VoyForums
[ Show ]
Support VoyForums
[ Shrink ]
VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time ]
Subject: Re: Wing anti-ice N2


Author:
Stéphane Paquet
[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]
Date Posted: 19:06:13 01/14/02 Mon
In reply to: Nicolas Bacon 's message, "Re: Wing anti-ice N1" on 13:52:42 01/03/02 Thu

Gentlemen. Nicholas is right on the money on this one. As an ex-Bombardier geek, I can attest to the fact that the requirement for 78% N2 is an Air Canada-ism, and has nothing to do with the certification (Mot,Faa or Jaa) of the RJ. The green-amber arc shown with wing A-ice on is simply a reminder that you may need an average of 78% N2 during single engine operation to properly feed both wing A-ice ducts with the 14th isol valve open.

However, since the EICAS integration of the RJ is not quite that of an Airbus or late Boeing product, the system does not reckognize single from dual engine operation, hence the presence of the N2 arcs during normal ops.

It's just one item in a long list of extra procedures the company has imposed on itself over the years which, again, have nothing to do with the certification of the RJ. I guess it's all extra safety though, but indeed it does add to the work load of an otherwise easy jet to fly (meaning: we could simplify here.....).

Just my thoughts here.

Cheers,

Pacman

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]


Post a message:
This forum requires an account to post.
[ Create Account ]
[ Login ]
[ Contact Forum Admin ]


Forum timezone: GMT-5
VF Version: 3.00b, ConfDB:
Before posting please read our privacy policy.
VoyForums(tm) is a Free Service from Voyager Info-Systems.
Copyright © 1998-2019 Voyager Info-Systems. All Rights Reserved.