A320 Single engine ops
 

The taxi at small airfields like EGNM is far too short to bother with all the single engine taxi procedures, surely? And cos you're not allowed to cross the runway without the second engine started, there's no advantage in bothering, is there?

This goes to all A320 pilots running out of small airfields - surely the taxi time is so small that there's no point in faffing with all the procedures that go with single engine taxi? I can see the point at somewhere like EHAM or EGLL, but not somewhere like EGNM or EGAC?

1234

Taxi time under 15 minutes, why bother.

15 minutes!? Are you kidding me? That's nearly 180 lbs, 27 gal, an easy $100 out the tail pipe for no particular reason. Our lot will SE taxi an A320 if it saves 2 minutes. It takes about 1/16th of a First Officer's brain capacity to throw the necessary switches. The cross-pond culture gap boggles my mind sometimes.

How does this affect a non-pilot? You don't seem to be asking, you are almost telling pilots there. What's the score and how are you affected (out of interest)? Taxi times are not all that short there. Any saving is a saving. What is the skin off your nose?

7 seconds...
 

.. The time it takes me to run the single engine taxi check list. I must be a saddo - I timed it!:hmm:

Generally, taxi-ing speed is not affected and brake wear reduced. Saves 3-4 kg per minute, and thats on the diddy Embraer 145 I fly !

Hi guys,

well to be very honest we're trying to save even 1 kg of fuel, whether it means single engine taxi, CONF 3 landings (a320 family), keeping her in thrust idle from top of descent to glide intercept, packs off take off's, high speed climb, REV idle at touchdown. However i just wanted to point out that there's a trade off everywhere, eg. reverse idle at touch down, you heat up the brakes tremendously, single eng taxi would create large imbalances between left and right tank. Furthermore with a heavier aircraft on the day you would have to use more power on the live engine during turns, resulting in the same consumption. So the question is is it effective ?

on the 737 you don't have to do anything special,just close the start lever.It takes about 1 sec....fuel usage around 5-6 kg /min.
For 2 min- 10-12 kg save. For one flight 20-24 kg savings. If I do 15 flights /month result 300-360kg. For 10months (as we have 2 months vacation :) ) result 3000-3600kg.
And if we are,let's say 50 cpt's then on one year is about 150T to 180T.
What do you think now about the 2 min single engine taxi?

For climb,would it be more economical to fly max rate?

Flight Director 7
All good fuel saving techniques. Every kg saved is worthwhile. Don't worry about your hotter than normal brakes. If you have fans leave them off until pushback on the next sector and they'll cool fine by themselves with the brakes off. Not so fast with brakes on. You just need them to be below 300 deg C for the next takeoff.

CFM doesn't recomend single engine taxi out. They give several reasons:
Starting an engine without outside supervision (leaks, fire,etc); warm-up time (Airbus tells 2 minutes but CFM says optimum is 10-15 mins) that reduces engine life or could result in engine failure. So adding all up, it's not worth it.

So, I won't do single engine taxi out, however I'll do it when I taxiing in.

Check Six Krueger...:ok:

I fly the 20s and i think the only problem comes in when u come to a complete stop or uphill or badly paved tarmac... sometimes the thrust req to overcome this is much more than what is normal...
key ways to overcome is enter the turn with a little more speed than normal...
other than that... anytime the taxi time is more than 3 min... i'd say use it... to each his own...

the single engine taxi procedure is only for arrival, not for departure and (at least in cfm engines) engine must run at idle power 3 minutes before being shut down.