Sponsor Message:
Aviation Technical / Operations Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
What Is That Scope On The 787 ZA002 Tail?  
User currently offlineferpe From France, joined Nov 2010, 2804 posts, RR: 59
Posted (2 years 12 months 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 5165 times:

Watching this beautiful video one suddenly realizes, the bird does not want to be photographed from the right hand side, the reason: there is a big scope type air inlet on the right side of the vertical tail, why?:

http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/fl...ideo-of-note-chasing-a-787-on.html

For flight test equipment (could well be)? or the temporary fix for the APU fuel spill problem (seems a bit big for that)?

Anyone who knows?

BTW the video is awesome as it the 787 flying, those wings reminds one of a real bird, a big beautiful one like an Eagle or Falcon soaring.

[Edited 2011-10-23 11:53:01]


Non French in France
20 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineFly2HMO From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (2 years 12 months 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 5136 times:

Quoting ferpe (Thread starter):
scope

its SCOOP.

Quoting ferpe (Thread starter):
why?

It's just the APU air inlet. The 767 and 777 have similar ones.

[Edited 2011-10-23 12:26:35]

User currently offlineferpe From France, joined Nov 2010, 2804 posts, RR: 59
Reply 2, posted (2 years 12 months 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 4902 times:

Quoting Fly2HMO (Reply 1):
It's just the APU air inlet. The 767 and 777 have similar ones.

OK, thought so after pondering for a while but why run the APU during a flight like this?



Non French in France
User currently offlineStarlionblue From Greenland, joined Feb 2004, 17068 posts, RR: 66
Reply 3, posted (2 years 12 months 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 4867 times:

Quoting ferpe (Reply 2):
Quoting Fly2HMO (Reply 1):
It's just the APU air inlet. The 767 and 777 have similar ones.

OK, thought so after pondering for a while but why run the APU during a flight like this?

Testing it presumably.



"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots."
User currently offlineHAWK21M From India, joined Jan 2001, 31684 posts, RR: 56
Reply 4, posted (2 years 12 months 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 4829 times:

Quoting ferpe (Reply 2):

OK, thought so after pondering for a while but why run the APU during a flight like this?

To check its functioning as it serves as an Alternative source In case the Electrical source from one Engine is unavailable.

Just an added doubt.....Since the APU will have pneumatic compressors too,if so what capacity as compared to the Engines.



Think of the brighter side!
User currently offlineferpe From France, joined Nov 2010, 2804 posts, RR: 59
Reply 5, posted (2 years 12 months 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 4812 times:

Quoting HAWK21M (Reply 4):
Since the APU will have pneumatic compressors too,if so what capacity as compared to the Engines.

The 787 APU is all electrical IIRC.



Non French in France
User currently offlinetdscanuck From Canada, joined Jan 2006, 12709 posts, RR: 80
Reply 6, posted (2 years 12 months 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 4684 times:

Quoting HAWK21M (Reply 4):
Just an added doubt.....Since the APU will have pneumatic compressors too

Ferpe is right...the 787 APU has no pneumatic capability. There's no point, the airplane doesn't have a pneumatic system. The only pneumatics are on the engine itself and they're not functions that you'd need the APU to provide anyway.

Tom.

[Edited 2011-10-24 10:07:40]

User currently offlineN243NW From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 1637 posts, RR: 20
Reply 7, posted (2 years 12 months 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 4583 times:

Quoting ferpe (Reply 5):

The 787 APU is all electrical IIRC.

Yep. The APU has two 250kVA generators, the same as each engine. As tdscanuck also mentioned, it's impractical to use the APU to provide pneumatics for engine anti-ice.



B-52s don't take off. They scare the ground away.
User currently offlineDC8FriendShip From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 243 posts, RR: 3
Reply 8, posted (2 years 12 months 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 4576 times:

Quoting tdscanuck (Reply 6):
There's no point, the airplane doesn't have a pneumatic system.

So what type of airconditioning and pressurization system does it have? Is there an air cycle pack at all or is it all compressors and vapor cycle?



Come fly the Friendly Skies of United
User currently offlinetdscanuck From Canada, joined Jan 2006, 12709 posts, RR: 80
Reply 9, posted (2 years 12 months 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 4485 times:

Quoting N243NW (Reply 7):
The APU has two 250kVA generators

Two x 225 kW...not exactly the same as the engines, but pretty close.

Quoting N243NW (Reply 7):
As tdscanuck also mentioned, it's impractical to use the APU to provide pneumatics for engine anti-ice.

Not only is it impractical, there's no reason for the capability. The only time you don't have engine bleed air available for engine anti-ice is if the engine isn't running...at which point you don't care if you have engine anti-ice or not.

Quoting DC8FriendShip (Reply 8):
So what type of airconditioning and pressurization system does it have? Is there an air cycle pack at all or is it all compressors and vapor cycle?

Four electric compressors feed two conventional air cycle machines.

Tom.


User currently offlineHAWK21M From India, joined Jan 2001, 31684 posts, RR: 56
Reply 10, posted (2 years 12 months 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 4447 times:

Quoting tdscanuck (Reply 6):

Ferpe is right...the 787 APU has no pneumatic capability. There's no point, the airplane doesn't have a pneumatic system. The only pneumatics are on the engine itself and they're not functions that you'd need the APU to provide anyway.

So since the APU does not provide bleed......Its mearly an electrical back up.
what occurs in case of an IFSD.....The Two Pneumatic compressors on the remaining side is the only source available for Bleed to pressurize.



Think of the brighter side!
User currently offlinetdscanuck From Canada, joined Jan 2006, 12709 posts, RR: 80
Reply 11, posted (2 years 12 months 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 4412 times:

Quoting HAWK21M (Reply 10):
So since the APU does not provide bleed......Its mearly an electrical back up.

Correct.

Quoting HAWK21M (Reply 10):
what occurs in case of an IFSD.

You start the APU and the APU powers the buses formerly powered by the dead engine.

Quoting HAWK21M (Reply 10):
The Two Pneumatic compressors on the remaining side is the only source available for Bleed to pressurize.

No. That's one of the joys of the more-electric architecture...it's really easy to switch electrons around. Any generator can power any bus. Loss of the L engine doesn't mean loss of the L air compressors or pack.

Tom.


User currently offlineN243NW From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 1637 posts, RR: 20
Reply 12, posted (2 years 12 months 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 4345 times:

Quoting tdscanuck (Reply 9):
Two x 225 kW...not exactly the same as the engines, but pretty close.

Whoops. Thanks for the correction...



B-52s don't take off. They scare the ground away.
User currently offlineferpe From France, joined Nov 2010, 2804 posts, RR: 59
Reply 13, posted (2 years 12 months 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 4220 times:

I think I have the reason for the APU scoop being open = APU running.

When you do a photo shoot like this you have to fly pretty advanced formation with the photo plane (a biz-jet with a roof mounted camera it seems). Changing flanks and passing each other requires excess speed and power vs the other plane, further maneuvering around each other like this at close distance is dangerous stuff even for experienced pilots (ref XB70 accident with chase plane), therefore this formation flying is done a pretty low speed where things happen at a slower tempo if someone does a tiny error.

The low speed means the engines are at low RPM, means the alternators are marginal for delivering the A/C electricity, hence the electrical system automatically starts the APU as backup.


BTW why is the keel beam protruding below the wing-root fairings, the only non elegant solution on a beautiful bird   .



Non French in France
User currently offlinetdscanuck From Canada, joined Jan 2006, 12709 posts, RR: 80
Reply 14, posted (2 years 12 months 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 4180 times:

Quoting ferpe (Reply 13):
The low speed means the engines are at low RPM, means the alternators are marginal for delivering the A/C electricity

That's part of the reason aircraft don't use alternators...modern large aircraft generators either have internal transmissions to get the right RPM (IDG's) or put out variable frequency (VFG's). Either way, you get full power from the generators regardless of engine speed.

Quoting ferpe (Reply 13):
BTW why is the keel beam protruding below the wing-root fairings, the only non elegant solution on a beautiful bird

It's always been that way...I always assumed it was to cut down the weight of the wing-body fairing. It would be silly to expand the entire fairing just to make an aesthetic change to cover an inch of keep beam.

Tom.


User currently offlineferpe From France, joined Nov 2010, 2804 posts, RR: 59
Reply 15, posted (2 years 12 months 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 4116 times:

Quoting tdscanuck (Reply 14):
modern large aircraft generators either have internal transmissions to get the right RPM (IDG's) or put out variable frequency (VFG's). Either way, you get full power from the generators regardless of engine speed.

It is intuitive that an IDG keeps the power constant, the ID sucks more tourque to keep the RPM constant. To keep the VFD power constant the generators must also suck more mechanical torque from the engine at low RPM, IMHO this should be a bit tricky to handle for the engine guys. On the electrical side how is this torque vs RPM transfer happening?



Non French in France
User currently offlinetdscanuck From Canada, joined Jan 2006, 12709 posts, RR: 80
Reply 16, posted (2 years 12 months 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 4008 times:

Quoting ferpe (Reply 15):
It is intuitive that an IDG keeps the power constant, the ID sucks more tourque to keep the RPM constant.

Not really...the IDG alters its gear ratio to keep the generator spinning at the correct RPM regardless of engine RPM (within the range of operation). Torque at the generator depends on generator load...torque to the engine is the generator torque times the current gear ratio of the IDG.

Quoting ferpe (Reply 15):
To keep the VFD power constant the generators must also suck more mechanical torque from the engine at low RPM

IDG's and VFG's aren't constant power devices...they only extract as much energy as the electrical load they're feeding at the time. At lower RPM, for a given power, both the IDG and VFG require more torque.

Quoting ferpe (Reply 15):
IMHO this should be a bit tricky to handle for the engine guys.

On large engines, the generator extraction is typically a relatively small fraction of the overall power moving through the spool (and there are other loads on the gearbox besides the generator) so it's not as bad as you might think. The FADEC will control idle speeds (and VSV schedules on engines so equipped) to keep the gearbox supplied at adequate RPM.

Quoting ferpe (Reply 15):
On the electrical side how is this torque vs RPM transfer happening?

The engine is controlled, basically, on RPM. Pratt & Whitney and RR control on other parameters (EPR and TPR respectively) but those boil down to RPM normalized by outside conditions. So, for a given thrust lever setting, the engine is going to run at a given RPM. Essentially all engine gearboxes are fixed ratio, so that means the generator input is spinning at a particular RPM. The load on the generator determines how much torque in on the generator shaft. As load changes, torque changes. This feeds back into the engine (via the gearbox) and tends to try to slow down the spool that's driving the gearbox. The engine controller will see that slowdown and increase fuel supply to maintain the target RPM.

Tom.


User currently offlineferpe From France, joined Nov 2010, 2804 posts, RR: 59
Reply 17, posted (2 years 12 months 18 hours ago) and read 3944 times:

Thanks for an excellent answer Tom. I guess I assumed a certain load from the A/C but who cares, good explanation of what counts.

So why the APU was running is still not obvious. My observations on the formation flying is valid however, normal formation flying is straight forward, sweeping around each other like they did is not, requires 100% discipline (who moves and who fly straight etc).



Non French in France
User currently offlinenomadd22 From United States of America, joined Feb 2008, 1881 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted (2 years 12 months 15 hours ago) and read 3916 times:

I thought generator speed was important for frequency, not power. Do they put out DC that gets converted to AC?


Andy Goetsch
User currently offlinetdscanuck From Canada, joined Jan 2006, 12709 posts, RR: 80
Reply 19, posted (2 years 12 months 15 hours ago) and read 3912 times:

Quoting ferpe (Reply 17):
I guess I assumed a certain load from the A/C but who cares, good explanation of what counts.

It's not a constant load...how hard the compressors work depends (a lot) on what the required airflow is, altitude, and what temperature the packs are trying to produce.

Quoting ferpe (Reply 17):
So why the APU was running is still not obvious.

In flight testing there are a lot of reasons to leave the APU running for an entire flight...I don't know why they did it this particular time but I have no idea what other testing they were doing that day

Quoting nomadd22 (Reply 18):
I thought generator speed was important for frequency, not power. Do they put out DC that gets converted to AC?

Generator speed isn't important for power, just the product of speed and torque. IDG's regulate speed to put out constand frequency. VFG's put out AC with a wide frequency range. Modern generator architectures like the A380 and 787 just use wild-frequency AC on the primary buses and skip the whole issue.

Tom.


User currently offlinenomadd22 From United States of America, joined Feb 2008, 1881 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (2 years 12 months 14 hours ago) and read 3885 times:

I adjust the frequency on my generators by turning a screw on the autothrottle. But thanks for making me feel like a caveman.


Andy Goetsch
Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic What Is That Scope On The 787 ZA002 Tail?
Username:
No username? Sign up now!
Password: 


Forgot Password? Be reminded.
Remember me on this computer (uses cookies)
  • Tech/Ops related posts only!
  • Not Tech/Ops related? Use the other forums
  • No adverts of any kind. This includes web pages.
  • No hostile language or criticizing of others.
  • Do not post copyright protected material.
  • Use relevant and describing topics.
  • Check if your post already been discussed.
  • Check your spelling!
  • DETAILED RULES
Add Images Add SmiliesPosting Help

Please check your spelling (press "Check Spelling" above)


Similar topics:More similar topics...
What is this part on the tail? posted Sun Jun 29 2008 16:53:07 by Imiakhtar
What Is This Hump On The 77W? posted Fri Oct 8 2010 15:00:07 by c5load
What Is This Flap On The DC10 For? posted Sat Jul 28 2007 01:52:21 by NEMA
What Is This Panel On The A-380? posted Thu Jul 5 2007 00:37:43 by SLCPilot
What Is This Lump On The 737? posted Sun Oct 1 2006 13:18:37 by Monteycarlos
What Is This For (On The Bae 146) posted Sun Aug 15 2004 15:47:02 by DeltaWings
What Is This 'thingy' On The A340 posted Sun Aug 15 2004 10:21:32 by Nwfltattendant
What Is This On The 787 Tail posted Thu Dec 17 2009 10:57:31 by Golfradio
What Is That On The Wing? posted Fri Nov 14 2003 00:44:54 by KYIPpilot
What's That On The Concorde Tail? posted Mon May 5 2003 22:37:48 by Bio15

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format