A320 Operators with both CFM and IAE engines (differences training)

[Andy24]

The airline I fly (Europe) with is leasing in an A320 with CFM engines. I appreciate that it is up to the operator to decide, in accordance with EASA regulations, the differences training to be given to its pilots.

May I please enquire with those in a similar situation (only Lufthansa comes to mind) what differences training you are given

[TopBunk]

We used to fly both in BA until the G-BUSx aircraft were retired.

I haven't flown the A320 since 2005, but recall very little differences training. More just a note pointing to the limitations etc. Maybe a remark about likely N1's in flight of the CFM engines (IAE were the majority). That was about it - 5 minutes tops iirc.

[Ollie Onion]

Yep, I used to fly both in a legacy airline and the differences training was a laminated card on the flight deck with the differences and limitations etc. That was it.

[tubby linton]

The differences are very minor.The CFM starts quicker and it needs less time after start to warm up. The only oddities are if you have a DAC (Dual annular combustor) CFM. This was an attempt by CFM to try and make it more efficient but it never really delivered on what they hoped. It has different acceleration schedules and restrictions on using DES mode. Intermixing is allowed.

[Metro man]

Vietnam Airlines operate A320 CFM and A321 IAE.

[compressor stall]

Not a huge difference in practice. Start times are a major one, but not something you need training for.

Starter limitations are different of course and annoying to commit to memory, but by the time you need to know them, you're probably into the FCOM anyway.

You could cover the differences training in a powerpoint presentation in 15 mins IMHO.

[Fursty Ferret]

Don't recall any formal differences training at my last carrier which inherited two IAE 320s. Beyond what others have mentioned...

- The IAE seems more vulnerable than the CFM to uneven acceleration, so pay careful attention to ensuring you've stabilised at 1.05 EPR / 50% N1 before whacking the thrust levers forward.

- Greater residual thrust compared to the CFM (possibly an illusion!). Closing the thrust levers at about 35 feet works well for me.

That's all I can think of, though if you've got different engines you might have a different FMS (Thales vs Honeywell). They're not difficult to get your head around.

[PENKO]

A couple of pages about the different systems, that's all.
The most annoying things is, that coming from CFM, you have no clue about EPR settings..

[Andy24]

Thank you all for your feedback. Much appreciated

[muti]

Fly the "PFD" you should be fine also "TLA" same

[student88]

We used to fly both in BA until the G-BUSx aircraft were retired.


BA still fly both engines as the A318s at LCY are powered by CFMs.

[Metro man]

Just for interest, once its left the factory its impossible to switch to the other engine type.

[Check Airman]

Why is that?

[DaveReidUK]

Why is that?

Nothing is impossible - it's just pointless and expensive, which is why no airline has ever wanted to do it.

OTOH, several Airbus prototypes and pre-production aircraft have had different manufacturers' engines hung on them over the years.

[Escape Path]

During training there wasn't too much fuss about it. As others have pointed out, going from CFM to IAE (maybe the other way too) is somewhat "uncomfortable" to look at the EW/D at first because of the EPR gauge. Starter, warm up and oil qty limitations vary, but nothing to worry about. Plus the MAN N1 sw on the overhead for manual engine starts.

Our training (on CBT) only highlighted the differences, when applicable, while describing a particular engine component. I reckon it was enough. Only a few things change and they're not particularly lengthy; they're more "annotations" than anything else, I think. So long as you mention the ones that pertain to the operation, I would reckon you're good to go

[screwdriver]

During training there wasn't too much fuss about it. As others have pointed out, going from CFM to IAE (maybe the other way too) is somewhat "uncomfortable" to look at the EW/D at first because of the EPR gauge. Starter, warm up and oil qty limitations vary, but nothing to worry about. Plus the MAN N1 sw on the overhead for manual engine starts.

Our training (on CBT) only highlighted the differences, when applicable, while describing a particular engine component. I reckon it was enough. Only a few things change and they're not particularly lengthy; they're more "annotations" than anything else, I think. So long as you mention the ones that pertain to the operation, I would reckon you're good to go


Don't both have Manual start pbs? The N1 pb is for EPR mode problems🤔

[Metro man]

In the beginning CFM was the better engine but IAE caught up and they are now pretty much even. Price and customer support would be the main deciding factors when purchasing.

Whilst having the same engines on all aircraft has obvious advantages, if you have different types your entire fleet won't be affected at the same time if a problem emerges. Think of the problems for RR engined A380 operators after the Qantas incident in Singapore.

[Escape Path]

Don't both have Manual start pbs? The N1 pb is for EPR mode problems🤔
Both have manual eng start pbs, but only the IAE-equipped aircraft have the ENG N1 mode as the CFM have N1 as a main engine parameter already