue 12
2 Issue 12 | JULY 2011 Safety The Airbus Safety Magazine Issue 12 | JULY 2011 3
Yannick MALINGE
Chief Product Safety Officer
Contents
For the enhancement of safe flight through
increased knowledge and communications
Yannick MALINGE
Chief Product Safety Officer
Editorial
Dear Customers and Aviation Safety Colleagues,
The Safety First issue n10, dated August 2010, included Information ......................................................... 4
an article on Go Around handling. It concentrated on the
correct execution of the maneuver. This issue takes a wider
view on the procedure itself, from the Go Around prepa-
ration to the PNFs actions and responsibility, describing Airbus New Operational Landing Distances....... 5
traps like the false climb illusion.
Lars KORNSTAEDT
Yannick MALINGE
Chief Product Safety Officer
4 Issue 12 | JULY 2011 Safety
Nils Fayaud
Director Product Safety Information
Information
Magazine distribution Safety Information on the Airbus
websites 17th
If you wish to subscribe to Safety
First, please fill out the subscrip- On the AirbusWorld website we are
building up more safety information Rome, 21-24 March 2011
tion form that you will find at the
for you to use.
end of this issue. The presentations made during our last event
The present and previous issues of
Please note that the paper copies in Rome will shortly become available on our
Safety First can be accessed to in the
will only be forwarded to profes- AirbusWorld web site, in the Flight Operations
Flight Operations Community- Safe-
Community- Conferences portal.
sional addresses. ty and Operational Materials portal-,
(https://w3.airbusworld.com).
at https://w3.airbusworld.com
Your articles
Other safety and operational exper-
As already said, this magazine is a tise publications, like the Getting to
tool to help share information. Grips withbrochures, e-briefings
We would appreciate articles from etcare regularly released as well
in the Flight Operations Commu-
operators, that we can pass to other nity at the above site.
operators through the magazine.
If you do not yet have access rights,
If you have any inputs then please please contact your IT administrator.
contact Nils Fayaud at:
Flight Safety
e-mail: nils.fayaud@airbus.com Hotline: +33 (0)6 29 80 86 66
fax : +33 (0) 5 61 93 44 29 E-mail: account.safety@airbus.com
We are pleased to announce that the The Flight Safety Conference As always we welcome presentations
18th Flight Safety Conference will provides an excellent forum for the from you, the conference is a forum
take place in Berlin, Germany, from exchange of information between for everybody to share information.
the 19th to the 22nd of March 2012. Airbus and customers. The event If you have something you believe will
The formal invitations with infor- is a dedicated forum for all Airbus benefit other operators and/or Airbus
mation regarding registration and operators. We do not accept outside or need additional invitations or infor-
logistics, as well as the preliminary parties. This ensures that we can mation, please contact Nuria Soler at:
agenda will be sent to our customers have an open dialogue to promote e-mail: nuria.soler@airbus.com
in December. flight safety across the fleet. fax: +33 (0) 5 62 11 97 33
The Airbus Safety Magazine Issue 12 | JULY 2011 5
Lars KORNSTAEDT
Performance Expert, Flight Operations Support
Figure 1
Deceleration Reported TALPA ARC runway
Runway Condition
Code and Directional Control Braking condition matrix
Description
Observation Action
6 Dry Dry
Wet
Water up to 1/8 (3mm)
Damp Braking deceleration is normal for
5 1/8 (3mm) or less of the wheel braking effort applied. Good
Slush Directional control is normal.
Dry Snow
Wet Snow
6. Status
Airbus is working to a target date
end of September this year for the
EFB (Flysmart with Airbus) and
the revision of the digital FCOM
and QRH:
qThe new electronic flight manual
(OCTOPUS V28) has received ap-
proval from EASA end of April
2011. Aircraft database production
has started. This is the basis for all
the other work packages, since it
provides the capability to actually
calculate OLDs.
qFor the operational documenta-
tion, the new layout of the landing
distance tables is finalized. Inter-
Figure 6 nal tools for the semi-automatic
RWY COND: 3-Medium computation of the tables are under
Runway not limiting, results displayed in green and MLW(perf) limited by FOLD
development. Full scale production
will start by June.
qThe EFB Landing module for
L3 standard is undergoing internal
validation at this time. Several ad-
ditional iterations seem likely to al-
low us to iron out any issues and
make it robust for entry into serv-
ice with the operators.
An update to the Flight Operations
Information Letter should be is-
sued beginning of summer, which
will include a more detailed view
on the final products.
7. Conclusion
Figure 7
RWY COND: 2- Medium to poor
Runway excursion is currently the
FOLD longer than Landing Distance Available (LDA), but OLD less than LDA, results displayed in amber and number one safety risk in terms of
MLW(perf) limited by OLD. occurrences according to ICAO ac-
cident statistics.
Let us hope that this risk will be
significantly reduced thanks to the
combination of:
qThe implementation of the OLD
concept.
qThe introduction of upcoming
design features that assist crews
in the Go Around decision making
process, by providing runway over-
run warning (see article on Runway
Overrun Prevention System in the
eighth Safety First issue, dated July
2009).
Figure 8
RWY COND: 1-POOR
Runway too short even for OLD, no result and MLW(perf) limited by OLD less than actual landing weight
shown in red.
10 Issue 12 | JULY 2011 Safety
David Owens
Senior Director Training Policy
The Go Around
Procedure
1. Introduction
Go Around is an essential safety
maneuver for all pilots. It is reg-
ularly practiced in the simulator,
but often with engine failure,
and often from minima.
By contrast, most real-world Go
Arounds are:
qLight weight
qHigh thrust
qFrom any other point on the
approach.
Pilots must be familiar and con-
fident with all aspects of the Go
Around maneuver. However, re-
3. Why Go Around?
cently, we have seen several ex- If:
amples where a safe Go Around
qThe approach is not properly sta-
was not achieved, and following
brief, the missed approach. We rec- bilized, or
these in-service incidents, we
must review Go Around man- ommend that the Pilot Flying (PF) qYou have doubts about your situ-
agement and flight crew task reads the missed approach from ational awareness, or
sharing for the Go Around. the MCDU, while the Pilot Non qA malfunction occurs below
This article will review the normal Flying (PNF) confirms by reading 1000ft AAL, or
Go Around, and examine several the missed approach section of the
chart. Use of the ND in plan mode qAdequate visual cues are not ob-
other different Go Around situ- tained at minima, or
ations. will give a good visual confirma-
tion at the same time. qAny GPWS/TCAS or wind-
shear alert occurs
2. Go Around qOn ATC request
Preparation qWhenever the crew considers it
necessary.
All pilots must be Go Around Green Dot
minded. As an essential and nor- -O
-S Flaps 0
mal part of the approach prepara-
-F Flaps 1
tion, the crew should check, and
THR levers
ACCELERATION
CLB ALTITUDE
Go Around procedure!
THR Levers
TOGA
The Airbus Safety Magazine Issue 12 | JULY 2011 11
4. How?
The PF announces Go Around
Flaps!, and, simultaneously:
qSets TOGA thrust
qIf in manual flight, rotates to the
Go Around pitch target (see right),
or monitors the Auto-Pilot (AP)
response
qChecks the Flight Mode Annun-
ciator (FMA).
Green Dot
-O
-S Flaps 0
-F Flaps 1
THR levers
ACCELERATION
CLB ALTITUDE
THR Levers
TOGA
5. What about
Pitch?
All pilots must know the required
initial pitch target for their aircraft
BEFORE commencing a missed
approach. They must maintain that
pitch target by following the SRS
commands in manual flight. With
the autopilot engaged, they should
use this knowledge to confirm the
A320 A320
autopilot behavior. A380
15 Single Engine
12.5
12.5
Pilot Illusion
Actual
7. PNFs Actions
and Responsibility
As soon as the PF announces
the Go Around, the PNF retracts
FLAPS one step.
The PF orders Gear up!, when a
positive climb is confirmed by the
PNF.
The PNFs prime responsibility
remains the monitoring of PFs
flying.
Pitch!
14 Issue 12 | JULY 2011 Safety
8. Thrust Reduction
Altitude
The PF sets the thrust levers to the
CLB detent when the aircraft reaches
the thrust reduction altitude.
Green Dot
-O
-S Flaps 0
-F Flaps 1
THR levers
ACCELERATION
CLB ALTITUDE
THR Levers
TOGA
10. Notes on
Lateral Guidance:
qRecent Airbus aircraft are fitted
with an automatic re-engagement
of NAV mode at Go Around.
qFor other aircraft the FMA will Heading, as NAV guidance
show GA TRK cleared by ATC for GA trajectory
This GA TRK will be the aircraft
track at the instant that the thrust le-
vers are placed to TOGA. If a head-
ing is required by ATC, or a track
different to the GA TRK, then, pull
HDG for HDG mode, and set the
correct heading as required. If a
managed Go Around is required,
then, push HDG for NAV.
11. Missed
Approach
other Altitudes
11.1. Go Around from
Intermediate Approach
All missed approaches must in-
clude the initial use of TOGA thrust
to ensure the Go Around phase is
engaged. Once TOGA is confirmed
on the FMA, THR CLB may be se-
lected.
5. Conclusion
We must train
for different Go Arounds
qLight weight and heavy
qAvailable thrust both high (all engines) and low (engine failure)
qHigh energy (Close to missed approach altitude)
qDifferent configurations
qFrom intermediate, decision and low altitude
PF PNF
Know the pitch Target
Set the pitch and Toga Monitor the pitch and thrust
Maintain the Pitch (follow SRS) Call any deviations
Check the FMA and when required Confirm the FMA
promptly select Climb
The Airbus Safety Magazine Issue 12 | JULY 2011 17
David Owens
Senior Director Training Policy
1. Introduction
The circling approach used to
be a frequent and normal part of
standard airline operations. Today,
it is not flown as frequently, and
is no longer part of recurrent
training for everyone. Yet, it re-
mains a challenging maneuver.
If visual reference is lost while cir- Minimum Visibility 1 600 m 2 400 m 2 400 m 3 200 m
cling to land from an instrument Minimum HAA 500 ft 450 ft 600 ft 550 ft
approach, the missed approach
specified for that particular instru-
ment approach must be followed. It
is expected that the pilot will make
an initial climbing turn toward the
landing runway and overhead the
aerodrome where he will establish
the aeroplane in a climb on the
missed approach track. In as much
as the circling maneuver may be
accomplished in more than one di-
rection, different patterns will be
required to establish the aeroplane
on the prescribed missed approach
course depending on its position at
the time visual reference is lost un-
less otherwise prescribed.
IEM to Appendix 1 to JAR-OPS
1.430, 3.1 45
5. Standard
Circling Approach
Step by Step
5.1. Approach Preparation:
First of all, start with the chart,
check the protected area and ter-
rain and look for any special notes
or restrictions. Check the MDA for
circling (circling minima) for your
category of aircraft and brief the
approach configuration. Prepare
the secondary flight plan (SEC
F-PLN): copy active and change
runway to actual landing runway.
Ensure that the use of ND during
the approach is fully briefed.
The Airbus Safety Magazine Issue 12 | JULY 2011 19
30 sec
45
5.5.Downwind:
Maintain visual reference with the
runway environment. Monitor both
lateral distance and track, with the
aid of the ND, and adjust track for
wind, as necessary. In particular if
the aircraft is too close to the run- 30 sec
way.
At an appropriate point, activate
45
the SEC F-PLN (Keep the DIS-
CONTINUITY). Disconnect the
AP and remove FD, at the latest
before commencing any further
descent.
When the secondary F-PLN is activated, the valid
NAV missed approach procedure is no longer available.
5.6.Downwind ABM:
Start timing when abeam the ABM
threshold (3 sec per 100 ft is a
guide).
But what about airspeed and tail
wind? Remember: this is a visual 30 sec
exercise and timings are approxi-
mate only! The ND may be used as
an aid to initiating and judging the 45
base turn.
(1) visual
references lost
5.9. JAR Ops Definitions:
Visual Reference
A pilot may not continue an ap-
proach below MDA/MDH unless
at least one of the following visual initial inst. approach
references for the intended runway
is distinctly visible and identifiable
missed approach
to the pilot: for initial procedure
i) Elements of the approach
light system; (2)
ii) The threshold;
visual
iii) The threshold markings; references lost
45
22 Issue 12 | JULY 2011 Safety
30 sec
45
8. Conclusion:
Airbus recommends that all opera-
tors examine their operations and
the associated training regarding
the circling approach
What about other types of ap-
proach? RNP APCH or RNP AR
APCH may replace a circling ap-
proach and create a lower minima.
45
The Airbus Safety Magazine Issue 12 | JULY 2011 23
Claude LELAIE
Experimental Test Pilot
Definition of the
VMU
This test allows to determine speeds
which are called VMU (Velocity
Minimum Unstick). A given VMU beginning of the development for slats / flaps positions: 1+F, 2 and 3.
is a function of weight, thrust, alti- the optimisation of the take-off aer- Configuration 3 gives more lift and
tude, and CG. The aircraft actually odynamic configuration. This was therefore allows the take-off at a
gets airborne in a similar manner to done in the first three months of the lower speed with a reduced runway
a Piper J3 (even if not the standard development. length. Alternatively, the minimum
procedure!), with a simultaneous deflection, 1+F, gives a lower drag
lift-off of the main gears and the and a better rate of climb with one
tail wheel, which is replaced by Optimization engine out. It is well adapted to the
the tail bumper on the A380. There
is no way to get airborne at a lower
of Take-Off situation where there are obstacles
far away, however, the take-off dis-
speed and this is the reason for the Performance tance is increased. Configuration 2
denomination. is used to cover intermediate situ-
The optimization of take-off per- ations.
We need to know the VMU be- formance is complex. Firstly, the
cause the computed take off speeds aircraft must be able to get air- For the optimisation phase, we
incorporate some margin above borne safely, even in the case of were able to play with slats and
VMU, just as they also do for VS failure of one engine. It may also flaps deflection and with the size of
(Stall speed), VMCG (Minimum have to overfly obstacles, close or the strake on the engines nacelle,
control speed on the ground) and far from the runway end, with suf- and we had initially to compare two
VMCA (Minimum control speed ficient margin, still with an engine characteristics: stall speeds and
in the air). These V speeds there- failed. The optimization has to be rate of climb with one engine out.
fore form the basic building blocks performed for all weights, alti- The first stalls were performed on
of take-off performance. tudes and temperatures and obvi- flight 3 with more being carried out
On the A380, there was not only ously some compromises have in the following days. It allowed us
a need to establish the VMU for to be made, as no aircraft can be to make a first choice among the
computation of the take off per- perfect for all conditions. On all configurations to be retained. Glo-
formance, but it was also necessary Airbus FBW aircraft, the crew has bally, the results were very good,
to perform some tests at the very the choice between three take-off even better than expected. The
24 Issue 12 | JULY 2011 Safety
stalls with a reduced slat deflection have found that 26 or 29 would the rearmost part of the plane was
were not so satisfactory as it was be better. However, after the stalls made of carbon, the bumper was
possible to generate too much side- and the rate of climb measure- installed slightly further forward in
slip. With the initial position the ments, we were still not sure which a metallic section. This had adverse
stall characteristics were excellent. setting was the best. Therefore we consequences, as the protection of
Easy choice! had to perform the VMU tests for a rear fuselage was not as good as if
final assessment. it had been mounted in an ideal po-
sition. It left a slight risk of contact
Without strakes, the stall appeared after take-off behind the bumper.
earlier, with a definite loss of lift.
Obviously strakes were needed. We
The Difficulties To cover this case, metallic pro-
tried several shapes of strake, some of the VMU Tests tection was also installed over the
carbon in the lower area of the aft
with a larger surface, without clear fuselage.
improvement, so we came back to Among all development and cer-
those that had been fitted initially. tification tests, VMU are probably
among the most spectacular for ob- There are several difficulties in car-
servers, with the small firework rying out VMU tests. The first one
The measurements of the rate of below the tail just before lift-off. is to perform a soft touch down of
climb with one engine out started For crew members, they are also the tail bumper, as the structure is
the first month of flight tests (flights one of the most stressful, as the not designed for a strong impact.
9 to 12). Again the target was to risk of damage to the aircraft is This is even more difficult with
check that, in all configurations, rather high. Few pilots can say that high thrust and strong acceleration,
the performance was in line with they have performed VMU tests on as there is sometimes not more than
the expectations, which proved to several programs without damag- one second between touch down of
be the case. ing anything! the bumper and lift-off. This partic-
ular test, when performed, is done
Finally, for the flaps, we had to In the case of the A380, some at the end of the sequence, when
make a choice for the configuration structural reinforcements were the crew is well trained and prac-
3 for take-off. When coming out made during the installation of the tised in the technique.
of the assembly line, the initially tail bumper so that it could sustain For tests with a very low thrust set-
planned deflection was 22, but in a force up to 160 tons (we reached ting, the rate of climb may be very
the mean time the aerodynamicists 100 tons during our tests). Because small, and the aircraft could be fly-
The Airbus Safety Magazine Issue 12 | JULY 2011 25
ing rather low for a long time after The right hand seat pilot has his which was different from the simu-
getting airborne. It is also possible seat in the upper position to be able lator, and the metallic part behind
that the aircraft can be caught up to see the runway even with a high the tail bumper touched the run-
in ground effect where it maintains pitch attitude. On the ground, he way. The damage was minor and
flight in a kind of air cushion, be- maintains the aircraft on the run- we were able to continue the tests,
ing unable to climb further. In this way. When in flight, he keeps the taking into account the lessons
situation, there is no other solution roll close to zero using very small learned from the first one!
than to perform a Go Around.
inputs on the rudder (induced roll),
and not with ailerons and spoilers
to avoid a drag increase. Finally, The following day, July 14th, was
But the key issue is the fact that the
regulations request that the pitch he is responsible for safety, which the French National Day. So apart
attitude must not be decreased be- means that he can take over any- from two KC145 taking off for the
low the value at lift-off. To perform parade on the Champs Elyses,
time, typically if the aircraft is not
a successful test, the pilot generally there was no traffic and we were
climbing in ground effect.
increases it slightly. However, the able to progress quickly. We ex-
margin is only around 1 to 1.5 changed seats between the two pi-
of additional pitch before touching The Test Flight Engineer on the lots. In the mean time, we found a
with the tail, behind the tail bump- flight deck is in charge of setting method of changing the protection
er. This is the most frequent cause very precisely the thrust, which is under the tail bumper without shut-
of damage, depending on individ- important when we are performing ting down the engines. This saved
ual aircraft flying characteristics. tests at very low ratio thrust over time so that eventually seven suc-
There is the challenge! cessful tests were performed, main-
weight.
ly with the two possible settings for
We need perfect weather condi- configuration 3.
tions, with no turbulence and wind In the cabin, in front of all their
less than 5 kts, to insure the preci- screens, two Flight Test Engineers
sion of the measurements. Another are monitoring the test, and thanks The final result was the choice of
good reason is that we are flying to the traces, they validate it (or a deflection of 26 for configura-
close to the limits and we must not not!). tion 3, but with only a very small
be destabilized by turbulence. difference from the 29 setting. We
planned initially four months to op-
Now, who is really the Captain? Is timize the aerodynamic configura-
For these tests, all the audio warn- it the guy who can damage the air- tion, but all the characteristics were
ings are killed by the crew prior craft while flying the pitch or the really excellent and everything
to the test, otherwise the crew re- other one in charge of the safety? was completed in less than three
ceive a stream of continuous warn- We have never really decided, but months.
ings: Thrust not set, then Stall, what is important is that the suc-
stall and possibly some others. We
cess is coming from a close team
must be able to work in a quiet en- Later in the development cam-
vironment. work as always in flight tests.
paign, some more VMU had to
be performed for the take-off per-
The Flight Test The Tests on A380 formance computations. These
were done on March 25th and 26th
Technique As explained previously, the first 2006. Eleven more tests were done
tests had to be performed rather in total, including those at very low
The flying technique, as developed thrust, down to 48 % of maximum
by Airbus, is really specific to this early in the program in order to
optimize the configuration 3. We thrust at 440 tons. For this last
type of test and airlines pilots will
began on July 13th 2005 at Istres test we were still at 200 ft about 4
surely find that rather strange.
Air Force Base (South of France) NM from brakes release, when fi-
where there is a 5 km runway and nally we were able to climb out of
The left hand seat pilot is respon- no houses or other obstacles on the ground effect!
sible for flying the pitch. His seat runway axis for several kilometres.
is in the lowest position as he does It was flight 41 and the first take-
not need to see the runway. He ad- A total of 22 VMU tests were ex-
off weight was 526 tons (followed ecuted including both development
justs the attitude using the horizon
of the PFD, performing a smooth obviously later by an overweight and certification.
touch-down of the tail bumper, landing). Unfortunately, due to
keeping the tail on the ground until traffic then weather conditions we
lift-off and maintaining the pitch had to stop after only four tests.
attitude after take-off until out of
the ground effect (one wing span) During the first test, I was surprised
or 400 ft. by the reactions of the airplane,
26 Issue 12 | JULY 2011 Safety
Capt. Christian NORDEN
A350 Flight Crew Training Policy and Development
Automatic Landings
in Daily Operation
1. Introduction
On January 9, 1969, the first-
ever fully-automatic landing of a
commercial aircraft with passen-
gers - a French domestic service
on a Caravelle III - was conduct-
ed in Paris-Orly.
Today, Autoland is one of the
key elements enabling standard
and reliable flight operations,
even in low visibility conditions.
All Airbus aircraft, from the
A300 to the A380, are certified
to perform Automatic Landings
(Autoland).
Although Autoland is commonly
associated with bad-weather
(Low Visibility Operations
LVO), there is a wider range of Here are some examples of the cas-
es for which an Autoland can prove
3. Prerequisites
benefits applicable to the per-
formance of automatic landings, beneficial: for Autoland
even in good weather. This ar- qFlight crew fatigue (e.g. an ear- 3.1. Aircraft Limitations
ticle will illustrate cases where ly-morning landing after a long and
Autoland provides such safety tiring night flight). As mentioned above, all Air-
advantages, and will indicate the bus aircraft are certified to
qUnfavorable operational condi- land automatically. However,
prerequisites required to ensure tions (e.g. Overweight landings.
that the procedure is safely con- limitations and conditions
Autoland has been demonstrated specified in the FCOM must
ducted. with weights much above Max be taken into account. Be
Landing Weight, as specified in aware that other not-so-ob-
the FCOM). vious Autoland-limitations,
2. Operational qPoor visual conditions (e.g. even such as maximum airfield
Advantages of if the reported weather conditions altitude, maximum (mini-
Autoland are VMC, a landing that faces a
low-rising or a setting sun, aligned
mum) GS angle or maximum
runway slope, must also be
Low Visibility Operations (LVO) on the runway axis, can seriously considered.
is the most commonly used (and affect and reduce the flight crews In addition, the flight crew
known) reason for the performance vision). must monitor possible day-
of an automatic landing. But there qCrew Incapacitation (e.g. the un- to-day technical restrictions
are many other situations where the affected pilot could decide to exer- (stated in the MEL), or the
use of Autoland provides opera- cise their emergency authority and consequence(s) of a failure that
tional advantages, and where the use the Autoland function in order may have occurred during the
decision to perform an Autoland is to benefit from the potential assist- flight and that may downgrade
a smart flight crew decision. ance and relief). landing capability.
The Airbus Safety Magazine Issue 12 | JULY 2011 27
Safety
Subscription Form
30 Issue 12 | JULY 2011 Safety
Subscription Form
To be sent back to
Name . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Surname . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Job title/Function . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Company/Organization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
..............................................................................................
..............................................................................................
Post/Zip Code . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Country . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Telephone . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Cell phone . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Fax . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
E-mail . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
(Mandatory for both digital and paper copies)
Please send me the digital copy* P
Please send me the paper copy* P (Please note that paper copies
will only be forwarded
to professional addresses)
Articles Published
Safety The Airbus Safety Magazine
in Previous
Subscription Form
To be sent back to
Safety First Issues
Issue 11, January 2011 Slide/raft Improvement
What is Stall? Cabin Attendant Falling through the Avionics
AIRBUS FLIGHT SAFETY OFFICE Bay Access Panel in Cockpit
How a Pilot Should React in Front of a Stall Situation
Fax: 33 (0)5 61 93 44 29
Minimum Control Speed Tests on A380
Mail to:marie-josee.escoubas@airbus.com
Radio Altimeter Erroneous Values Issue 5, December 2007
Automatic NAV Engagement at Go Around New CFIT Event During Non Precision Approach
A320: Tail Strike at Takeoff?
Name . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Issue 10, August 2010 Unreliable Speed
A380: Flutter Tests Compliance to Operational Procedures
Surname . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Operational Landing Distances: The Future Air Navigation System FANS B
Job title/Function . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A New Standard for In-flight Landing Distance Assessment
Go Around Handling Issue 4, June 2007
Company/Organization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A320: Landing Gear Downlock Operations Engineering Bulletin Reminder Function
Situation Awareness and Decision Making Avoiding High Speed Rejected Takeoffs
Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Due to EGT Limit Exceedance
.............................................................................................. Issue 9, February 2010 Do you Know your ATC/TCAS Panel?
A320 Family: Evolution of Ground Spoiler Logic Managing Hailstorms
.............................................................................................. Incorrect Pitch Trim Setting at Takeoff Introducing the Maintenance Briefing Notes
Technical Flight Familiarization A320: Dual hydraulic Loss
Post/Zip Code . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Terrain Awareness and Warning Systems
Oxygen Safety
Operations Based on GPS Data
Country . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Issue 8, July 2009
Telephone . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The Runway Overrun Prevention System Issue 3, December 2006
The Take Off Securing Function Dual Side Stick Inputs
Cell phone . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Trimmable Horizontal Stabilizer Damage
Computer Mixability: An Important Function
Fuel Spills During Refueling Operations Pitot Probes Obstruction on Ground
Fax . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
A340: Thrust Reverser Unlocked
E-mail . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Issue 7, February 2009 Residual Cabin Pressure
(Mandatory for both digital and paper copies)
Airbus AP/FD TCAS Mode: Cabin Operations Briefing Notes
A New Step Towards Safety Improvement Hypoxia: An Invisible Enemy
Braking System Cross Connections
Upset Recovery Training Aid, Revision 2 Issue 2, September 2005
Please send me the digital copy* P Fuel Pumps Left in OFF Position Tailpipe or Engine Fire
Managing Severe Turbulence
A320: Avoiding Dual Bleed Loss
Please send me the paper copy* P (Please note that paper copies Airbus Pilot Transition (ATP)
will only be forwarded
to professional addresses) Issue 6, July 2008 Runway Excursions at Takeoff
A320: Runway Overrun
* Please tick the appropriate case FCTL Check after EFCS Reset on Ground Issue 1, January 2005
A320: Possible Consequence of VMO/MMO Exceedance Go Arounds in Addis-Ababa due to VOR Reception Problems
A320: Prevention of Tailstrikes The Importance of the Pre-flight Flight Control Check
Low Fuel Situation Awareness A320: In-flight Thrust Reverser Deployment
Rudder Pedal Jam Airbus Flight Safety Manager Handbook
Why do Certain AMM Tasks Require Equipment Resets? Flight Operations Briefing Notes