The HUD have been designed and implemented on the P-8A. Quoting bikerthai ( Reply 15): Good pull. It's would be a lot simpler to change the under-the-hood parts but keep the human-machine interface constant. It's certainly technically possible, although physically moving the panel would bring in a host of new certification testing. Quoting odwyerpw ( Reply 12): So, perhaps there is room to take advantage of newer technology that might push the overhead panel up a critical inch or two to ease egress/ingress into the pilot seats, but still maintain identical operational characteristics? Pilot ergonomics don't show up in CASM therefore airlines don't actually care. Quoting aviateur ( Reply 11): it's the ergonomics, stupid! As for sun visors, Boeing continues the proud tradition of providing them through Jeppesen. A side-sill clip in the 737 cockpit is going to be tricky.the 777 and 787 ones are great. Quoting aviateur ( Reply 11): And while we're at it: how about a pen holder, a side-sill clipboard that you can actually use, and some decent sun visors. The A380 and 787 don't even have that (and not for technology limitations).ain't gonna happen on a 737. Quoting aviateur ( Reply 11): How about a QWERTY-style keyboard on the ACARS and FMS interfaces. So, perhaps there is room to take advantage of newer technology that might push the overhead panel up a critical inch or two to ease egress/ingress into the pilot seats, but still maintain identical operational characteristics? It might not be too far fetched of an idea that the overhead panel could be improved if it cuts costs and maintaince with out violating the type rating. If you look at fotos of the overhead panel.they look quite different on many 757/767 planes, yet you still enjoy a common type rating. (credit to: B757 & 767 Flight Deck Differences (by HAWK21M in Tech Ops))
The squib test lights are different, there is two test switches and only the test switch one will light up the APU light because there is only one squib for the APU. There are 6 switches one for each system for the tail and one for each system going to the wings. On the 757 you have hydraulic isolation switches for the 3 systems going to the tail but on the 767 you can isolate the wings aswell. (credit to: 767/757 Cockpit Differences (by Ups763 in Tech Ops))Ĥ. Anti-Ice panel is different to allow an added system. The Hydraulic control panel is a little different. The B7672 has a very different maintenance panel (P61) than the B757. The B767-200s have a panel for Fuel Jettison. The air conditioning, hydraulic, and bleed air portions of the panels are slightly different. Also, The overhead panel is slightly different in each.
I always found this page useful: it shows the extent that the two planes differ from a handling perspective (ground & air), yet enjoy a common type rating.Ģ.
#737 max cockpit windows
Afterall, not much was done to the overhead area after the eyebrow windows were removed.Īfterall, the 757/767 maintain common type ratings, but the cockpits are not absolute duplicates of one another.ġ. Perhaps something could be applied that is cheaper to produce/install, cheaper to maintain, asthetically pleasing, but still maintain complete backwards compatability and common type rating.
0 kommentar(er)
