Originally Posted by
QuarterInchSocket
you assume the need for a technique without considering that perhaps there has been an analysis conducted by a team of professional engineers in an office working for the apu oem, the aircraft manufacturer and the airline whose sole job description might be to consider the effects of temperature on apu/jet engine performance, BEFORE apu certification and IN-SERVICE, on a worldwide fleet, with experience in a range of operating conditions.
An assumption is also made that somehow all pilots around the world have been applying the suggested ‘technique’, leading to the apu reliability rates that underpin etops certification.
No - I just don’t think so. I think pilots have been cranking straight away relying on inbuilt protections (as designed and certified) to auto-shutdown if the apu is unhappy.
There is nothing wrong with developing technique, but some measure of reason needs to be applied and tested, and I don’t think delaying an apu start for cold soaked apu because it is thought to be healthy for it, is reasonable. There is no evidence that supports the ‘technique’ unlike the other examples you gave, which can be sensed immediately.
Thank you, enlightened response.
Im a very simple carbon based life form and mostly water at that. Easily confused.
So getting told off 180 degrees apart confuses me lol.
I think I can put this to bed now.
As far as the brain dead comment, we have all flown with brain dead people.