Qavion2

Has the fire handle been pulled? You have plenty of air, but you have all 3 packs running. It's not normal to run all the packs during start (at least on the standard 747). Try cycling the bleed switch OFF/ON. Sometimes this clears latched failures.

On our earlier aircraft, there used to be fuel system logic to prevent refuelling if the stabiliser was not in the 5~7 unit range. A light illuminated on the fuelling panel to advise that HST fuelling was inhibited. Now there is no light or logic, so I guess Boeing deemed it unnecessary. There are 10 level sensors in the tail tank, so I guess they can figure out what the level is, irrespective of angle.

It was engine dependent. Northwest had PW engines. I don't think PW engines had an autostart option until a few years later. PW simply didn't have the technology on their engines. I stand corrected on the message logic (I amended my earlier message), but there were wiring modifications carried out to pump power relays somewhere after 2009 (I don't know if PMDG models these).

As far as I know, weight and balance systems are mostly fitted to freighters (or combis). Freighters don't have stabiliser tanks. Single or dual appears to be simply a customer option (and how deep the customer airline's pockets are). Ballast fuel is related to the CWT. When freighters/combis are empty, fuel is carried in the CWT to help shift the Centre of Gravity forward.

The first 744's came out with PW engines which initially didn't have autostart. I recall that even our first RB211-powered aircraft didn't have autostart, but were later retrofitted.I guess within a few years of 747-400 production. It depends on what aspect of the new fuel system in PMDG. Hydromechanical scavenge pumps? New message logic? Automatic pump shutoff with pump low fuel pressure? The last one was somewhere between 2009 and 2011 (I have wiring diagrams dated 2009 without the updated logic and diagrams with the updated logic dated 2011). Hydromechanical scavenge pumps have been around much longer. At least since August 1989. Qantas' first -400 had the #1 Aux pump.

Technically speaking, the test induces an artificial fire signal in the AFOLTS* cards, not the overheat detectors themselves. *Automatic Fire/Overheat Logic Test System The turbine overheat detectors are only found on the RB211. These are overheat "switches", which talk directly to the AFOLTS (computer) cards. The normal (cowl) fire detectors (or "loops" as they are known) are found on all engine types. The loops feed into specialised detector cards. These determine if the signals from the loops are faults or fires. The detector cards then talk to the AFOLTS cards. The AFOLTS cards process test pushbutton and fire/fault signals and then send signals to the rest of the aircraft to produce lights, bells and messages. There are very few indicator lights on the flight deck which are not illuminated by the Master Dim and Test System. The engine/APU fire and squib tests lights are some of these (including the fire handles). Other lights that come to mind are the big orange EVAC light on the pedestal and the Stab Greenband forward/aft lights. On some Boeing aircraft, some light tests may be affected by the configuration of aircraft switches.

.. and it doesn't look like the APU is running.

Sorry.. I used the expression Ground Handling Bus instead of Ground Service Bus at one point in my response. But, yes, the brake indicator runs off the GSB. I recall that PMDG's 744 automatically powers the GSB when the aircraft is powered using the GHB (even though manual intervention is required at door Left 2 on the real aircraft) I doubt this was a factor in the video, however.

Bare weight of the RB211-524G/H, according to my manuals is 9,681lbs (4391Kg). I seem to remember earlier discussions on this as to whether this included the reverser assembly. I think reversers are included in the bare weight of a RB211, but not on a GE. So where does the (huge) extra 5th pod "weight" come from? I guess the mounting strut weight is included, the fairing panel weight, etc. The fan blades are removed, so that should reduce the weight significantly. I guess the weight penalty is based on aerodynamic drag at critical phases.

For takeoff and landing performance determination, the spare engine certified weight of 6,786Kg is used. For loading calculations (possibly airline specific), the spare engine weights and indexes applied in the Flight Management (FM) load planning system are: RB211-524D4 6,537kg RB211-524G/H series 6,610Kg RB211-524G-T/H-T series 6,524Kg

Did you try a RECALL on the EICAS control panel to see if the red returned?

Engineering should check to see how long the engine was at specific temperatures/speeds, to see what maintenance checks will be required (not always an engine change, but may simply be an inspection). After maintenance has been completed, the "exceedance" has to be erased from the non-volatile memories in the instrument display computers using the CDU Central Maintenance Computer ("Chapter 71") pages on the real aircraft.

Actually, I was talking about the selected heading cursor here. The pressure sensor needs power. Without power, the needle will go to the zero endstop. Wiring Schematic reference 32-41-03. During Standby Power operation, the Ground Handling Bus is unpowered. Cheers JHW P.S. I don't have the latest version of QOTS II, so perhaps someone can recheck these and submit a ticket?

Did you accidentally activate Pogo Stick power after you turned off the engines ?? 🤔 Off topic, but I noticed a few other curiosities in that video clip: Should the PFD and ND blank after switching off the engines? Wouldn't Standby Power take over almost immediately? The Upper EICAS seemed ok. Shouldn't there be an [RA] flag on the PFD with no main bus power to the Radio Altimeters? Should there be an [FD] flag on the PFD? I'm not sure how it would behave with the MCP unpowered. Should the heading cursor be in view on the ND? The MCP is dead, so no computed data. Shouldn't the Brake Pressure Gauge be showing fully zero (power normally comes from the Ground Service Bus)? Unfortunately, I can't test this on the real aircraft anymore.

My 2 cents' worth: In the real world, you would almost never start turning a 747 straight away. You would normally clear most of the parking area before turning. This way, there would be less chance of colliding with aerobridges, mobile steps, aircraft on the next gate, light poles and lines of parked cargo equipment. Taxiways also provide a wider space for the turn. To get a sharp turn in a small amount of space, initially you may reach the nose gear turn angle limit for towing (65 degrees). Also, the larger the steering angle, the more strain there will be on the main gear. More than 20 degrees of nose gear angle forces the body gear steering to activate. This helps alleviate the twisting forces on the main gear during sharp turns. Anyway, it's not something I would recommend for a beginner tug driver. Pushing an aircraft is a little like reverse parking a very long trailer/caravan