Coasting onto stand.

[tripilot]

I'm not sure if this has been brought up on here before - if so sorry.
I'm a LTC captain on 737-300/800 so know a bit about the aircraft but I'm a bit bemused by crews that shut down both engines and 'coast' onto stand. I've noticed it as a passenger only and nobody has ever suggested it to me on the flight deck.
Single eng taxi is regularly used by myself and others but never a no engine 'drift' having turned onto stand. Obviously the APU will supply elec and hydraulic power and should that fail the brakes still have accumulator pressure but.......IS IT A GOOD IDEA?
As always I default to what Boeing say and in this case it doesn't offer any advice but on the other hand it doesn't say not to do it. Mind you it doesn't say not to shut down both engines in flight and drift down from overhear the field to save fuel - presumably because its NOT A GOOD IDEA!
I've only seen and heard about this on one airline (based in the Emerald Isle), does anyone else do it? If so why? Does it make such a huge difference to fuel costs or shut down time? Does that outweigh the potential safety / embarrassment factors? Does your FO swoon and say "wow capt. you're amazing doing that, one day ill make up my own procedures too"!
Opinions please.

[OutsideCAS]

One engine taxi I can understand to a degree - coasting onto stand with no engines, well that sounds daft to me and assuming this is a supposed fuel cost saving measure (and maybe a few seconds in time)?. Perhaps the baggage handlers could start to crack open the holds as the aircraft enters the stand, the catering truck moving in before the aircraft has stopped and the fuellers attaching the hose on the taxi in.:hmm:

[grumbles69]

I do know that its not a good idea to shut the engines down too early, say at 37000 ft!! :eek:

[BARKINGMAD]

After the accident, what will the crew be saying to the CP to justify this?

Some ramps have just that, a ramp before the ideal parking position, requiring considerable thrust application to reach the ideal parking spot, which may be jetty determined but also ensure the tail of the 'frame is not encroaching on the taxiway.

I can only assume this manoeuvre is an example of "showing off", and sooner or later the practitioner(s) will come to grief. I and no one with whom I have operated have NEVER EVER considered it as a professional, disciplined and safe method of parking and IMHO it is fraught with risks and danger and should never be considered as a way of parking 89 million dollars of aircraft, let alone the 189 hapless SLF in the back. :=

[BOAC]

+1. Had one of those 'ever so slick' Captains once who used to do it and actually ran out of motion short of the stand. Choice of restart/tug or disembark with stairs at rear door since the jetty blocked forward steps - tee hee............did I larf........

[Agaricus bisporus]

At the point when a ground collision/fod risk is at it's highest and four eyes should be focussed firmly outside yet some fool's shutting down an engine and, presumably, watching the EGT to see it really does shut down cleanly?

What's the point anyway? This indicates a bit of a Walt mentality to me, and grossly unprofessional too. It is completely inappropriate.

[rog747]

BMA DC-9's used to do quite often on to the bravo cul de sac at Terminal one LHR in the 1970's and 80's and coast in to B2 or B4 stands

also on the odd occasion powered back off stand using reverse...

[Sleeve Wing]

>>>>> BMA DC-9's used to do quite often on to the bravo cul de sac at Terminal one LHR in the 1970's and 80's <<<<<

Apart from maybe one smartarse, no they didn't, and even then it was shutting down just as brakes were applied for final stop……..never "coasting".

……..and reversing off stand was forbidden because of ingestion, "bucket" damage and the possibility of lifting the nose wheel off the ground. Did you ever really look at the amount of rubbish on the Bravo stands ? :ugh:

[tripilot]

I'm sure these chaps are only choosing to do this in situations that they are very familiar with i.e. without an up slope, no airbridge, maybe self stopping, cute FO that needs to be impressed etc... However I really would like to know if this is something that has been suggested within the airline to save fuel and time. Further to this, the same low cost airline only uses 1 minute cool down time for its engines rather than the Boeing time of 3 mins - sad I know but I've timed it!

[rog747]

lol sleevewing,

i possibly agree with your observations of certain maverick(s) lol...but i was merely saying what i saw as i worked there...

as for reverse off yes of course it was not standard nor approved but it happened on odd occasions for whatever reason...

merely all this is an aside please don't get ratty by it

it was along time ago LOL

and if you worked for Midland too i am sure we met!

Lots of very nice characters both flying and on the ground at LHR

[Sleeve Wing]

Hi Rog,

No offence taken…….
and, yes, I was on BMA's DC9s from the start………. ;)

Great company in those days, as you say, mainly because of the peeps.

[Uplinker]

Whatever the reason, this (coasting onto stand) is a stupid and extremely unprofessional thing to do.

Sadly, extreme fuel saving (if that's what this is being done for) is a particularly beguiling genie which has been let out and can never be put back.

Owing to the fact that fuel saved can be projected by multiplying by the number of sectors flown per year, even a 10kg saving can be made to look like say, 200,000kg per year. Fuel costs $1 per kilo, so abracadabra! you've "saved" $200,000!

This is a classic demonstration of how statistics can be manipulated to show whatever you want them to. Because you haven't saved $200,000, you've saved $10. But it has led to all airlines single engine taxying, not turning all the aircon packs on, not having aircon on at all while on stand, and not putting on the heating/cooling before the passengers start getting on - leaving the cabin crews to work in awful conditions, and other stupidities.

As an illustration of how far this could go; why not turn off one engine at the top of descent? I mean, you're going down anyway aren't you? Then at say 10,000 feet, fire it up again for the landing. :D

Don't laugh, this sort of thing could happen.

The way round this of course would be to charge the proper ticket price for the flight :hmm:

[dubbleyew eight]

you'll feel a real hero if you kill one of the groundies because he stood in the way not knowing that a silent aircraft was rolling down on top of him.

make some noise. it warns people.

[nitpicker330]

I've seen it done in the 737-300 a few times with no problems in Oz.

Obviously the Captain only did it at locations that were conducive to a successful outcome. Generally at small quiet outports in Oz such as OOL ROK etc where there wasn't any Aerobridge just a downhill run to stop in front of the Marshaller.

Stop being so tight assed and live a little folks.

[Centaurus]

Stop being so tight assed and live a little folks

You certainly have a way with words. "Coasting" displays poor airmanship at it's worst. If it is meant to save fuel, you may as well recommend taxiing with the packs off after landing. That saves fuel too, and the cabin air won't have time to stink before the doors are open.:mad:

[MaxReheat]

'Stop being so tight assed and live a little folks

It's being 'tight assed' that enables the airline industry (generally west of the Gulf) to enjoy its enviable safety record that 'tight assed' professionals have strived to achieve. With that attitude your cutting the odds on ever making the 'old' bit of the 'old and bold aviator'.

Why anyone would want to shut down all engines before coming onto stand is a concept beyond my comprehension.

Tight assed - you bet, as and when required - assuring a long and accident-free career to date.:ok:

[Capn Bloggs]

Still approved...
POWERBACK
General
The powerback maneuver can be an efficient means for the airplane to
depart the gate and transition to the taxi phase. There are, however,
several factors of safety and passenger comfort that must be considered
before commencing the maneuver and during the maneuver itself. These
considerations are as follows:
• Flight and ground crew must have completed an appropriate
powerback procedures training program.
• Powerback can be performed only in approved ramp areas.
• Thrust reversers on both engines must be operative.
• Ramp must be clear of contamination.
• There must be no more than moderate precipitation.
• Use minimum reverse thrust required.
• Do not use brakes while the airplane is moving rearward.
• Both pilots should have their feet on the floor during the powerback
maneuver.
• Verify all personnel and equipment are clear of engines fore and aft
prior to initiating movement of thrust levers.
:ok: :ok:

[captjns]

To quote Scott Crossfield, after coasting into a hangar door.

"Chuck Yeagar may was the first pilot to break the sound barrier, but I'm the first to break the hangar door."

Saw a dumb A$$ try it in a 727. Shut all engines down, the APU took a crap:eek:, and guess what... The Brake Accumulator was sho:eek:t. Off in the dirt she rolled. By the graces of the Sky Gods, there were no passengers on board, no buildings, vehicles or personnel in the way. I guess the crew forgot about the brake interconnect:rolleyes:. Oh well:{.

[Basil]

No argument - it's unprofessional.
Neither have I ever taxied a twin on one - except once after landing with a failed engine.;)

Edited to add: Runup to leaving employ of HM, on initial IR and having offered CAA IRE control of little twin to fly back, he decides to impress me by cutting both donks as we approach the refuelling pump which has an upslope.
The (almost) inevitable and we stopped short. As he restarted one to complete positioning, I recollect hoping he wasn't so embarrassed that he'd take it out on me at the debrief. He didn't :ok:

[nitpicker330]

You are all hanging on too tight.....:8

Get a life you lot, more important things to fix first other than rolling the last 100' on to stand I would have thought. :confused:

( things like, stabilized approach criteria and not crashing into Sea Walls, landing on the nose wheels first, stalling the Aircraft at FL390 etc etc etc, those really will kill you :sad: )

Suppose you wouldn't buzz the tower either!!:}

[de facto]

Suppose you wouldn't buzz the tower either!!

Nothing wrong with that:E

Did the rolling in with engines off,pimples cleared and i aint doing it anymore.:p

[mikedreamer787]

BMA DC-9's used to do quite often on to the bravo
cul de sac at Terminal one LHR in the 1970's and 80's
and coast in to B2 or B4 stands

I recall as a kid watching Ansett ANA 727s and DC9s coasting
into the open stands at Essendon and West Beach 60s & 70s.
No one got into any trouble. Then again it was back in an age
when airline flying was enjoyable and the aeroplanes were real.

[Uplinker]

Get a life you lot, more important things to fix first other than rolling the last 100' on to stand I would have thought.

:rolleyes:

Yeah, like having all your hydraulics, electrics, and full control available until you stop the aircraft and are finished with main engine(s).

Bravado, being 'clever' and showing off is all very well in speed boats and on surf boards etc., but has no place in airline operations.

[flyboyike]

Only Bob Hoover coasts into the stand. Or, rather, the stand coasts to him. That's because even Chuck Norris is afraid of Bob Hoover.

[Basil]

showing off is all very well in speed boats
. . . and don't see the swimmer :sad:

I hate it when I'm snorkelling and hear the high speed props - Decision: Surface right now and wave or wait till it's passed overhead, misjudge and have to come up as it's getting louder :eek:

[parabellum]

As an illustration of how far this could go; why not turn off one engine at the top of descent? I mean, you're going down anyway aren't you? Then at say 10,000 feet, fire it up again for the landing.

Apart from being a dumb idea, I think, the cost of an additional start cycle on the engine will probably out weigh any savings in fuel.

Can anyone find, in the AFM or SOP of any aircraft or company, where coasting into stand all engines off as an acceptable procedure is discussed? Thought not.

Personal opinion but the potential for things to go seriously wrong whilst still moving but all engines off is way too big to even consider it.

[nitpicker330]

1/ it's been done a lot in the past all around the world and I can't think of one single accident directly attributable to "coasting in".
( it's not something I see a need to do however let's keep it in perspective shall we )

2/ how many backups do you need? You might as well fly an Aircraft with 10 Engines, 5 Hyd systems, 2 accumulators and an Anchor if you are that "conservative" :D

[ImbracableCrunk]

Bob Hoover. That's it. He's the one and only.

My passengers did not pay for an airshow.

If you do this, then you are one YouTube video away from, "Hey, y'all, watch this!!!"

[nitpicker330]

I don't do it or endorse it BUT please tell me how many incidents have been caused or people hurt/killed by this "dangerous" practice in the last 40 years.....

Nah, thought so...

[stilton]

It's just stupid :=


If you want to put on a show go do it outside of your airlines operations, otherwise don't tempt fate.

[Capn Bloggs]

I hate it when I'm snorkelling and hear the high speed props - Decision: Surface right now and wave or wait till it's passed overhead, misjudge and have to come up as it's getting louder
Diver's flag nearby was there, Basil?

[Basil]

Diver's flag nearby was there, Basil?
Nobody's perfect :O

[Desert185]

To borrow a wee bit of the Queen's english...daft idea. :=

[Uplinker]

1/ it's been done a lot in the past all around the world and I can't think of one single accident directly attributable to "coasting in".
( it's not something I see a need to do however let's keep it in perspective shall we )

2/ how many backups do you need? You might as well fly an Aircraft with 10 Engines, 5 Hyd systems, 2 accumulators and an Anchor if you are that "conservative"

Er, nit old chap, I bow to your obvious statistical knowledge of operations all around the world involving engine-less taxying, but you seem to be implying that having your engines running as you manoeuvre onto stand is too much of a 'back-up' ??

I'd love to see you try this on something like an A330 - keeping on the centre line with only a few meters of clearance each side, and stopping within half a meter when the stand guidance says "STOP" !!

[nitpicker330]

1/ I haven't ever done it and won't
2/ I never suggested being daft and doing it in a wide body entering a confined area to an Aerobridge!!

3/ for smaller 737 ops in quiet open un-congested aprons ( with steps ) with a serviceable RUNNING APU I don't particularly see the serious problem if you cut both 60' before the stop point.

Silly and pointless? Maybe..........Dangerous? No.

[safetypee]

nitpicker, absence of evidence of risk (incident / accident), is not evidence of absence of risk.
Safety involves managing risk; coasting into a stand is not good risk management.
What you say is what you think; often what you think is what you do.
Try managing your thoughts; it’s good for risk management.

[Centaurus]

and I can't think of one single accident directly attributable to "coasting in".
I wouldn't be surprised at that statement. Probably more than 99.9% of reportable incidents go unreported through the ICAO dissemination system.

[JammedStab]

Had one captain that always coasted in silently. There was nothing written anywhere that said we could not. He was very old school and said he liked that it pissed off one of the management pilots.

[myekppa]

If you expect to be paid and treated as professionals, then be professional.

Passengers do notice and while most wouldn't care, all sorts of ideas will flow through their heads as a result.

If you're prepared to 'coast in', what else are you prepared to do? Where do you draw the line, or is that something that needs to be written for you in a manual somewhere because you can't work it out?

My advice, find another job more suited to your skills. NASCAR comes to mind.

[Uplinker]

3/ for smaller 737 ops in quiet open un-congested aprons ( with steps ) with a serviceable RUNNING APU I don't particularly see the serious problem if you cut both 60' before the stop point.

Silly and pointless? Maybe..........Dangerous? No.


Not dangerous?? And if the APU dies when the electrical load is suddenly put onto it as the main engines are cut?? (It happens).


Are you sure you're an airline pilot?

[nitpicker330]

If the APU fails you have 6 full applications of the accumulator mate....from 8 to 10 kts more than enough to stop.
Remembering that the accumulator is certified and good enough to stop the Aircraft from landing speeds according to Boeing...( significantly faster than 10 kts )

And besides, the APU generator is "put on the busses" and stabilized way before you "cut both" If you left it that late then you deserve a cluster f***

It's been done in the circumstances I describe many many times in 40 years on 737's 727's DC-9's etc WITH NOT A SINGLE INCIDENT ATTRIBUTED TO THE PRACTICE.

So, get a life.

Are you sure YOU are a real Pilot.

[Uplinker]

It's been done in the circumstances I describe many many times in 40 years on 737's 727's DC-9's etc WITH NOT A SINGLE INCIDENT ATTRIBUTED TO THE PRACTICE.

So, get a life.

Are you sure YOU are a real Pilot.


Oh dear, handbags at dawn?


OK, let me ask you this. Is this "procedure" of yours certified and approved by the aircraft manufacturers?

I only ask because when the company I fly for were looking at single engine taxying in, they took it very seriously and carefully. They got permission from the manufacturer and took advice and wrote a checklist for the procedure. Even then, owing to an unknown hidden software fault on some aircraft; when the engine was cut, the brakes were immediately applied fully on without any command from the pilots - very nasty. This was obviously unintended, and investigation discovered the fault.

Their checklist for single engine taxying includes: the APU has to be on line and stabilised. The electric Yellow hydraulic pump has to be selected on. The main engine in question has to be sufficiently idled and cooled. The aircraft has to be taxying in a straight line and with feet off the brakes on a straight taxiway clear of obstacles. Only then can we cut one engine. (The electrical busses only transfer to the APU generator when the engine is cut).

So back to your procedure; How would you feel if one day the brake accumulator was faulty, or when you cut both engines, you had an engine tailpipe fire warning distracting you as you coasted onto stand, and you ran over a ramp worker? It's just not the sort of unnecessary risk one would expect an airline pilot to take.

[fireflybob]

A debate on coasting in to stand on a Professional Pilots forum - some kind of oxymoron?

[Shaman]

At any interview, the following question will be asked of both pilots:

"Is this an SOP?"

If the answer is "yes" and a company reference can be provided that all will be well. If not...

[tripilot]

Let's face it folks - it's a donkey move to shut both engines down before arriving on stand. No question.
All your are trying to achieve is the miss-placed adulation of the person in the other seat - it ain't gonna save a significant amount of fuel or ANY time and all it could really increase is the risk factor in you day.
Thanks for all the opinions, I'm a little suprised to hear people who think it works though. Any response from our Emerald Isle colleagues? Is this an SOP? Is it taught on the line? From what I've seen of crew that have previously worked for them they are very good and don't stray away from SOPs in the least.

[bugged on the right]

I am a retired FE and one of the things I was paid to do was to look at the scenario and try to anticipate the unforseen consequences of certain actions. Having seen and heard about the results of some smooth operator's non standard aviation tricks I can only advise pilots to keep it standard. When it hits the fan you will find your capacity is greatly reduced and you need a standard act to fall back on with the normal checklists while you concentrate on the abnormals.
Can you imagine in a court being asked by a lawyer why you saw fit to deviate from SOPs?
SOPs, checklists and limitations are there for a reason and it is not for the likes of us to bend them to suit ourselves.

[myekppa]

This thread's quite hilarious.

I now understand why some aussie pilots have earnt the 'Austronaut' title, based on Nitpickers demeanour. Mate.

A bit unfair really as they usually make far better pilots than cricket or rugby players.

[Basil]

they usually make far better pilots than cricket or rugby players.
Do you mean they're better at piloting than other cricket or rugby players are or they're better at piloting than they are at playing cricket or rugby? :}

Bas - didn't even remark last score to Oz DiL; she might hit me ;)

[BARKINGMAD]

This is a strange sort of behaviour to advocate.

My simple NG throws up all sorts of lights, blue and amber with MWS cautions even when only one is shutdown. I brief my oppo, as we decide to stop the appropriate (usually RH donk), to expect lights various, and as they occur they are all checked and accounted for.

So as you coast onto stand and even more system failure annunciators are lighting up, can you be absolutely certain NONE of them is something CRITICAL?

Methinks this profession's aptitude testing needs a radical overhaul to identify and isolate (chop!) those who wish to operate like this, or defend those who do!

[Ozlander1]

Me thinks I'll start coasting into the garage, save a bit of fuel, don't you know. :ok:

[Trackdiamond]

Here is your gotcha!

Imagine taxiing in heavy with a tailwind, Engines fuel cut off, roller coasting in with a smug grin...and RingRing!!! APU fire..AND some ramp vehicle is about to intercept your path...and need I add some unruly passengers at the sound of engines being shut down decide to stand and remove luggage from over head bins...and Mr.Murphy decides to thrown in a brake failure scenario or nosewheel deflation...that cockpit ain't gonna smell too good! Now imagine in command is ...Mr. Bean!

[DownIn3Green]

So in reply to Uplink...He is exactly correct...My experience with a major US carrier (Eastern Airlines) was shut down an engine on taxi in...But I was on the 727 and it was always #2...to lessen the footprint.

As far as powerback goes...yes we did that also...but only on certain gates at certain airports...Reason? Powerback requires a trained ground crew (with goggles) to direct you. Additionally, all GSE needs to be secured...lots of wind hitting the terminal, gate area...

Another issue was 2 engine powerbacks...we did it but only if taxi wgt was less than 160,000 lbs...(MGTOW of some of our 727's was 191,000)

It is always a physics vs cost over-ridden by safety

Sometimes good piloting, sometimes foolish...

[Mach E Avelli]

I have flown two types where power-backs were both approved in the FCOM and allowed by SOP. Other SOPs that I have operated with permitted one engine shut down during taxy-in and my current four engine type allows two engine shut down - but the engines that run the hydraulics must be kept running until brakes are parked. This is called CDF (common dog f...).

I have never flown a type where coasting with all engines off was permitted. Doing this is called a CLM (career limiting move).

[nitpicker330]

Ok, let me put this in CAPTIALS so you guys can read it. :sad:


I HAVE NEVER DONE OR NEVER WILL "COAST IN " TO THE STAND. I DON'T CONDONE THE PRACTICE AS I AGREE IF SOMETHING GOES WRONG YOU WILL BE IN A SPOT OF BOTHER OPERATING OUTSIDE SOP's :ooh:

ALL I'VE SAID IS THAT IT HAS BEEN DONE MANY TIMES IN 40 YEARS IN "SUITABLE " CIRCUMSTANCES WITHOUT INCIDENT THAT I'M AWARE OF.

Ok?? :ok:

[nitpicker330]

Trackdiamond:-----don't forget to add the Earthquake occurring at the same time you enter the stand or the piece of space junk re-entering the atmosphere and then hitting you as you pull in to the stand as well as a sneezing fit...!!

Anymore scenarios you'd like to think about????!!!;)

[Uplinker]

No, you actually said more than just that:-

1/ I haven't ever done it and won't
2/ I never suggested being daft and doing it in a wide body entering a confined area to an Aerobridge!!

3/ for smaller 737 ops in quiet open un-congested aprons ( with steps ) with a serviceable RUNNING APU I don't particularly see the serious problem if you cut both 60' before the stop point.

Silly and pointless? Maybe..........Dangerous? No.

You also said the accumulator gave you 8 applications of the brakes, but then you changed that to 6.

When you're in a hole.... stop digging !

[nitpicker330]

Haven't flown the 737 for 20 years so sorry if I changed the accumulator from 8 to 6 after I researched the books. You must have been bloody quick as I changed it no more than 5 mins later!!!

My opinions haven't changed and I think I've been pretty consistant throughout, pity some here can't read.:ugh:

[aviatorhi]

Coasting into the gate is a dumb idea at best. Never do it myself (and I'm usually a gung ho type), apart from fooling around in the sim, and in that case I shut the engines down when clearing on the high speed at 80 knots to see if I can make it to the gate.

Can it be done? Yes, absolutely, but you leave yourself potentially one failure away from no steering or brakes.

Also, the tools bragging about the accumulator, what's your recourse when the leak is in the brakes themselves, or a return line (has happened to me). On the 727 we at least have pneumatic brakes.

Additionally, when doing single engine taxi I strongly advise to keep the engine which pressurizes the HYD system on which the NWS is to be the last one shut down after a complete stop.

[Citation2]

Another cowboy undocumented and invented procedure .

[Boeing 77W]

However I really would like to know if this is something that has been suggested within the airline to save fuel and time. Further to this, the same low cost airline only uses 1 minute cool down time for its engines rather than the Boeing time of 3 mins - sad I know but I've timed it!

It has not been suggested by the company. This sounds like individuals going outside of the SOPs. I've spoken to a couple of guys, one of whom has seen it done several times.

The company also uses a 3 minute cool down period in it's SOPs as per the Boeing recommendation, one of the considerations for single engine taxi. So again. Sounds like people operating in their own fashion.

[750XL]

With the implementation of 'Safedock' at my station, I've noticed it happens a hell of a lot more often with a particular LCC who have a large fleet of 738's.

Only a couple of weeks ago the captain cut the engines about 20meters off the stop bar, presumably coasting to a stop. Catering truck started to reverse off the next stand so I hit the emergency stop button. Aircraft stopped, half on the taxiway, half off stand.

Once the obstruction (catering truck) was clear Airfield Ops came to marshal the aircraft on stand, which had no power :E He spent 5 minutes blocking the taxiway while he restarted the engines to come back on stand.

[nitpicker330]

Thankyou, that is exactly the situation a sensible commander should never contemplate the practice, not to an Aerobridge in a busy closed in area.

I only ever said it "could be done" to an open quiet big empty apron such as Rockhampton. When I saw it done there were no other Aircraft around with only an Engineer and Marshall waiting on the Tarmac.

Having said that I wouldn't do it....

[vilas]

These are all non standard immature personal procedures. No company asks you to do it. These come out of boredom of the routine so you try to become creative and as a bit of show off.Cockpit is a dangerous place to be creative. If not stopped in its track leads to inflight deviations and incidents. I had a collegue who would never use Auto Brake and full reverse on 747 till one day landing on a shorter RW in heavy rain trying to do the same thing went off at the other end. Aircraft and pilot both were on ground for months.