Airbus Start Procedure
Thread Starter
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 58
Likes: 0
From: AUSTRALIA
Airbus Start Procedure
Can someone tell me whats the difference if you start engine 1 first or engine 2 first. I know some airlines SOP say engine 1 1st and some airlines SOP say engine 2 1st? Does it matter?
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 1,337
Likes: 1
From: Sunrise Senior Living
Assuming you are talking about the A320 Series, no 2 is started first because it powers the yellow hyd sys which in turn powers the parking brake which should be keeping you where you are at the time.
Cheers,
mcdhu
Cheers,
mcdhu
The Bumblebee
Joined: Jul 1999
Posts: 333
Likes: 1
From: Inside the shiny tube.
Well, for single engine taxi in 320, # 1 engine is started first as it pressurises the G hyd system (normal braking). Whereas for normal taxi #2 is started first as it pressurises the Y hyd system for parking brakes.
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
From: Planet earth
Starting 3 or 4 first.
Well for the A380, the body gear steering is powered by the yellow system and that is in turn powered by no 3 or 4 so we start those first even in a crossbleed start without APU. A380 has only 2 engine driven hydraulic systems with electro-hydraulic backup.
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 451
Likes: 2
From: USA
Yes, that's correct...
To my understanding, it's true. Both Airbus and Boeing do not recommend single-engine taxi. But, the airlines (a.k.a the customers) have demanded that Airbus and Boeing come up with 'approved' procedures to do this...with the high cost of fuel and all. The aircraft manufacturers have satisfied the airlines with approved procedures...adding the footnote that single-engine taxi is not recommended, but also stating that there is "NTO"....no technical objection. This way, FAA and JAA are happy.
We've beaten this topic to death in previous threads. Is single-engine taxi safe? Does it really save that much fuel (money)? ....the questions go on and on.
At my old carrier (before my retirement), we did single-engine taxi as a 'normal procedure'. That is, unless circumstances and conditions prohibited it (as per the discretion of the captain), single-engine taxi would be performed...both in taxiing out for takeoff and taxiing in after landing. Few problems resulted, as far as I know.
Anyway, that's my two cents worth to the discussion...
Fly safe,
PantLoad
We've beaten this topic to death in previous threads. Is single-engine taxi safe? Does it really save that much fuel (money)? ....the questions go on and on.
At my old carrier (before my retirement), we did single-engine taxi as a 'normal procedure'. That is, unless circumstances and conditions prohibited it (as per the discretion of the captain), single-engine taxi would be performed...both in taxiing out for takeoff and taxiing in after landing. Few problems resulted, as far as I know.
Anyway, that's my two cents worth to the discussion...
Fly safe,
PantLoad
