A320 - Characteristic Speeds - GW Computations

Page 1 of 12
GROSS WEIGHTS AND ASSOCIATED CHARACTERISTIC SPEEDS COMPUTATIONS ON SINGLE AISLE

1. INTRODUCTION
2. GROSS WEIGHT COMPUTATION
2.1 GROSS WEIGHT (GW) COMPUTATION BY FM
2.1.1 BASIC PRINCIPLE
2.1.2 FUEL ON BOARD (FOB) ESTIMATION BY FM
2.2 GROSS WEIGHT (GW) COMPUTATION BY FAC
2.2.1 BASIC PRINCIPLE
2.2.2 AERODYNAMIC MODEL
2.2.3 FUEL CONSUMPTION MODEL
2.2.4 SWITCHING CONDITIONS BETWEEN AERODYNAMIC & FUEL CONSUMPTION MODELS
3. CHARACTERISTIC SPEED BASED ON GROSS WEIGHT
3.1 LOWEST SELECTABLE SPEED - VLS
3.2 FLAP RETRACTION MINIMUM SPEED – F
3.3 SLAT RETRACTION MINIMUM SPEED – S
3.4 GREEN DOT – O
3.5 APPROACH SPEED – VAPP
4. TROUBLESHOOTING LINKED TO GW ISSUES
4.1 “CHECK GW” OR “CHECK WEIGHT” MESSAGE ON MCDU
4.2 “VAPP” TOO CLOSE TO VLS ON PFD S
4.3 “VAPP” ON PFD HIGHER THAN VAPP ON MCDU
4.4 CHARACTERISTIC SPEED DISCREPANCY BETWEEN PFDS AND MCDU
4.5 REMARKS ON FAC AND FMGC STANDARDS
5. DOCUMENTATION
https://w3.airbus.com/1H43/MEFO_AW/ISI/MjIuMDAuMDAwNjE=/resources/BPhes/ext... 7/29/2014
Page 2 of 12
INTRODUCTION

Gross Weight is computed by both Flight Management (FM) and Flight Augmentation Computer (FAC).

Gross Weight is then used in the computation of characteristic speeds that are displayed on PFD and MCDU:
Characteristic Speeds displayed on PFDs are computed by FAC based on FAC Gross Weight (except on A318 and on aircraft fitted with sharklets. On those aircraft the FM Gross
Weight is used).
Characteristic Speeds displayed on MCDU are computed by FM based on FM Gross Weight

Page 3 of 12
Gross Weight Computation
Gross Weight (GW) computation by FM
Basic principle
The FM GW computation is based on the aircraft Zero Fuel Weight (ZFW) entered by the crew in the MCDU and on the Fuel On Board (FOB) quantity measured in aircraft tanks:

FMGW = ZFW + FOB

Note: The FMGW computation starts when the crew has inserted a Zero Fuel Weight (ZFW) in the INIT page on the MCDU and one engine is started.

Fuel On Board (FOB) estimation by FM

The FMS reads the fuel quantity information which is used to initialize a filter. This filter refines the fuel quantity indicator (FQI) resulting value with the fuel flow (FF) values. This allows
determining the precise Fuel On Board (FOB) value in real time. This computation model is the default one, however, flight crew can deselect the FF or FQI input for computation (this de-
selection is automatic in case of detected failure of the related sensor, refer to FCOM 4.03.28 p15).

FOB = function (FQI, FF) OR FOB = function (FQI) OR FOB = function (FF)

Note: The detailed logics of FOB computation are manufacturer proprietary and cannot be exported to the A/L.
Page 4 of 12
Gross Weight (GW) computation by FAC

Basic principle

The FAC GW computation is based on two different models:
an aerodynamic model,
a fuel consumption model.
These models are used alternately during the flight (see “Switching conditions” paragraph).

Aerodynamic Model

Each FAC carries out its own Aerodynamic Gross Weight (A-FACGW) computation using the dynamic aircraft data which represent the aircraft equilibrium conditions. First, the FAC
computes Vs1g (stall speed), which corresponds to a virtual stall speed with a vertical acceleration of 1g. To evaluate this Vs1g, the thrust, the current aircraft pitch (TETAown), speed
(VCown), the Angle Of Attack (AOA), the Slat/Flap configuration, the altitude, the vertical acceleration (AZown) and the CG are used.
This Vs1g is then used to evaluate the A-FACGW.

A-FACGW = function (AOAvoted, VCown, AZown, TETAown, etc…)

As a consequence, the A-FACGW of each FAC is highly dependent on the aerodynamic position of the voted Angle Of Attack sensor, the own aircraft speed, the own vertical acceleration,
the own theta…
Regarding the AOA taken for A-FACGW computation, each FAC performs a vote between the 3 AOA and chooses a median value as the AOA reference which will be used.
The AOA sensors accuracy is the main factor in the FAC weight calculation: 0.1 degree of error in the AOA can result in a 1 ton error in weight.
Notes:
- Exclusion threshold to reject an AOA from the vote is 3.5 degrees (3.5 degrees compared to the median value).
- AOA accuracy tolerance is 0.5°, as indicated in TSM task 34-11-00-810-861: "Different Angle of Attack value on the three ADIRUs"

Fuel Consumption Model

The Fuel FAC Gross Weight (F-FACGW) is based on a fuel consumption model using the Total Air temperature, the N1 and the Mach. An instantaneous consumed fuel weight is computed
thanks to previous parameters and is continuously deducted from the last memorized F-FACGW:

F-FACGW = Previous F-FACGW – Fuel consumed (TATown, PTown, N1own, Machown)

Note : At the beginning of each switching to the fuel consumption model computation, the initial weight is the last FAC computed weight. It could be the last A-FACGW or the last FMGW
(refer to §2.2.4).

Page 5 of 12
Switching conditions between Aerodynamic & Fuel consumption models

Switching conditions

The Aerodynamic model and the fuel consumption model are used alternately during climb and descent. The conditions to switch from one model to the other are listed here below.
During cruise at Flight Level above 14625ft and high speeds (refer to below conditions), fuel consumption model is systematically used.

The aerodynamic model is used if:
At least one AOA available
Altitude < 14625ft
Vc <240kts (A318; A319; A321) Vc < 255kts (A320)
Vertical Acceleration <0.07g
Roll angle < 15° (from T/O until the first slat/flap retraction) then < 5°
Slats/Flaps: Conf0; Conf1+F; Conf2 & Conf3
Airbrakes are not extended.
No peripheral failures (ADC; IRS; SFCC; ELAC)
EFCS Normal Law engaged
Landing gears up
Note: These values are given for information and have to be confirmed in each particular case. In particular, the conditions on slat/flap are indeed more complex and depend on the flight
phase.
Model used Vs. Aircraft flight phase

Initialization
FAC GW is initialized on ground from FM GW once ZFW is entered by the crew on MCDU, and one engine is running.

Climb
From 10sec after T/O, if aerodynamic conditions are fulfilled, FAC computes its GW with the aerodynamic model. If conditions are not fulfilled, FAC computes its GW using the Fuel
consumption model. The computation model depends on the switching conditions.

Cruise
At the transition to high altitude/high speed envelope (refer to switching conditions), fuel consumption model is systematically used to compute the FAC GW.

Descent
When A/C is in descent and re-enters the aerodynamic model conditions (below 14625ft and 240/255kts), the FAC weight computation is again performed from either Aerodynamic model
or Fuel consumption model depending on switching conditions.

After landing
From 60sec after landing, FAC GW is a copy of FM GW.

Note : For information, a rate limiter is added to avoid a too sharp FACGW variation. Thus, FACGW (resulting from the combination of A-FACGW and F-FACGW) is limited to 900kg/min
(15kg/sec).
Page 6 of 12
Page 7 of 12
Characteristic speed based on Gross weight
Lowest Selectable Speed - VLS

VLS represents the lowest selectable speed taken into account by the FG for guidance purpose.
VLS computation is mainly based on Altitude, Slats configuration, Flaps configuration, Airbrakes configuration, gross weight.

On MCDU:
VLS (FM) value is displayed on the APPR page. This characteristic speed is in particular based on FM GW and on forecasted Slat/Flap landing configuration (inserted by crew in MCDU).
On PFD:
VLS (FAC) is represented by the top of an amber line along the airspeed scale. This characteristic speed is in particular based on FAC GW (FM GW for A318 and sharklet aircraft) and on
actual Slat/Flap landing configuration.

Flap retraction minimum speed – F

F represents the minimum flap retraction speed (the minimum speed at which the flaps may be retracted to CONF 1). F computation is based on gross weight.

On MCDU:
F value is displayed on the APPR page. This characteristic speed is in particular based on FM GW.
On PFD:
It is represented by a green “F” on the PFD speed scale and displayed only when slat/flap lever is on position 2 or 3 (CONF 2 or 3). This characteristic speed is in particular based on FAC GW
(FM GW for A318 and sharklet aircraft).

Slat retraction minimum speed – S

S represents the minimum slat retraction speed (the minimum speed at which the slats may be retracted to CONF CLEAN). S computation is based on gross weight.
On MCDU:
S value is displayed on the APPR page. This characteristic speed is in particular based on FM GW.
On PFD:
It is represented by a green “S” on the PFD speed scale and displayed only when slat/flap lever is on position 1 (CONF 1 and 1+F). This characteristic speed is in particular based on FAC GW
(FM GW for A318 and sharklet aircraft).

Green Dot – O

Green Dot so-called “engine out” operating speed, gives an estimate of the speed for best lift to drag ratio. It is also the final take-off speed and it also represents the operational speed of
the clean configuration and the recommended speed in holding in clean configuration.
Green Dot computation is based on Altitude and gross weight (refer to FCOM PRO-SUP-10).

On MCDU:
Green Dot value is displayed on the APPR page. This characteristic speed is in particular based on FM GW.
On PFD:
It is represented by a green dot on the PFD speed scale and displayed only when slat/flap lever is on CLEAN position and when landing gear not compressed. This characteristic speed is in
particular based on FAC GW (FM GW for A318 and sharklet aircraft).

Approach speed – VAPP

VAPP represents the approach speed target of the selected landing configuration.

On MCDU:
VAPP (FM) displayed on APPR page is mainly computed from FM GW and inserted Slats/Flaps Configuration:

VAPP = VLS (FM GW, forecasted Slat/Flap conf) + 1/3 Tower headwind component
This value being limited by VLS + 5kts as min value and VLS + 15kts as max value (Refer to FCOM DSC-22_30-90).

VAPP (FM) can be manually modified by the crew, depending on the Slat/Flap selection, the use of A/THR and encountered wind.

Note: Vapp ; VLS speeds and corrections to apply (∆) are available in QRH chapter 4.

On PFD:
VAPP is not displayed on PFD.
However, the approach IAS target (often assimilated to VAPP) is represented by a magenta triangle (managed speed mode) and is computed from FM VAPP. When the FMS approach
phase is activated and aircraft slat/flaps are set in landing configuration (3 or full) with A/THR engaged in managed speed, the target followed by FMGC is the approach IAS target.
This target is computed to ensure aircraft will touchdown at least at VAPP speed, and this even if the headwind component becomes null shortly before touchdown. Such a target is
elaborated thanks to VAPP (from FM), to Tower headwind (from FM), and thanks to Actual headwind (from FG):

IAS Target = VAPP + (Actual headwind component - Tower headwind component)
This value being limited by VAPP as min value and VFE-5kts (conf full) or VFE (conf 1,2,3) as max value (Refer to FCOM DSC-22_30-90 / SPEED MODE IN APPROACH PHASE).
Page 8 of 12
Page 9 of 12
TROUBLESHOOTING LINKED TO GW ISSUES
“CHECK GW” or “CHECK WEIGHT” message on MCDU

Report:
Airlines report that “CHECK GW” or “CHECK WEIGHT” message is displayed on MCDU.

Answer:
GW is computed by FAC and FMGC from different data. In flight, FM GW is continuously crosschecked with aircraft gross weight value computed in the FAC. If both GW differ by more than
7 tons, the “CHECK GW” message is displayed on MCDU.

Difference must be done between single report and recurrent report of CHECK GW Message:

Single Report:
During flight, FCOM procedure PRO-SUP-22-10 / Other Abnormal Procedures / “CHECK WEIGHT (or GW)” message must be applied.
On ground, cargo weight, pay load, load & trim sheet, ZFW, FOB must be checked.
In case those parameters are consistent and coherent, the root cause of this discrepancy can either be due to:
a FAC GW miscomputation,
And/or, an erroneous FM GW.
Or an FMGC – FAC interface issue.
In this case AIRBUS would recommend monitoring of affected aircraft and to perform “Recurrent CHECK GW Message” troubleshooting in case of event re-occurrence.

Recurrent CHECK GW Message:
Operators should first refer to TSM TASK 22-82-00-810-823 “CHECK GW Message Systematically Shown on the MCDU”, that can be supplemented with the following recommendations:

a) Relative to FAC GW miscomputation

FAC Gross weight is computed thanks to many input parameters; however, as per our in service experience, a miscomputation of the FAC GW is more likely due to air data or IR data issues.
In addition to TSM TASK 22-82-00-810-823, following trouble shooting actions could be tried:

TSM task 31-13-00-810-998: "Altitude or Airspeed Discrepancy between CAPT PFD and F/O PFD"
AMM task 34-13-00-720-009-A: "Functional Test of the Altitude and Airspeed Data (A/C with RVSM capability on three ADIRUs)"
Check of IRS computation accuracy as per AMM task 34-12-34-200-001

b) Relative to erroneous FM GW

FM Gross weight is computed thanks to Zero Fuel Weight (ZFW) and Fuel On Board (FOB); a miscomputation of FM GW is likely due to a wrong entry of Zero Fuel Weight in MCDU or more
rarely to a fuel issue (FOB depends on FQI and/or FF)
As a consequence if previous recommendations did not highlight any findings, Airbus suggests checking fuel on board and fuel parameters in order to find a potential misbehavior.

Thus, AIRBUS would recommend following troubleshooting:
A/C weighing & balancing as per AMM 08-10-00-200-001 to check the empty weight
Check if any FQI/FF fault is reported in PFR/logbook and apply dedicated TSM task.

c) Relative to FMGC-FAC interface

In case FAC does not receive valid FMS data from FMGC, the FAC will use a default initialization GW to start its computation (10 seconds after liftoff). This default initialization GW depends
on the aircraft type and in the kind of invalidity detected (no data or out of range data).
To be noticed that in case only FMS CG (Center of Gravity) is invalid, the FAC will also invalidate the FMS GW. The default initialization GW is also used in this case.

In case the default initialization GW is used, if the actual GW is far from the default value, a large FAC GW vs. FM GW discrepancy will occur 10s after liftoff. If the discrepancy is above 7
tons, the CHECK WEIGHT message will immediately appear on MCDU.

Thus, if a “CHECK WEIGHT “ or “CHECK GW” message is reported just after taking off, the defect lies at FMGC-FAC interface. If no failure highlights a failed FMGC-FAC ARINC link in PFR, the
event might be due to:

No crew entry of ZFWCG in MCDU init B page
No maintenance action necessary
BLOCK FUEL <TAXI FUEL entered in MCDU init B page:
Such entry generates an abnormal CG computation by FMS, which invalidate this data. Once such incoherent data are entered via MCDU, the CG calculation remains invalid until
a FMS long reset is performed (10 minutes).
This FMS software anomaly is described in TFU 22.70.00.070 .
To avoid reoccurrence of event if aircraft is not depowered, we recommend resetting both FMGC for at least 10 minutes before the following flight.
Page 10 of 12
“VAPP” too close to VLS on PFDs

Report:
Airlines sometimes report that “VAPP” (IAS target) is too close to VLS on PFD (below 5kts).

Answer:
Airbus would like to inform Airlines that “VAPP” on PFD (IAS target) is based on FM VLS while VLS on PFD is computed by FAC. As a consequence an underestimation of FM VLS or an
overestimation of FAC VLS can lead to the reported misbehavior.
In such a situation, Airbus suspects:
Either an overestimation of FAC GW, However, as the AOA tolerance is 0.5°, in some extreme cases FAC GW/VLS can be overestimated by up to 5t/5kt without any AOA defect on
aircraft. For those cases AOA replacement might not solve the issue even if the discrepancy is due to AOA accuracy.
Or, an underestimation of FM GW,
Or, a discrepancy between forecasted landing Slat/Flap conf and actual landing Salt/Flap conf (in fact if conf full was selected in MCDU as landing conf and if conf 3 is finally used,
FAC VLS will be higher than FM VLS)

Airbus suggests Airlines to carry out the following:
Check if the forecasted landing conf match the actual landing conf
Perform all recommendations given in §4.1

“VAPP” on PFD higher than VAPP on MCDU

Report:
Airlines sometimes report that VAPP between PFD and MCDU are not consistent, “VAPP” on PFD being higher than VAPP on MCDU.

Answer:
Airbus would like to inform Airlines that approach speed target displayed on PFD (magenta triangle) is not the VAPP but the IAS target followed by FMGC during approach. Such a target is
elaborated thanks to VAPP (from FM / displayed on MCDU), to Tower headwind (from FM), and thanks to Actual headwind (from FG):

IAS Target = VAPP + (Actual headwind component - Tower headwind component)
This value being limited by VAPP as min value and VFE-5kts (conf full) or VFE (conf 1,2,3) as max value (Refer to FCOM DSC-22_30-90 / SPEED MODE IN APPROACH PHASE).

Thus, during approach, if actual headwind component is higher than the tower headwind component entered in MCDU, the IAS speed target on PFD will be higher than the VAPP displayed
on MCDU.

Page 11 of 12
Characteristic speed discrepancy between PFDs and MCDU

Report:
Airlines sometimes report that characteristic speeds (VLS, F, S, O) displayed on both PFDs differ with the characteristic speed displayed on MCDU.

Answer:
First of all, Airbus would like to inform Airlines that the characteristic speeds accuracy tolerances for FAC computation are as follows:
Clean aircraft:
Green dot: +/-5kts
VLS: +/-4kts
Conf full:
VLS: +/-3kts
In addition, FMS performance model used to compute the characteristic speeds has an accuracy within +/-2kts.

As a consequence, it might be possible to get a 5kt discrepancy between VLS shown on PFD and VLS shown on MCDU perf approach page without any defect on aircraft.

If the observed discrepancy is higher than her above given accuracies, Airbus mainly suspects that FAC or FM GW is erroneous. Thus, AIRBUS would recommend performing
troubleshooting described in §4.1.

Remarks on FAC and FMGC standards

FAC Standard PN B397BAM617 has been primarily developed to match the A318 specificities. For this specific aircraft type, FAC PN B397BAM617 software has been modified to perform
the computation of its characteristic speeds from FMS Gross Weight. This technical solution has also been retained for all aircraft fitted with sharklets.
For A319/A320/A321, computation of FAC characteristic speeds (VLS, S, F and Green Dot) from FM GW is also available via the activation of an option available through pin programming.
This option is available when FAC Std B397BAM617 and later standards is installed on aircraft. This option obviously avoids discrepancy between characteristic speeds displayed on PFD
and those displayed on MCDU.

From FAC standards with P/N higher than B397BAM515, GW computation algorithm was refined and some slight inaccuracies of aerodynamic model were corrected. Thus FAC upgrade to
FAC PN B397BAM617 or higher could reduce slight GW/characteristic speeds discrepancies encountered on some parts of weight/CG aircraft envelope.

On Pegasus FMGC standard (P1), VLS estimation algorithm accuracy slightly exceed the +/- 2kt normal accuracy given in § 4.4. (max error being about 3kts on A320 in forward CG
configuration).
Page 12 of 12
DOCUMENTATION

FCOM DSC-22-30-90 / SPEED MODE IN APPROACH PHASE
FCOM DSC-31-40 / INDICATIONS ON PFD
FCOM PRO-SUP-10 OPERATING SPEEDS DEFINITION
FCOM PRO-SUP-22-10 / Other Abnormal Procedures / “CHECK WEIGHT (or GW)” message
FCOM DSC-22-20-50-10 /MCDU – Page Description / FUEL PREDICTION Page

FCTM N0-100 APPROACH GENERAL / VAPP
FCTM N0-100 APPROACH GENERAL / GROUND SPEED MINI
FCTM AO-010 ABNORMAL OPERATIONS / VAPP DETERMINATIONS

QRH FPE-IFL VAPP DETERMINATION
QRH FPE-SPD OPERATING SPEEDS

SB 22-1057 FMGC- REDUCE VAPP FOR A320 CFM & IAE ENGINES
SB 22-1077 FMGC- DEACTIVATE SB 22-1057
SB 22-1229 FAC- COMPUTATION OF CHARACTERISTIC SPEEDS FROM FM GW

TFU 22.73.00.007 MCDU/PFD GREEN DOT DISCREPANCY
TFU 22.73.00.009 “CHECK GW” ON MCDU
TFU 22.73.00.023 FS: WRONG “S” AND “F” SPEEDS ON PERF APPR PAGE
TFU 22.70.00.070 FMS CG dashed for several successive flights with possible CHECK WEIGHT message

AMM 08-10-00-200-001 A/C WEIGHING AND BALANCING
AMM 34-10-00-170-001&002 FLUSHING OF THE TOTAL AND STATIC PRESSURES LINES
AMM 34-11-00-720-001 FUNCTIONAL TEST OF THE ADMS
AMM 34-12-34-200-001 CHECK OF IRS COMPUTATION ACCURACY
AMM 34-13-00-720-009-A FUNCTIONAL TEST OF THE ALTITUDE AND AIRSPEED DATA
AMM 31-32-00-869-002-A PROCEDURE FOR CLASS 3 FAULTS READING

TSM TASK 22-82-00-810-823 CHECK GW Message Systematically Shown on the MCDU
TSM TASK 31-13-00-810-998 ALTITUDE OR AIRSPEED DISCREPANCY BETWEEN CAPT PFD AND F/O PFD
TSM TASK 34-11-00-810-861 DIFFERENT ANGLE OF ATTACK VALUE ON THE THREE ADIRUS


A320 - Characteristic Speeds - GW Computations

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Titolo originale

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

A320 - Characteristic Speeds - GW Computations

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Page 1 of 12

GROSS WEIGHTS AND ASSOCIATED CHARACTERISTIC SPEEDS COMPUTATIONS ON SINGLE AISLE

Model used Vs. Aircraft flight phase

Potrebbero piacerti anche