Glas-Cockpits sind in der Luftfahrt Standard. Brauchen diese jedoch viel mehr Strom als die früheren Analog-Instrumente, erfordern daher stärkere Generatoren?

Was ein prinzipieller Nachteil ist wäre im seltenen Fall wenn wegen Treibstoffmangel beide Triebwerke und die APU ausfallen und auf Batteriestrom zurückgegriffen werden muss

(2 votes)
Loading...

Similar Posts

Subscribe
Notify of
4 Answers
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Grapy
4 months ago

Of course, glass cockpits need more power than the old analog instruments, which is on hand. But this is absolutely no problem, because modern aircraft are designed to deliver more performance without the systems getting into shrubbing. And as far as the eternal talk about the case is, that sometimes both engines fail – yes, that can happen theoretically, but we are talking about a scenario that is so rare that it is hardly worth having sleepless nights about it. Aircraft are equipped to continue working in such situations, thanks to batteries, emergency systems and the Ram Air Turbine.

So, if you’re worried that a glass cockpit will consume the electricity more quickly and will put you in danger, then I can only tell you that the risk is so low that it is completely irrelevant for practice. The technology is now designed to cushion such problems. So don’t make any illusions about this “afterpart” – you’re sure to fly with or without a glass cockpit.

Grapy

eieiei2
4 months ago

I assume that the increased use of computers and screens is compensated by the conversion of light bulbs to LEDs. In addition, we are no longer in 1970 with battery technology.

KarlRanseierIII
4 months ago

The cockpit itself represents only a small proportion of the total requirements of the onboard systems.

The electrical energy requirement itself is also rather negligibly measured at the total energy requirement.

wiki01
4 months ago

If both or all engines fail? The emergency power is sufficient for the time when the aircraft is still in the air.