Analysis: Airbus Corporate Jet

Analysis
Airbus Corporate Jet
Boasting the largest cabin cross section and some of the most advanced
systems among its peers, Airbus’ airliner in pinstripes is ready to compete.
By Fred George
Photography by Mike Vines
wo decades ago, Airbus revolutionized airliner design by introducing
the then-radical A320. It had a wider
cabin compared to conventional singleaisle aircraft. It was fitted with a new-gener at ion su per-critical wing for higher
cruise speed and better fuel economy. It
was en d owed with the most-ad v an c e d
glass cockpit of any airliner yet produced.
And it was the first subsonic aircraft to be
equipped with fly-by-wire flight controls
and a side-stick controller.
W h ile not an instant success, the pio-
T
44 Business &CommercialAviation ■ July 2002
neering A320 eventually captured a signific ant share of the market for the Fren c h ,
German, Spanish and U.K. partners. Airbus
evolved shorter and longer, A318, A319 and
A 321, variants of the basic A320 design.
Moreover, the A320 series helped spawn the
A330, A340 and A380 families of Airbus aircraft that, Airbus boasts, together with the
A320 family, now account for more than
half of new airliner sales in the world.
Five years ago, buoyed by the success of
the A319 airliner, Airbus decided to lock
horns with Boeing, as well as Bombardier
and Gulfstream in the ultra-long - r ang e
business aircraft market by announcing the
A319CJ, or Airbus Corporate Jetliner. Based
upon the A319, the 22-foot-shorter variant
of the A320, Airbus figured the ACJ’s bigger
cabin cross-section and advanced technology were viewed as competitive advantages in
the business aircraft market, just as they
were in the airline market.
Moreover, the ACJ could be fitted with
up to six auxiliary center tanks (ACTs) in
t he fuselage, boosting its range to more
than 6,000 miles, an increase of up to 2,200
miles over the standard A319 aircraft.
The A319CJ, built at the con s o rt i u m ’s
plant in Hamburg, Germany, would be the
“crème de la crème” of the A320 famil y,
according to Richard Gaona, vice president
of the consortium’s ACJ division. Tanked
and trimmed according to individual cust om er needs, it could be configured as a
head-of-state or government transport, an
executive jet, or a corporate shuttle aircraft,
among other variations. ACJ certification
occurred in mid-1999.
However, Airbus could allocate only four
ACJ delivery slots per year because of high
www.AviationNow.com/BCA
d e m and for its A319 and A321 jet l i ner s .
This threw cold wat er on hot cus t om er
demand, Gaona conceded. Nobody wants
to wait four or five years for delivery.
Just as importantly, Boeing, Bombardier
and Gulfstream had a healthy head start in
the ultra-long-range market segment and
they had all the best customer contacts in
corporate America and the international
business aviation community. And all three
branched out into fractional ownership programs. Airbus was a newcomer to business
aviation. Newer still to fractional ownership, in 2001 it inked a deal with ill-fated
UAL subsidiary Avolar.
Un d a u nted, Gaona and his ACJ team
have now refocused on the business aircraft
market, eager to steal half of future orders
from archrival Boeing Business Jets.
Can they do it? This report may provide
some answers.
Aircraft Structure and Systems
The original A320 earned type certification
in 1988. In January 1989, the FAA imposed
several special conditions relating to the aircraft’s unique fly-by-wire control system,
engine controls, side-stick controllers and
flight characteristics. Heavy re l i ance on
computers also necessitated special conditions regarding resistance to high-intensity
radiated fields and lightning strikes.
The A319 variant was awarded type certification in 1996, including voluntary compliance with newer requirements, such as
more-stringent structure, flight loads and
m ane u v ers, gust lo ads and mane u v er i ng
rules specified in later certification regulat ions. The A319 C J - 133 is fitted with
26,500-lbf IAE V2527M-A5 turbofans, and
t he -115 has 27,000-lbf CFM56 - 5 B 7 / P
engines. The -133 was certified in accordance with JAR 25 in August 1999, according to Airbus officials. Reciprocal FAR Part
25 certification has not yet been sought.
T he pr i m a ry ai rframe is made from
high-strength aluminum alloy using conventional construction methods. Secondary
s t ru c t ures, including the ho r i z ontal tail ,
vertical fin and certain flight control surfaces, are fabricated from composites. Most
Airbus 320 family members have a 39,100foot cert i f ied ceil i ng and a design life
g re at er than 75,000 cycles. The ACJ, in
contrast, is certified to cruise at FL 410 and
has a slightly higher pressurization ratio of
8.33 psi. It also has extra reinforcement in
the fuselage to handle the additional weight
of the auxiliary center fuel tanks. As a result,
the ACJ has a design life of 18,000 flights,
according to Airbus officials. The A319 airliner, in contrast, has a 48,000-flight design
life. Competitors’ design lives range from
16,000 to 75,000 cycles. Airbus officials hasten to add that the ACJ is intended to fly
www.AviationNow.com/BCA
4.3-hour cycles, thereby providing a design
life of 77,400 hours — significantly longer
than most competitors.
Standard equipment now includes a dualhandrail, folding, electrically operated, illuminated airstair. The aircraft has four 73by-32-inch, Type I, plug-design doors, two
f o rw a rd and two aft, plus left and right,
40.1-by-20-inch, inward-opening, Type III
over-wing emergency exits.
The forward and aft cargo bays are accessible through a pair of hydraulically actuated, 48.3-by-71.5-inch doors. The outward
opening door design allows forward or aft
ACTs to be removed and replaced without
removing the associated cargo door. A hand
pump can be used to open the doors with
no power on the aircraft.
Need to replace any door? Each is an
i nt erc h ang e ab le part. No hand fitting is
necessary.
Fuel is contained in wing and center fuel
tanks with a capacity of 42,223 pounds. The
standard four ACTs, one forward and three
aft, hold 18, 787 pounds, for a total fuel
c a p a c i ty of 61,010 pounds, enough for a
maximum range of about 4, 800 mile s ,
a c c o rd i ng to oper ators. The four tank s
leave 124 cubic feet of baggage space in the
c a rgo hold. The optional fifth and sixth
ACT boost fuel capacity to 71,815 pounds,
stretching maximum range to 6,000-plus
miles, but they eliminate all under- f lo o r
cargo volume.
A i r b us is evaluat i ng a ne w, four- A C T
configuration, with 1,500 pounds more fuel
capacity and 255 cubic feet of baggage volume in the aft cargo bay. The extra fuel also
should boost range by 150 miles.
Fuel is transferred from the ACTs to the
center fuel tank using cabin air pressure. Six
dry-canister AC pumps supply the engines
Standard equipment now includes a lighted airs t a i r, a vi r tu al ne ce ss i ty c on si d er i n g t h e
A319CJ’s tall stance and intended use as a
business aircraft.
and APU. A static inverter, powered by the
aircraft batteries, furnishes AC power for a
fuel pump during APU start.
The primary electrical system is 115 VAC,
400 Hz, with a 28 VDC used for secondary
systems. Both use a split bus architecture
with automatic bus tie and load shedding.
Each engine is fitted with a 90 Kva, brushless AC IDG, supplemented by a 90 Kva
constant-speed AC generator powered by
the APU. Transformer rectifiers supply DC.
If both engines and the APU fail in flight, a
ram air turbine (RAT), powering the blue
c h annel of the hydraulic system, can be
deployed. This, in turn, furnishes power to a
The super-critical airfoil, illustrated by the characteristic bottom surface reflex “s” curve, enables the
A319CJ to cruise at 0.78 Mach with 99-plus-percent fuel efficiency at all but the lightest weights.
Business &CommercialAviation ■ July 2002 45
Analysis
fourth, hydraulically powered, emergency
AC generator.
Twin 23 AH batteries supply DC power to
start the APU and furnish emergency DC
and AC power by means of a static inverter.
Airbus Corporate Jet
Price
Green Aircraft . . . . . . . . . . . $39,000,000
Estimated Completion Cost . $12,000,000
Total . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $51,000,000
Characteristics
Wing Loading . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 126.3
Power Loading . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.14
Noise (EPNdB) est’d. . . . 85.9/92.0/93.9
Seating . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4+12/48
Dimensions (ft/m)
External
Length . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111.0/33.8
Height . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38.6/11.8
Span . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111.8/34.1
Internal
Length . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78.0/23.8
Height . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.4/2.3
Width. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12.2/3.7
Thrust
Engine. . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 IAE V2527M-A5
Output/
Flat Rating OAT°C . . 26,500/ISA+30°C
Inspection Interval . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . OC
Weights (lb/kg)
Max Ramp . . . . . . . . . . 167,380/75,922
Max Takeoff . . . . . . . . . 166,445/75,498
Max Landing . . . . . . . . 137,800/62,505
Zero Fuel . . . . . . . . . . 128,970/58,500c
BOW . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 94,245/42,749
Max Payload. . . . . . . . . . 34,725/15,751
Useful Load . . . . . . . . . . 73,135/33,174
Executive Payload . . . . . . . . 2,400/1,089
Max Fuel . . . . . . . . . . . . 61,016/27,676
Payload with Max Fuel. . . . 12,119/5,497
Fuel with Max Payload. . . 38,410/17,423
Fuel with
Executive Payload . . . . 61,016/27,676
Limits
Mmo . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.820
FL/Vmo . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . FL 250/350
PSI. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8.3
Climb
Time to FL 370 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 min.
FAR Part 25 OEI rate (fpm) . . . . . . . . . na
FAR Part 25 OEI gradient (ft/nm) . . . . . na
Ceilings (ft/m)
Certificated . . . . . . . . . . 41,000/12,497
All-Engine Service. . . . . . 37,000/11,278
Engine-Out Service . . . . . . 22,000/6,706
Sea Level Cabin . . . . . . . . 22,000/6,706
Certification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . JAR Part 25
46 Business &CommercialAviation ■ July 2002
ACJ has a triple - c h annel, 3,000 - p s i
hydraulic system powering the landing gear,
spoilers, wheel brakes, flight controls, nosewheel steering, thrust reversers and cargo
doors. The triple - c h annel design, along
with engine-driven and electrically powered
pumps, a left/right power transfer unit and
the RAT, assure maximum redundancy.
Each of the flight controls has multiple
actuators powered by different combinations of channels. This reduces the probability of control loss to less than one in a
billion if single- or double-component failure occurs.
Fully powered, irreversible primary and
secondary flight controls are fly-by-wire
(FBW) controlled. Artificial feel is provided
by springs in the side-stick control units.
A i r b us says FBW saves se v eral hundre d
pounds of weight.
The landing gear feature carbon/carbon
brakes with an estimated life of 1,500 to
2, 200 lan d i ngs and an overhaul cost of
$50,000, according to Airbus.
Bleed air from the APU or from engines
on the ground or in flight supplies the twopack air-conditioning system. The ACJ uses
partial recirculation, with three-zone temperature control. Maximum pressurization
is 8.3 psi, pro v id i ng an 8,000-foot cab i n
altitude at FL 410.
Anti-ice protection for the engine inlets
and wing leading edges, including a crossflow feature, also is provided by bleed air.
T he windshields and vario us probes are
electrically heated for anti-ice protection.
Emergency oxygen for the pilots is furni s hed by a 77-cubic-foot bottle. Cab i n
crew and passenger emergency oxygen systems are installed by the customer during
completion.
An APIC APS 3200 APU, rated for
engine starts up to 9,200 feet field elevation
and ISA + 35°C temper at ures, is stan d a rd
equipment. A Honeywell GTCP 36-300A is
a factory standard option. Also available is
the new Honeywell 131-9A APU, with 12percent more power, yielding faster cabin
cool-down times, quicker engine starts, better high-altitude electrical power output in
flight and lower hourly operating cost.
Cabin, Range and Weight Allowances
The green weight of a -133 aircraft is 82,507
pounds, while -115 ai rcraft weigh 200
pounds less. Sogerma in To u lo use; Jet
Av i at ion in Basel; Lufthansa Tec h nik in
Ha m b urg; Ozark Aircraft Systems in
B ent on v il le, Ark.; and As s o c i ated Air
Center in Dallas are among the authorized
Airbus Corporate Jet
completion centers.
T he com p let ion weight allow an c e
d e pends upon the number of ACTs
installed in the aircraft. With full fuel in the
standard four-tank package, for example,
c om p let ions as heavy as 20,000 pounds,
accommodating up to 12 passengers, are
feasible. The optional fifth and sixth tanks
add 1,380 pounds to the green weight. This
reduces the tanks-full completion allowance
to just over 11,000 pounds, assu m i ng an
eight-passenger payload.
Most customers favor the four-tank configuration because they prefer its range/payload tradeoff. Completion centers told B/CA
that the ACJ’s factory-designed ACTs are
easier to remove, replace and re-rig than
some after-market aux tank systems in other
large-cabin aircraft. The ACJ has removable
panels in the cabin floor for maintenance
access to the ACT plumbing and gauging
systems. Com p let ion cent ers said su c h
access panels don’t limit the interior configuration any more than in other aircraft.
They also advise customers to order the
optional Cabin Intercommunication Data
System (CIDS), a digital interface unit that
enables various cabin systems, such as light-
www.AviationNow.com/BCA
Aero Services’ ACJ, completed by SOGERMA, has four seating areas in the main cabin. Extensive use
of off-the-shelf airliner hardware expedited certification and helped keep completion weight down.
ing, inflight entertainment and air conditioning, to interface with main aircraft systems. They praised the ACJ’s three-zone
temperature control because it simplifies airflow distribution from front to rear.
Choice of completion materials, such as
fabrics, upholstery and furniture coverings,
may be limited to those approved for commercial airliners with seating capacities in
excess of 20 passeng ers, unless a blanket
exemption is sought through the controll i ng ai rw o rt h i ness autho r i ty. In No rt h
America, for example, Airbus has not pursued such an exemption through Transport
Canada or the FAA, as has Boeing, completion centers told B/CA. At present, North
A m er i c an com p let ion cent ers are taske d
with this responsibility, adding to completion cost and time.
The only four interiors we’ve seen thus far
are relatively high-density corporate shuttle
or group charter configurations. The Aero
Services group charter aircraft that we flew
for this report, for example, is equipped
with five ACTs and 29 passeng er se at s .
Completed by Sogerma, it has a forward
VIP section, including a lavatory with shower, plus four, two-by-four super club-class
seating areas in the main cabin. Sogerma
used plenty of off-the-shelf airliner interior
c om p onents, including sidewall pane l s ,
overhead bins and PSUs, to keep the weight
down and to speed the completion process.
Flying Impressions
What’s it like to fly? The ACJ has the most
comfortable cockpit we’ve yet experienced,
immediately apparent when we strapped
i nto the left se at of Aero Services’ ACJ,
a c c om p anied by Pet er Chan d ler, Airbus
experimental test pilot in the right seat and
www.AviationNow.com/BCA
Aero Services’ chief pilot Richard Cimino
on the jump seat as safety pilot. The ACJ’s
side-stick controller, which eliminates the
column and yoke between the pilots’ knees,
is the main reason why cockpit comfort is
head-and-shoulders above the competition.
For all its advanced fly-by-wire, throttleby-wire, steer-by-wire and brake-by-wire
controls, the A319CJ flies like a typically
refined French airplane, albeit one with a
very bright digital flight engineer on board
who majored in cockpit ergonomics.
Quite cle a r l y, the FBW flight cont ro l
system is the most critical of the four digital
c ont rol systems. Two pr i m a ry and thre e
secondary, dual-channel flight control computers, each using dissimilar hardware and
software, ensures optimum redundancy.
L o se one com p u t er channel? You can
still dispatch and have critical level redundancy, as well as full functionality. The five
c om p u t ers pro v ide FBW cont rol of the
elevators, ailerons and spoilers, along with
horizontal stabilizer trim. Rudder control,
though, is conventional, augmented by a
computerized yaw damper.
There are no mechanical links between
t he side stick and the flight cont ro l s .
Instead, the FBW system uses computer
control laws to determine how much control surface deflection is needed to achieve
the desired result. Control laws, in essence,
are the software "brains" of a fly-by-wire
system, that process pilot, IRS, air data and
other sensor signals to generate the appropriate electrical commands to the aircraft's
hydraulic control surface actuators.
FBW enables aircraft designers to overcome the classic stability versus maneuverab il i ty aerodynamic design compromise.
A i rcraft with con v ent ional, mec h ani c a l link flight controls can be designed to be
as stable as ocean liners or have dogfight
agility — but not both.
The FBW system's control laws, though,
enable aircraft designers to endow the aircraft with both exceptional stab il i ty an d
maneuverability. Stability characteristics are
enhanced by moving the control surfaces as
nec e s s a ry, without any inputs from the
pilot, to hold pitch and roll attitude, within
s pec i f ied pitch, roll, speed, g-lo ad an d
angle-of-attack protection limits, similar to
t he touch-cont rol steer i ng mode of an
autopilot. Don't touch the side stick, and
the aircraft remains fixed in attitude.
M ane u v er ab il i ty characteristics are
enhanced by deflecting the control surfaces
as needed, in response to pilot inputs, to
achieve maximum aerodynamic perform-
The right side of the aircraft has four club seat sections, each with four chairs and a folding work table.
Business &CommercialAviation ■ July 2002 47
Analysis
Airbus Corporate Jet
These three graphs are designed to be used together to provide a broad overview of the ACJ’s approximate performance.They were pieced together using several data sources,
so it is especially critical that they not be used for fine-tuned comparisons, let alone flight planning. For a complete operational analysis, use realistic completion weights for
the candidate aircraft, look closely at the JAR 25 Approved Flight Manual, and be sure to use Airbus’ Less Paper in the Cockpit (LPC) mission-planning software. Notably, we
had no access to these essential tools when we prepared this report.
Time and Fuel vs. Distance — This graph shows the range performance of A319CJ at 0.78 Mach high-speed cruise, assuming departure at MTOW, the standard four ACT
configuration and a 4,600-pound NBAA IFR reserve.We chose not to include a long-range cruise line because the ACJ’s advanced super-critical wing enables it to cruise at
this speed with 99 percent, or better, specific range efficiency. Notably, the ACJ’s relatively high wing loading and airfoil design result in comparatively low initial cruise altitudes at the highest weights. Using this speed profile, for example, leveling off at FL 350 as the initial cruise altitude yields the best specific range performance,assuming
a departure at MTOW. After five to six hours, a step climb to FL 370 improves specific range performance. The ACJ should be flown at FL 410 only at relatively light weights.
However, the highest altitude for which we had cruise performance data was FL 390.
Specific Range — The ratio of true airspeed to hourly fuel burn is a measure of fuel efficiency. Using a mid-range cruise weight of 130,000 pounds, the chart illustrates that
it is counterproductive to push the ACJ to a higher than recommended cruise altitude when cruising at 0.78 Mach, equivalent to 447 KTAS in ISA conditions. The specific
range, at this mid-range cruise weight, actually is slightly better at FL 370 than FL 390, even though the aircraft has ample reserve climb thrust to climb to FL 390 or FL 410.
Range/P ayload Profile — The purpose of this graph is to provide gross simulations of various trips under a variety of payload and airport density altitude conditions, with
the goal of flying the longest distance at 0.78 Mach high-speed cruise.The four payload lines are highly simplistic, based upon Airbus data at minimum weights and B/CA
estimates at maximum weights, with straight lines between the endpoints.We estimated the range performance assuming departure at MTOW, with maximum fuel and available payload, using the flight-planning guide for a standard A319 airliner. Boiled down to basics, the ACJ has 10.5 to 11.0 hours of endurance with the standard four
ACTs, a typical 15,000- to 18,000-pound ultra-large cabin interior and 20 passengers on board. That’s enough for a maximum range of about 5,000 miles, based upon
our estimates.Range with a super-lean, 8,000-pound interior and eight passengers is 5,400-plus miles, according to Airbus officials.
48 Business &CommercialAviation ■ July 2002
www.AviationNow.com/BCA
ance within said protection limits.
T h ree levels of FBW cont rol law are
available, assuring optimum redundancy.
"Normal" control law, the top-level mode,
is available when all systems are working or
after a single computer or related system
failure. While in flight, fore/aft movement
of the side-stick controller changes g-loading in pitch and lateral movement controls
roll rate, within said protection limits. Pitch
trim is automatic, adjusting for speed and
c on f i g ur at ion changes. The system also
compensates for variations in pitch-control
re s p on se associated with c.g. movement.
Normal control law incorporates ground,
flight and landing flare sub-modes. The
transition between the three sub-modes is
automatic and virtually transparent to the
crew, tossing in just enough digital magic to
impart a natural control feel and appropriate cont rol re s p on se dur i ng the critical
takeoff and landing phases of flight.
Ground law mode enables the crew to
have full control over the flight control surfaces. At liftoff, the system blends in flight
law mode, with its envelope and attitude
pro t ec t ions. The process is re v er sed for
landing, except that at 50 feet the system
slowly rolls in two degrees of nose-down
pitch trim for a more natural pitch feel during landing flare.
The FBW system is so robust that the
reversion modes aren’t taught during initial
or recurrent flight training, unless the operator requests otherwise. All maneuvers are
performed using normal control law. Actual
c ont rol law re v er s ion events have been
“very, very, very few,” according to Airbus
o fficials. Actual MTBF statistics for the
FBW system were not avail ab le from
Airbus.
One of the biggest advantages of FBW is
the ability of any pilot, regardless of experience level, to extract maximum performance from the airplane at critical times. If
wind shear is encountered, for example, the
procedure is simple. Reef all the way back
on the side-stick and slam the throttles to
the forward stop. Immediately, the aircraft
rotates to the optimum angle-of-attack for
climb, within g limits, and the eng i ne s
spool up to maximum thrust. The escape
maneuver is perfectly and consistently executed, regardless of the amount of gray hair
or accumulated flight hours in the cockpit.
A word of caution app l ies here. The
FBW system won’t let you pull over 2.5 g’s
during an escape maneuver. The pilot isn’t
given the option of overstressing the aircraft if it’s necessary to avoid hitting the
ground.
T he ai rcraft also has one of the most
capable avionics suites ever installed in a
civil aircraft (see accompanying sidebar).
Airbus’ design philosophy was years ahead
www.AviationNow.com/BCA
of most business aircraft when introduced
two dec ades ago. Pilots of lat e - m o d e l
heavy-iron business aircraft, though, should
have little tro u b le ad a p t i ng to Airbus ’
a u t om at ion, even though the acron y m s ,
systems design feat ures and some colo r
c on v ent ions are diff erent from tho se on
most bus i ness ai rcraft. For all its digital
c a p ab il i t ies, the ACJ still is an ai r p l ane
designed by and for pilots. Airbus pilots
we’ve contacted love the airplane and would
loathe going back to a conventional aircraft.
Most engine and systems functions are
automated, thereby reducing pilot workload. Engine start, for example, is handled
by computers. APU bleed is automatically
rerouted from packs to starter, the FADEC
h an d les the eng i ne start, the gener at o r
comes on line, and the APU bleed air then
is rerouted to the packs.
I t ’s easy to get used to flying with the
side-stick controller and using FBW normal
control, based on our observations. But what
The side-stick controller provides excellent
artificial control feel. After 15 minutes, we felt
comfortable using it in place of a yoke.
ACJ Avionics
The ACJ has one of the most capable avionics suites ever installed in a civil aircraft. Six large-format
CRTs provide a wealth of information, including context-sensitive system synoptics, extensive use of
graphics and text prompts to keep the crew out of trouble after coping with an abnormality or emergency. Color cues, boxed text titles and flashing annunciations provided by the system ensure that the
pilots are “in the loop” in spite of the aircraft’s advanced automation. Hand-eye coordination features
are especially well designed, in our opinion.
However, it takes a little time to get used to the non-moving autothrottles. Normally, the pilot flying
engages the system by pushing the throttles up to the flex takeoff/max continuous thrust detent in the
quadrant. At 3,500 feet, or a manually selected, noise abatement power reduction altitude, the pilot
pulls the throttles back to the climb detent. That’s the last time the throttles move, or have to be
touched, until retarding to idle during landing flare. All thrust changes are controlled by the autothrottle system using automatic or manual speed set modes.
The avionics package includes triple ADIRS integrated with angle-of-attack sensors, dual multi-mode
nav radios with ILS and GPS receivers, dual VOR receivers, dual DMEs, dual Mode S transponders, and
two radio altimeters, plus a Doppler weather radar, ADF,TCAS and EGPWS. Triple VHF voice/data radios,
triple audio panels and dual radio management units, plus a single HF, SELCAL, solid-state CVR and
ACARS with printer also are included. There are provisions for a multi-channel satcom system.
A HUD option is under development and is slated for JAA and FAA certification in December 2004.
EVS sensor development will be discussed at an upcoming customer focus group meeting.
Business &CommercialAviation ■ July 2002 49
Analysis
if highly improbable failures were to cause
loss of normal control law? If two failures
occur within a system, such as loss of two of
the aircraft’s three hydraulic systems or loss
of both pitch trim channels, then the system
reverts to “alternate” control law. This second-tier mode provides “normal” law handling characteristics with reduced envelope
and attitude limit protection. In the event of
triple failures, the system reverts to “direct”
law. The pilot then has direct control of the
control surfaces, with elevator deflection
compensated for aircraft c.g.
Even though it’s highly unlikely that a
pilot would ever encounter such reversions,
we wanted to experience “alternate” and
“direct” control law. So Chandler turned off
both flight control computers. We found
that it’s not hard to fly the aircraft using
alternate law mode, with its normal control
law feel. In the direct mode, we found flying characteristics acceptable, albeit with
thrust and configuration induced pitch trim
changes, similar to a conventional aircraft.
The ACJ still is a stable aircraft without all
its FBW capab il i t ies, but it takes som e
practice to be smooth without high-level
help from the computers.
Stalls are impossible in flight because of
the envelope protection provided by normal control law. They’re also tough on the
airframe, considering the buffeting of the
engine pylons and empennage. As a result,
we executed them in the simulator using the
control law reversion modes. The ACJ, we
soon discovered, still has conventional handling qualities. There’s plenty of pre-stallwarning buffet. If stall recovery is initiated
at the onset of buffet, the ACJ recovers with
no loss of aplomb.
When pressed close to the aerodynamic
stall, however, the nose pitches up, unless
the stick force is relaxed. Pull all the way
into the stall and a wing often drops.
S w i t c h i ng back on both flight control
computers, we returned for pattern work.
We found the aircraft docile during twoeng i ne oper at ions. It’s som e w h at more
challenging with one engine inoperative, as
we experienced in the simulator session.
Why? While the flight control computers
h an d le the ele v ators and wing - m o u nt e d
flight controls, it’s entirely up to the pilot to
step on the rudder to prevent adverse yaw.
It’s back to basics during OEI takeoffs.
Push the on-side rudder close to the floor
and pull back to 12-degree nose-up pitch to
hold V2. The maneuver takes a little practice for new pilots because the combination
of body movements is different without the
yoke. After a few attempts, we found the
ACJ is no harder to handle than a conventional jet with wing-mounted engines during OEI takeoffs.
Once at a safe altitude, we accelerated and
retracted the flaps. The flight manual then
calls for engagement of the autopilot and
autothrottle. This allows both pilots to concentrate on coping with the emergency. The
ECAM, Airbus’ term for EICAS, displays
provide context-sensitive systems graphics,
along with QRH recommendations handling the emergency, including balancing
the fuel load and returning for landing.
Conclusion? After experiencing the handling ease and capabilities of Airbus’ FBW
flight controls, it’s hard to go back to 90year-old analog technology.
Will Europe’s Best Triumph?
A gre at ai r p l ane doesn’t autom at i c a l l y
translate into great air transportation. To
date, there only are 11 ACJs in service and
one A319 jet l i ner con f i g ured as an ACJ.
Most are in service in veteran flight departm ents with years of ai r l i ner operation s
experience. These folks know how to deal
with large jetliner manufacturing organiza-
The standard four-ACT configuration provides 124
cubic feet of underfloor cargo volume. Bring a
tall ladder for loading.
tions and how to arrange for support with
local com m ercial ai r l i ne mai nt enan c e
departments.
In the past, Airbus seemed detached from
t he bus i ness aviat ion com m u ni ty, som e
o per ators and com p let ion cent ers told
B/CA. Five years ago, the ACJ team had
few key people with any business aircraft
e x per ience. Some of their marketers
seemed more bent on bad-mouthing the
competition than on explaining the virtues
of the ACJ. More o v er, coord i nat ion
between the ACJ team and Airbus headquarters seemed lacking, even though both
organi z at ions were, and are, in the same
office building in Toulouse. And in addition
to airliners, Airbus is a world leader in production of aviation-grade red tape, according to some industry observers.
All those perceptions are history, Gaona
says. Of key importance was the appoint-
IAE V2500 or
CFMI CFM56-5?
ACJ customers have a choice of engines. Thus
far, all have chosen the IAE V2527M-A5 over
the CFM56-5B7/P. Airbus officials claim the
V2527, while adding 100 pounds per side to
aircraft weight, offers slightly better fuel economy and lower FAR Part 36/ICAO Annex 16
noise levels. While both engines offer airlinerquality reliability, the IAE engine, on average,
visits the shop more than seven times per
100,000 flight hours, while the CFM makes
fewer than five visits per 100,000 flight hours,
according to Airbus’ data for the last 12
months.
Hidden behind this cover is a quiet, fuel-efficient IAE V2527M-A5, standard aboard the A319CJ.
XX Business &CommercialAviation ■ July 2002
www.AviationNow.com/BCA
Analysis
Stout carbon/carbon brakes provide excellent stopping power without grabbing when cold.
Airbus Corporate Jet Comparison Profile
(Percent Relative to Average)
Tradeoffs are a reality of aircraft design, although engineers attempt to optimize the blend of capabilities,
performance and passenger comfort. In order to portray graphically the strengths and compromises of
specific aircraft, B/CA compares the subject aircraft to the composite characteristics of other aircraft in
its class, computing the percentage differences for the various parameters. We also include the absolute
value of each parameter, along with the relative ranking, for the subject aircraft in the composite group.
For this Comparison Profile, B/CA includes the Airbus A319CJ Corporate Jetliner, Boeing Business
Jet BBJ1, Bombardier Global Express and Gulfstream VSP. The Comparison Profile quite clearly illustrates that the ACJ has the biggest cabin and the highest maximum payload of any aircraft in the composite group.Surprisingly, it also offers the second-best hot-and-high airport takeoff performance.
Cruise performance, though, is airliner grade, a notch below that of traditional business aircraft.
When the ACJ’s $51 million price is considered, its strongest asset is its lowest cost per cubic foot of
cabin volume.
52 Business &CommercialAviation ■ July 2002
ment of Haig Hagopian, a well-known, 30plus-year business aviation veteran, to take
on a high-profile role in ACJ marketing in
No rth America. Ha g o pi an is wid e l y
respected for his willingness to listen to customers and respond to their concerns. With
m o re members like that, the ACJ team
could overc ome market inertia. To cut
delivery lead time for new orders, ACJ production rates will increase to six deliveries
in 2003. Gaona would like to see the rate
increased in 2004, if demand warrants.
To improve after-sale communications,
Gaona now meets with each one of his ACJ
operators at least twice per year. He can be
reached 24/7 on his mobile phone at other
times. He’s also assigned no more than
three customers to each technical service
representative in Toulouse, using the adjac ency of the ACJ division and the hom e
office to best advantage.
Warranty administration continues to be
handled by UAL’s United Services during
the five-year airframe, engine and avionics
warranty period. United Services also offers
long-term ACJ support, regarded by Gaona
as the best in the airline industry.
The ACJ has been relatively trouble-free,
and operators said that spares support from
Airbus and its vendors has been satisfactory.
Most of the engine and systems gremlins
were wrung out by dozens of airlines in regular passenger service.
De s pite having a high deg ree of commonality with garden-variety airliners, both
the ACJ and BBJ are distinct models not
routinely operated by commercial air carriers. Thus, the ACJ’s 18,000-flight design
life is not a limitation in the business aircraft resale market, but it’s a shortcoming
t h at could se v erely limit its value in the
commercial airliner resale market, considering the 3,000-cycle-per-year work schedule
of the average single-aisle jetliner.
A n o t her dark cloud lo oms large. The
demand for $50-million-plus, airliner-size
b us i ness aircraft seems to have reached a
plateau, as illustrated by the soft sales both
of new aircraft and of fractional ownership
u nits dur i ng the past 12 months. Even
demand for traditional, ultra-long-range
b us i ness aircraft, such as the Gulfstream
V/VSP and Global Express, has slowed as a
result of the world economic slump.
Yet, Gaona, Hagopian and the rest of the
ACJ team are confident the slump in ACJ
sales is over. They maintain that the ACJ
can triumph because it has the biggest cabin
cross-section, the most-modern systems,
and a strong swell of acceptance in the airline community. Clearly, when the world
economy does rebound, the ACJ team will
be better positioned than in the past to skim
la crème from the very top of the business
aircraft market. B/CA
www.AviationNow.com/BCA