PDA

View Full Version : Ops question!


Markieboy
22nd Sep 2011, 05:42
Hello everybody,

I am studying for my 4 bar exam and have been playing with scenario's etc. One of the questions I haven't been able to answer is this:

Am I allowed (EU-OPS wise) to embark/disembark pax with an engine running (737)?

I am aware it is potentially very dangerous and I am not asking whether or not one should do this, I am merely looking to where the law stands on this.

Thanks.

dixi188
22nd Sep 2011, 09:30
Not sure of the law, but you can do it with helicopters so I don't see why you can't with fixed wing A/C, as long as you have an approved procedure.

westhawk
22nd Sep 2011, 10:21
If it's allowed in your op, it'll be in the ops manual.

First.officer
22nd Sep 2011, 12:47
Hi Markie,

As per previous posters remarks, can't say for your individual Ops Manual (within which will be guidance for you i'm sure), but looking at EU-OPS, if you have a look at the Appendix 1 to OPS 1.1045 (Ops Manual Contents), and look at 8.2.1 & 8.2.2, this is the area that most likely encompasses what you seek with regard to relevant information in your Company Specific Ops Manuals - appreciate that isn't a definitive answer, but hopefully will help you "zone in" on the relevant area in your manuals !.

Dan Winterland
22nd Sep 2011, 13:07
In our manuals, we have a procedure for refuelling with an engine running, but none for disembarking or embarking. So we can refuel, so long as we take the passengers back to where they came from!

Markieboy
28th Sep 2011, 08:11
Thanks guys, we too have restrictions for refueling with an engine running but that is without pax. I'll have a look at OPS. I'll post whatever I find here.

Many thanks again.

grounded27
28th Sep 2011, 08:30
WOW, common sense is really dead. It has been murdered by liability driven processes and procedure......

EDIT.. on the fuel issue. Operating an MD-11F PW4000 engined aircraft, had to divert because we were overloaded. APU inop and the airport did not have 2 huffers to start engines. Spent 20 minutes taking and throwing nut shots with the island airport to convince them they had no other choice to fuel us up with #2 eng running to get us back in the air. Not sure I won as the island had some great beaches..

xtypeman
28th Sep 2011, 09:34
The ATR uses No2 in hotel mode as APU so allowable for pax disembarking etc.

Dani
28th Sep 2011, 09:44
I think it's most probably allowed according the law. There isn't an air starter unit on every airport in Europe, and if you cannot start with your own bleed (bleed or APU problem) you have to do it with a running engine.

I remember when they did it:
Park the aircraft, engine 1 off, pax disembark, start eng 1 with eng 2, eng 2 off, start fuelling, catering aso, start eng 2 with eng 1, eng 1 off, let the people in, start eng 1 with eng 2. Off you go!

One airline would limit itself by quite a bit if it wouldn't allow this procedure.

Escape Path
28th Sep 2011, 19:38
@grounded27

Out of curiosity, how did you manage to be overloaded without first noticing before departing and diverting because of that? :confused:

Never heard of anything like it

grounded27
29th Sep 2011, 00:59
We were operating an MD-11F ACMI. The cargo agent (working for our customer) was suspect of and I believe convicted for altering the pallet weights. There is no way of knowing the true weight of this type of aircraft, all is based on calculation. We (testiment to the airframe) had a normal T/O / climb, it took us about 4-5 hours to see that we did not have the fuel to meet destination.

Slasher
29th Sep 2011, 02:34
If its in your ops manual you are permitted to do it. I've done
4 of them so far in my career (3 unplanned, 1 planned). The
procedure is as what Dani said.

If its NOT permitted in your Company's books then DON'T do
it, even though the manufacturer may have a procedure. You
will not only incur the wrath of the CP, but the Authority who
issued your licence will also want to know what the hell you
were doing as it'll be seen as a safety issue.

Escape Path
29th Sep 2011, 15:23
Ah I see, thanks for the enlightment :)