DHL Air & EAT - APU use
 

Why is there such a polarised philosophy regarding the use of the APU between DHL Air and EAT? DHL Air use the APU as one imagines it should be (start after landing); EAT aircraft sit on stand with one engine running until ground power is connected - IMHO a rather dangerous practice at madhouse airports like BRU.

How about leased APUs with an additional charge/cycle ?

Dusk,

I can't recall whether DHL Air or EAT record using the hour-meter or aircraft cycles (1 cycle = 1 start). If the latter, I cannot remember seeing any provision in either tech log to record APU starts. It is possible APU use is assumed and tracked on an aircraft cycle basis.

We have seperate management and although SOPs are much more harmonised there are some differences in philosophy.

The EAT not starting the APU on the 757 is a carry over from the A300, though why they started doing it on that I'm not sure, when Air Contractors had the A300 they certainly never had the policy of not starting the APU. (At least if they did have the policy it was dropped on saftey grounds very quickly)

As for the cycles run on the APU on the 757 I would think they are automatically recorded by the QAR rather that just on an assumed 2 starts per sector.

APU hours
 

:} Apu hours

The G Reg` DHL 757`s, the Apu hours are recorded on every Service check. There, easy.

the D.H.L. A300s have a counter built in to the APU , they do not start after landing then they only one APU start for engine start and there for reduse there starts by 50%. saving mony on maint.

Peeps, an interesting thread. The airline I work for has been through similar over the last few years (B744F); ie should we or shouldn't we. Believe me, it was one heck of a discussion, with tests, flowcharts :rolleyes: .... you name it.

I'm moving this one to TechLog, as I feel the discussion is worthy of a wider audience.

Brgds