Jump to content

Sign in to follow this  
Airline2Sim

Ask the Q400 pilot a question.....

Recommended Posts

Is there a way with the Q400 to put an extended centerline from the runway in when there is no approach to the airfield?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is, using the P VOR function in the FMC which draws a virtual VOR radial to a point of your choosing. I can't quite remember how to do it without watching the videos again, however as we did it on the first lesson (seems a long time ago now)  :P

Let me find out. 


website-splash-screen-smaller-.png| Ben Weston www.airline2sim.com 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A question more about the FSX/P3D Pilots edition from Majestic . . When I search for Q400 data practically everything that comes up is the Q400NextGen.  Does your training model use this NextGen upgrade and can you tell the difference in the cockpit between the two?  Has Majestic stated which specific model or year their model is based?

 

Question for the pilots:  I read that a Q400 with a light load, like a short ferry flight handles almost like a different airplane than a Q400 at MTOW.  Any comments on the extremes?

 

Thanks.

 

Ray


When Pigs Fly . Ray Marshall .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think once you enter the PVor, it'll give you the radial to enter on the waypoint definition page.


A question more about the FSX/P3D Pilots edition from Majestic . . When I search for Q400 data practically everything that comes up is the Q400NextGen.  Does your training model use this NextGen upgrade and can you tell the difference in the cockpit between the two?  Has Majestic stated which specific model or year their model is based?

 

Question for the pilots:  I read that a Q400 with a light load, like a short ferry flight handles almost like a different airplane than a Q400 at MTOW.  Any comments on the extremes?

 

Thanks.

 

Ray

 

The differences with the nextgen are primarily cosmetic- in the cockpit we had a digital clock, the cabin provided LED lighting as well as larger overheads, GPWS upgraded to mode 6, and added the option for landing with reduced Np (which is simulated in our Q400)


@raymar

 

The Q was very nimble to say the least, but harder to fly smoothly when empty. Being a very sturdily built airplane, you could expect a very firm landing.


Brendan R, KDXR PHNL KJFK

Type rated: SF34 / DH8 (Q400) / DC9 717 MD-88/ B767 (CFI/II/MEI/ATP)

Majestic Software Q400 Beta Team / Pilot Consultant / Twitter @violinvelocity

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The differences with the nextgen are primarily cosmetic- in the cockpit we had a digital clock, the cabin provided LED lighting as well as larger overheads, GPWS upgraded to mode 6, and added the option for landing with reduced Np (which is simulated in our Q400)

@raymar

 

The Q was very nimble to say the least, but harder to fly smoothly when empty. Being a very sturdily built airplane, you could expect a very firm landing.

Thanks Brendan,

 

Regards,

Ray


When Pigs Fly . Ray Marshall .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Being a very sturdily built airplane, you could expect a very firm landing.

I was just wondering, do pilots of the Q ever give out any passenger announcements giving out any inimitable pilot briefings to educate passengers on the forthcoming bump? I'm assuming that 'very firm' will wake up the passengers :)

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was just wondering, do pilots of the Q ever give out any passenger announcements giving out any inimitable pilot briefings to educate passengers on the forthcoming bump? I'm assuming that 'very firm' will wake up the passengers :)

 

Naw, I think they were all always worried about delays and making their connecting flights more than the landing.


Brendan R, KDXR PHNL KJFK

Type rated: SF34 / DH8 (Q400) / DC9 717 MD-88/ B767 (CFI/II/MEI/ATP)

Majestic Software Q400 Beta Team / Pilot Consultant / Twitter @violinvelocity

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In the RL Q400, when taxiing I notice the prop pitch remains relatively the same (small angle) and then only when the PLs are in alpha the blades increase pitch into a higher angle.

 

In the MS Q400, its almost as if its directly linked to throttle % or throttle position. 

 

In either case, can anyone clarify which one is true?


Cameron Caldwell

CPL (A)

King Air 200 Pilot

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that anyone who flies (as a passenger) regularly on the Q400 knows not to expect creamy smooth touchdowns....

To be honest, I flew FlyBe Newcastle > Gatwick and back twice a week for 5-6 years and although some landings were firm, many were very smooth.   

 

One thing I always noticed was how the Q400 cabin crew used to hate the moment that the aircraft pulls onto the gate, and the pilot feathers the props - it sounds just like the engines have cut (even moreso in real life than in the MJC sim) and of course many passengers would start unclicking the seat belts and standing up to grab their luggage!

 

"LADIES AND GENTLEMEN.... the engines are still running.. please DO NOT unfasten your seat belts at this time!".......

 

So, as I experienced that 30 sec feathering time, about 300 times over the years, I was just wondering what the reason for it was, Ben? ....... Is it to allow cooling before the engines are cut?

 

Cheers,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that anyone who flies (as a passenger) regularly on the Q400 knows not to expect creamy smooth touchdowns....

 

Amen to that, I flew into Sarajevo on the Q400 and as we touched down I thought the wheels were coming through the wings!.. ^_^


AMD Ryzen 7 3700X 4.2 32 gig ram, NVidia 1060 6 gig, Intel 760 SSD M2 NVMe 512 gig, Crucial MX500 SSD

You Tube:- https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC96wsF3D_h5GzNNJnuDH3WQ

Reality Is For People Who Can't Handle Simulation!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In the RL Q400, when taxiing I notice the prop pitch remains relatively the same (small angle) and then only when the PLs are in alpha the blades increase pitch into a higher angle.

 

In the MS Q400, its almost as if its directly linked to throttle % or throttle position. 

 

 

Sorry, I'm not a real world Q400 pilot, but I think that since the engines rpm is constant during the taxi (660 rpm), the only way to vary engine thrust is varying blade pitch, so you get an impression that throttle levers are directly linked to props beta angle.


banner_samdim_q400_nrw.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry, I'm not a real world Q400 pilot, but I think that since the engines rpm is constant during the taxi (660 rpm), the only way to vary engine thrust is varying blade pitch, so you get an impression that throttle levers are directly linked to props beta angle.

 

I think that might be correct. I'm sure Brendan will pitch in (if you pardon the pun) with a response soon enough. To be honest turboprop technology is rather baffling for those of us who aren't particularly technically minded, as unlike jets you've got prop pitch and torque and blade angle to think about. In the Cadet's training we're more concerned with the flying than the systems but in the FO training we do a bit to try to demystify what's actually happening back there when you're pushing and pulling the levers in the flight deck.

 

And Dave - good question. I think it is a cool down as you MUST allow the 30 seconds to pass before shutdown. I'll ask Josh for clarification. 


website-splash-screen-smaller-.png| Ben Weston www.airline2sim.com 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that might be correct. I'm sure Brendan will pitch in (if you pardon the pun) with a response soon enough. To be honest turboprop technology is rather baffling for those of us who aren't particularly technically minded, as unlike jets you've got prop pitch and torque and blade angle to think about. In the Cadet's training we're more concerned with the flying than the systems but in the FO training we do a bit to try to demystify what's actually happening back there when you're pushing and pulling the levers in the flight deck.

 

And Dave - good question. I think it is a cool down as you MUST allow the 30 seconds to pass before shutdown. I'll ask Josh for clarification. 

Hey guys,

 

You're absolutely right @Avi8tor1- in the beta range (which is the area between slightly above flight idle, down to the MAX REV stop), the power levers actually control the blade angle through a "Propeller Electronic Control" unit, and fuel is metered using the FADEC (full authority digital engine control) through a fuel metering unit, to maintain at least 660RPM. As you would expect, if you increase blade angle, the prop would get bogged down with air resistance, and so fuel is increased to keep the engine running at 660. This increased angle allows you to moderate your taxi speed- as well as slow down, without the need for brakes. 

 

More conventional turboprop designs (such as on the Saab 340, King Air/B1900) use "bottom governors" that maintained the engine speed mechanically, but also by metering fuel somehow. The Q400 has all electronic units- it's a very computerized airplane. 

 

____

I don't know why exactly we must observe a 30 second cool-down on the engines (and that time begins when the engines are START/FEATHER and power lever at DISC), but it probably has to do with the ITT stabilization before shutdown, to make sure the ITT fluctuations during taxi don't involve a shock to the turbines on shutdown due to temperature extremes. That's my best guess.

 

Operationally, you can always feather your left engine when you're on the straightaway portion coming into your parking position, using your right engine to carry you through the remaining taxi. That way when you set the parking brake on-blocks, you can shutdown the left engine almost immediately (allowing GPU, the jetbridge, rampers to approach the left side) and shut down the right soon afterward. 


Brendan R, KDXR PHNL KJFK

Type rated: SF34 / DH8 (Q400) / DC9 717 MD-88/ B767 (CFI/II/MEI/ATP)

Majestic Software Q400 Beta Team / Pilot Consultant / Twitter @violinvelocity

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello Gang,

 

When searching for DHC-8-400Q information I see a lot of DHC-8-402Q and not so much 400Q.  Is this significant or just more like a production model number?

 

Regards,

 

Ray


When Pigs Fly . Ray Marshall .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Tom Allensworth,
    Founder of AVSIM Online


  • Flight Simulation's Premier Resource!

    AVSIM is a free service to the flight simulation community. AVSIM is staffed completely by volunteers and all funds donated to AVSIM go directly back to supporting the community. Your donation here helps to pay our bandwidth costs, emergency funding, and other general costs that crop up from time to time. Thank you for your support!

    Click here for more information and to see all donations year to date.
  • Donation Goals

    AVSIM's 2020 Fundraising Goal

    Donate to our annual general fundraising goal. This donation keeps our doors open and providing you service 24 x 7 x 365. Your donation here helps to pay our bandwidth costs, emergency funding, and other general costs that crop up from time to time. We reset this goal every new year for the following year's goal.


    27%
    $6,985.00 of $25,000.00 Donate Now
×
×
  • Create New...