747 engine takeoff power

On 11/28/04 1:18 PM, in article
, "Elmshoot"
wrote:

So, you're gonna bid the MD-[9]11 so you can git kilt in a civil airplane
after
all those years in [E]A-6s?!? Can I have your flight jacket?


John,
Now that you mention it, I must be nuts! Yep when I make the move I will be
chasing the $$ otherwise being in the right seat of the 727 has a lot of
benifits, although some how I spent another holiday away from home since I
ended up in Toronto for T-Day but my wife was very supportive. We just took a
one day delay. Heck after one deployment we had Christmas in Februaury.
Sparky

Ah yes, Christmas with the company. Now THAT'S some whacky stuff.

--Woody

(Elmshoot) wrote in message ...
Gord,
Concerning the weight shift and CG movemnt to get better cruise economy.
SNIP:

FWIW the L1011 was operated that way - retaining fuel in the #2 outer
tanks moved the CG back in cruise flight to reduce horizontal tail
trim drag. This fuel was used later in flight, of course.
Walt BJ

"Gord Beaman" wrote in message
...
"Keith Willshaw" wrote:


Well yes but the aircraft concerned was not a 747
it was an Airbus A310

http://aviation-safety.net/database/1994/940323-0.htm

Keith



Ok...thanks Keith, in the report that I read the tail tank trim
was being used. Are you saying that the A310 doesn't use tail
fuel trim?

Nope, I heard that the aircraft was out of trim but
not the details

and are you familiar with this system?

Sorry I am not

Keith

(WaltBJ) wrote:

(Elmshoot) wrote in message ...
Gord,
Concerning the weight shift and CG movemnt to get better cruise economy.
SNIP:

FWIW the L1011 was operated that way - retaining fuel in the #2 outer
tanks moved the CG back in cruise flight to reduce horizontal tail
trim drag. This fuel was used later in flight, of course.
Walt BJ

Thanks Walt, I hadn't heard of using 'wing fuel' that way but of
course it would work, might not be quite as effective as tail
tanks because of less moment being available at the wing tanks
--

-Gord.
(use gordon in email)