Taxiing one engine out

[Luc47]

Hello,
At Heathrow airport, it is clearly mentioned that one should not cross a runway with one engine out. Is it a rule that applies to all airports or is it allowed unless clearly mentioned ?

[FlightDetent]

Never seen it mandated elsewhere. It is a pity they needed resorting to such measure, though I see the point of it rather clearly.

[wanabee777]

Hello,
At Heathrow airport, it is clearly mentioned that one should not cross a runway with one engine out. Is it a rule that applies to all airports or is it allowed unless clearly mentioned ?

As a courtesy to the ground controllers as well as landing traffic, I generally did not shut down any engines after landing until clear of all active runways.

One go around negates the fuel savings from a bunch of single engine taxiing aircraft.

[CaptainMongo]

In the U.S., lower 48, I know of no airport which regulates how many engines one must taxi with. I fly the 319/320, inbound taxi I can cross a runway virtually as fast SE and with two. Outbound taxi depends on weight, contamination or local requirements (tight turn from gate)

I flew into LHR regularly years ago and don't remember that restriction, although we didn't taxi SE in the -777 and -767 so it would not have mattered.

[tubby linton]

I would say it is good airmanship but you need to ask the pilot of the aircraft who when crossing an active runway and the crew were involved in starting the second engine,the pilot monitoring shutdown the running engine!!

[No Fly Zone]

I've personally never heard of such a rule, but I've also never flown into LHR. Even old farts like me can grasp the logic. It is not an unreasonable suggestion but... Given the wide differences between airports, runways and taxiway layouts - to say nothing of the differences between aircraft types, I think it would be nearly impossible to make this a formal 'rule.'
I rather like response #3 from wannabe777 and keeping all engines burning at least until clear of the last active runway. SOP or not, his practice sounds like a very good choice. At the end of the day, the ticket sellers and the cabin crews do compete - a lot. and it ends behind that semi-secure door. Forward of said door it is still safe flying and noting else. Good airmanship and courtesy are important, there is no company or brand competition at the pointy end. Safety and courtesy are the operative practices. Period. With apologies for the sermon, we already know this stuff. Once in a while, someone forgets, but I think most readers of this space include such things in their daily practices.
**If anyone** comes up with a citation for the SE rule at LHR, I'd sure like to see it! (Now long retired, it make no difference to me, but again, I've never heard of such a rule. Anyone?

[wanabee777]

From my former company's Jepp 10-7 pg for LHR:


Reduced Engine Taxi (RET) While Crossing a Runway

• Pilots desiring single engine taxi should notify Delivery on first contact.
• Terminal 3 operations: RET for takeoff or after landing are authorized when operating to/from T3.
• Terminal 4 operations: RET outbound to Rwy 9R/27L is permitted.
- If assigned 9L/27R for takeoff, start both engines to cross 9R/27L.
• After landing, RET is permitted when crossing Rwy 9R/27L, to T4.
• Expedite when cleared to cross.

[seen_the_box]

Barcelona tower has been known to ask if we have both engines running before authorising us to cross 25R on the way to 25L/07R for departure. Seems fair enough to me.

[No Fly Zone]

Sir,
-
Thank you for the finer details. As noted before, the idea does have merit - "I what my runway, now." per tower/ground and I understand. I've simply never seen such a thing before. Thank you for the follow up!!

[FlightDetent]

http://www.ead.eurocontrol.int/pamslight/pdf/4e415453/EG/C/EN/AIP/AD/EG_AD_2_EGLL_en

EGLL AD 2.20 LOCAL TRAFFIC REGULATIONS

(i) Reduced Engine Taxi
(i) Pilots who intend to execute a Reduced Engine Taxi Out must report their intention to Heathrow Delivery on first
contact.
(ii) Reduced Engine Taxi can be used, at the discretion of the aircraft commander, EXCEPT in the following
circumstances:
aa. By any aircraft that is required to cross an active runway;
bb. By any aircraft, from Terminal 4 (Z,W,T,V) when the southern runway is in use for landings;
cc. By any aircraft exiting T and turning west onto S due to jet blast affecting Stand 412;
dd. By B777 variants in G and H due to jet blast;
ee. Where commanders of aircraft are aware that their taxi routing or entry onto stand is likely to involve tight turns or
gradients requiring significant power increases.

[wanabee777]

Obviously, my former employer's tailored Jepp special pages are not up to date.

Not surprising....

[FlightDetent]

You stated the source (-7) and validity well. It's NFZ's thank you that made me realize there was room for additional reference.

Official state data is openly published and easily accessible online these days, I enjoy using those to clarify stuff for myself. E.g. the current Lido does not paint the full picture here: Pilots who intend to execute a reduced ENG taxi out must report their intention to Heathrow Delivery on first contact.
Reduced ENG taxi is not AVBL to ACFT required to cross an active RWY.

[Piltdown Man]

What is all this rubbish about airmanship, monitoring, rules, regulations etc.? Why complicate a simple procedure with all this guff? Single engine taxiing saves fuel. There are times when is makes sense and times when it doesn't; it should be left to our judgement. Unfortunately one airport, LHR, has decided unlaterally for reasons only known to themselves that they will prohibit the crossing of active runways by aircraft with "reduced engine running". So be it and I comply. As a result, I pollute the air at LHR with 200 Kgs of CO2 near enough every time I fly there. As a company, I reckon we unnecessarily waste nearly 2,000 Kgs of fuel every day at LHR whilst taxiing.

PM

[Skornogr4phy]

As others have said, it depends on the conditions. If it's a hot day and I'm at max TO weight, keep two engines running. If it's a cool day and you have light loads, single engine taxi. Even then, delaying while crossing a busy runway is a bit on the silly side.

[Ian W]

From the ground procedure side, the problem that was always of more concern was jet blast from the one (or two) remaining engines on gradients, turns, or even on restarting taxiing after a halt. This is probably why ground wants to know so they ensure there is separation behind an aircraft on reduced engine taxi. A considerable amount of unintentional damage can be done with jet blast.
The chance of an engine failure just as you cross an active runway must be extraordinarily low almost certainly meets the target level of safety for operations. Unlike the probability of damage to a smaller aircraft immediately behind a stationary widebody on SET at an uphill runway crossing point when the widebody is given a 'cross immediate'

[Max Angle]

What is all this rubbish about airmanship, monitoring, rules, regulations etc.? Well I am guessing its because various crews failed to exercise good airmanship and caused enough go-arounds on 27L at LHR for it to become a problem. I've gone around a couple of times there myself when traffic that had been told to expedite took a leisurely Sunday drive across the runway.

[Piltdown Man]

...even with two engines running? The problem is the drivers, not the number of engines that are not running. So this is a cure for a problem that doesn't exist, especially on smaller aircraft.

PM