d) Example
On a 1000 NM stage length, the increases in fuel consumption when the center of gravity position is 20% with regards to the fuel consumption when the center of gravity position is 35% are summed up in the following table for an aircraft with a high weight and at a high flight level.
A300-600/A310
2.5
2
1.5 1
0.5 0 -0.5 -1
-1.5 -2
SR variation (%)
A340
Flight Level
Fuel increment (Kg)/1000Nm between a 20% CG and a 35% CG
A319/A320/A321 Negligible
A330 220
A340 380
A310 250
A300-600 230
A. GENERALITIES
3.4. Impact on landing performance
3.4.1. Landing distance or landing weight
The aircraft operating speeds are referenced to the stalling speed. At landing: VApp ≥1.3Vs (1.23Vs1g )
Now, the Vapp value directly impacts the landing distance (or the landing weight).
Vs
V
LD
app
So for a given Landing Distance: the lower the stall speed (Vs) value, the greater landing weight (LW).
Reminder: Forward CG position . High stall speed Aft CG position . Low stall speed.
The further aft the CG, the smaller the LD (the greater the LW).
3.4.2. Basic and alternate CG positions
As for takeoff performances, when determining the aircraft landing performance (LW, LD), the
calculation is always performed at the most forward-certified CG position. Therefore, for aircraft
having a naturally aft CG position (tail heavy aircraft), everyday operations might be penalized
using this very forward value.
Only the A320 has two different certified CG. For the other aircraft, the position of the CG is of no
influence on landing performances as long as it stays within the certified limits.
The important performance as far as landing is concerned is the landing distance. As noted in
the FCOM of the A320, a correction has to be made in the case of an alternate CG.
中国航空网 www.aero.cn
航空翻译 www.aviation.cn
本文链接地址:Getting to Grips with Aircraft Weight and Balance(42)