Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Guest BeaverDriver

APU Question

Recommended Posts

Not sure what you mean by the -8. The RAT is for Hydraulic System 3 only.

 

 

I guess I skipped a step or two in the comment :Tounge:  I meant they had a rethink regarding the addition of a RAT to replace some of the functionality of the engines. I assume the -8 doesn't have the capability of using this hydraulic pressure to generate electricity? The 767 couldn't do this either (It had a RAT, but it couldn't divert the hydraulic pressure to the HMGs to produce electricity from hydraulic pressure).

 

Cheers

John H Watson.


John H Watson (retired 744/767 Avionics engineer)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess I skipped a step or two in the comment :Tounge:  I meant they had a rethink regarding the addition of a RAT to replace some of the functionality of the engines. I assume the -8 doesn't have the capability of using this hydraulic pressure to generate electricity? The 767 couldn't do this either (It had a RAT, but it couldn't divert the hydraulic pressure to the HMGs to produce electricity from hydraulic pressure).

 

Cheers

John H Watson.

No Boeing still has not given up their stance that the statistical likelihood that you lose all 4 engines is completely unlikely. Even though it has happened a couple times and has almost happened to one of our -8s (multiple engine rollback due to icing).

Brian Thibodeaux | B747-400/8, C-130 Flight Engineer, CFI, Type Rated: BE190, DC-9 (MD-80), B747-400

beta.gif   

My Liveries

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

what bring Boeing to re-design from the classic where the APU can be started in the air then the -400 no more?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It was probably safer not to have it operate in the air (statistically).

 

They have been known to catch fire. There is only one fire bottle, but I suppose another could be added, but it's difficult to know what's happening to it, though, when it's sitting in the tailcone.

 

Cheers

John H Watson


John H Watson (retired 744/767 Avionics engineer)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

John,

 

thanks for the head. never asked the maintenance when they did an overhaul of the classic fleet, no ops bulletins associated with it, so i imagine with the years more and more issues or the wore out ... i ve seen -341 and -269b with still the sticker operation in flight authorized ...

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.
×
×
  • Create New...