PPRuNe Forums

Go Back   PPRuNe Forums > Flight Deck Forums > Tech Log
Forgotten your Username/Password?
Register FAQ Calendar Advertise Mark Forums Read

Tech Log The very best in practical technical discussion on the web


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 1st November 2009, 14:06   #1 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: united arab emirates
Posts: 268
B777 APU to pressurize in flight ?

Just doing a little thinking , hypothetically

OK so we are in the cruise ( FL 330)over high terrain ( say 15000 ft)
We get EICAS , BLEED OFF ENG L. OK .
Shortly afterwards we loose The Right Engine.

OK I know we have a drift down to consider and off course will have a depressirisation strategy to follow ( while the cabin slowly depressurises). Proceduraly OK.

But what about starting the APU ( once we have done the important stuff of course) and using it to pressurise the Cabin.
Assuming we are at a weight where we can maintain say FL210 ENG OUT.
I see the MEL is the only source of guidance ( Turn Off ENG Bleed Switches , PUT on APU bLEED Switch , Turn off wing Anti Ice, See you are FL220 or lower etc etc)

However are we really going to be doing this ( consulting the MEL at this time) ?
Is there any other reference apart from the MEL or systems knowledge that will lead us to pressurising the cabin this way ?

My present company is draconian to anyone who thinks outside the box , following a procedure withiut guidance from a Checklist etc.

Just curious chaps , and ladies , your views ?
fourgolds is offline   Reply
Old 1st November 2009, 14:15   #2 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Middle East
Posts: 96
Thats been a standard sim upgrade loft scenario in EK for years. You pretty much knew what was coming when you saw the high MSA routing and the MEL.
Its not a rapid loss of cabin pressure when you lose the opposite engine so if you do the memory items then nip down to say, 20,000' while starting the APU you can even avoid the CABIN ALT EICAS.
There is a section in the checklist preamble and probably your FOM with gives you the flexibility to be creative when checklists do not cover a particular situation.
It should be briefed for prior to departure though.

Just noticed your location - not EK are you?

Last edited by NO LAND 3 : 1st November 2009 at 14:30.
NO LAND 3 is offline   Reply
Old 1st November 2009, 16:21   #3 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: united arab emirates
Posts: 268
I know its an old loft scenario. However if you despatch under the MEL with the Bleed off fault , then you are directed in the MEL with what to do in the event of the scenario described. However , if it just happens in flight the way I described. You have to configure the bleeds from memory to get the APU to provide the packs ( Not rocket science , but stepping outside the box) . EK, EY ,QR , who cares where I am from its all the same sandbox and it sucks.
fourgolds is offline   Reply
Old 2nd November 2009, 12:20   #4 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: wales
Posts: 93
Depends which engine you've lost , if its number 2 you could only use no 1 OR APU for packs . Anyway whats the worry , one pack is MEL 'able with altitude restriction so wouldnt really improve things ? (if you can get it to start at altitude !)
bvcu is online now   Reply
Old 2nd November 2009, 13:33   #5 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Middle East
Posts: 96
I think I see your point which is how come in the Boeing such a hypocritical system has evolved. On the one hand we have a super smart electronic checklist integrated with the aircraft systems which we are trained to strictly follow. And yet this holy grail of a philosophy gets casually chucked out the window when the aircraft is dispatched under an MEL.
Furthermore, the associated MEL procedures are often poorly written, ambiguous and complex.
Is that the point you were making?

I do concur Sir!
NO LAND 3 is offline   Reply
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes


Posting Rules
vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 20:49.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2009, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
SEO by vBSEO 3.2.0 RC7
© 1996-2009 The Professional Pilots Rumour Network

As these are anonymous forums the origins of the contributions may be opposite to what may be apparent. In fact the press may use it, or the unscrupulous, or sciolists*, to elicit certain reactions.

*"sciolist"... Noun, archaic. "a person who pretends to be knowledgeable and well informed".