I have looked through the tutorials and can't seem to locate this procedure. If engine 2 is started first with the APU running, and then the APU is turned off, how does one start engine number 1?  

I think you have to wait for about 15% N1 and switch the engine bleed on. And make sure that the isolation valve is on auto.

There should be a cross bleed procedure in the Supplementary Procedures (section 7, engines/apu), FCOM 1.

There should be a cross bleed procedure in the Supplementary Procedures (section 7, engines/apu), FCOM 1.

 

He is not talking about a crossbleed start. A crossbleed start is when you start no 1

have looked through the tutorials and can't seem to locate this procedure. If engine 2 is started first with the APU running, and then the APU is turned off, how does one start engine number 1?

 

Are you making up procedures? Why would you turn off the APU after a NP start?

You may well normally start eng 1 from ground air then crossbleed start eng 2, but you can still crossbleed start eng 1 from eng 2 if necessary. The APU might fail after eng 2 is running, for example. That might well be done in sim training to unexpectedly force a crossbleed start procedure.

 

 

He is not talking about a crossbleed start. A crossbleed start is when you start no 1

 

A crossbleed start is when you start another engine using an engine that has already been started. The engine number doesn't matter.

He is not talking about a crossbleed start. A crossbleed start is when you start no 1

 

Not really. Starting any engine using the other one is a crossbleed start.

 

 

 

Are you making up procedures? Why would you turn off the APU after a NP start?

 

No need to be so harsh here. As Kevin pointed out, you may well do so to simulate an APU failure. Or else you may very well do so just because you WANT TO and you CAN. It's a simulator after all.

 

A crossbleed start is when you start another engine using an engine that has already been started. The engine number doesn't matter.

 

You shot faster than me!

From my point of view its not in the NP or SP so there for IM NOT BEING HARSH, but i only asked if you are making up procedures because thats the first i've heard of that.

 

ALPHA FLOOR wind your neck in. I only asked if hes making it up!!!

 

 

IM NOT BEING HARSH

 

 

ALPHA FLOOR wind your neck in

 

Ok.

This is what I was looking for.   

You may well normally start eng 1 from ground air then crossbleed start eng 2, but you can still crossbleed start eng 1 from eng 2 if necessary. The APU might fail after eng 2 is running, for example. That might well be done in sim training to unexpectedly force a crossbleed start procedure.

 

Or a one engine taxi with APU off for some reason. 

Or a one engine taxi with APU off for some reason.

 

I know its only the sim and i follow a strict ops manual a and SOPs. But no company that i know of recommends OET (one engine taxi) purely needing sufficient heat in the engine before setting takeoff thrust.

 

Only done after landing and after 3 minutes cool down.

 

But of course crack on

I know its only the sim and i follow a strict ops manual a and SOPs. But no company that i know of recommends OET (one engine taxi) purely needing sufficient heat in the engine before setting takeoff thrust.

 

Only done after landing and after 3 minutes cool down.

 

But of course crack on

 

A good friend of mine who is an Pilot for Delta, with about 14,000 hours would disagree with you.  

A good friend of mine who is an Pilot for Delta, with about 14,000 hours would disagree with you.  

 

Different companies have different SOPs. Countering company procedure with company procedure isn't going to get people anywhere...particularly when one operator uses off-hub airports, and another uses megahubs with long taxi times, queues and occasional ground holds. Note Vernon said "that I know of."

 

I'd avoid throwing hours around, too. It's rare that it actually adds to a discussion, despite how often it's thrown around in this industry.

Different companies have different SOPs. Countering company procedure with company procedure isn't going to get people anywhere...particularly when one operator uses off-hub airports, and another uses megahubs with long taxi times, queues and occasional ground holds. Note Vernon said "that I know of."

 

I'd avoid throwing hours around, too. It's rare that it actually adds to a discussion, despite how often it's thrown around in this industry.

 

 I personally  have been on many flights in real life as a passenger, where single engine taxi was frequently  used and second engine was started a few minutes prior to taking the active. Airlines included Delta, and United. 

 I personally  have been on many flights in real life as a passenger, where single engine taxi was frequently  used and second engine was started a few minutes prior to taking the active. Airlines included Delta, and United. 

 

Re-read my post above. Never said it didn't happen. I was saying an op like Delta - the "and another uses megahubs with long taxi times, queues and occasional ground holds" part - may use them, while an op like RyanAir - the "when one operator uses off-hub airports" part - may not. This would explain the discrepancy between the two viewpoints.