AA Super 80 Gate Engine Shutdown Proc. — Tech Ops Forum

Sponsor Message:


My Starred Topics \| Profile \| New Topic \| Forum Index \| Help \| Search

AA Super 80 Gate Engine Shutdown Proc.

IAHFLYR From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 4719 posts, RR: 25
Posted (6 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 2250 times:

Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

I have a good opportunity to observe the Terminal A ramp at IAH where AA parks on the southside which creates the question of why do the Super 80's keep 1 engine running for 3-5 minutes once parked at the jetway, in the chocks, jetway connected, and baggage door open?

I've witnessed this numerous times and only find this to happen with AA and their 80's....CO didn't operate their MD80 fleet in such a manner when they flew them nor do I find the AA B738's doing it either, but that may only be due to the quieter engines on the B738.

Thanks in advance for all ideas and help.

[Edited 2007-01-23 22:28:19]

Any views shared are strictly my own and do not a represent those of any former employer.

9 replies: All unread, jump to last

MX757 From United States of America, joined Aug 2005, 602 posts, RR: 12
Reply 1, posted (6 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 2240 times:

That's a very interesting observation. The only reason I can think why AA leaves an engine running is that the APU is inoperative and they are waiting for external power to be hooked up before shutting down the engine.

How many a/c did you observe?

Is it broke...? Yeah I'll fix it.

IAHFLYR From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 4719 posts, RR: 25
Reply 2, posted (6 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 2233 times:

Quoting MX757 (Reply 1):
How many a/c did you observe?

Almost everyone of them......but I didn't think about the APU and it might be to save cycles on the APU and that little bit of fuel it would burn while they are connecting up the ground power! MMMM I don't think that is a likely senario as the extra fuel burned with the engine at idle would seem to be worth more than the APU cycles and fuel burn of the APU! Confused

Any views shared are strictly my own and do not a represent those of any former employer.

VTBDflyer From Thailand, joined Aug 2006, 368 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (6 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 2201 times:

Quoting IAHFLYR (Reply 2):
Almost everyone of them......but I didn't think about the APU and it might be to save cycles on the APU and that little bit of fuel it would burn while they are connecting up the ground power! MMMM I don't think that is a likely senario as the extra fuel burned with the engine at idle would seem to be worth more than the APU cycles and fuel burn of the APU!

It does take a little while for the APU to start up, so for a short period of time both the engines and APU are running. But, I'm not sure that it would make a huge difference in dollars lost.

VTBDflyer

Fly Thai

MX757 From United States of America, joined Aug 2005, 602 posts, RR: 12
Reply 4, posted (6 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 2187 times:

Quoting VTBDflyer (Reply 3):
It does take a little while for the APU to start up, so for a short period of time both the engines and APU are running. But, I'm not sure that it would make a huge difference in dollars lost.

This sounds like a very likely scenario. I agree with you, I don't think it would make a huge difference either. I guess AA crunched the numbers and decided it was cheaper to leave number 1 engine running instead of cranking the APU.

Is it broke...? Yeah I'll fix it.

AAR90 From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 3410 posts, RR: 50
Reply 5, posted (6 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 2119 times:

Way...way...way back when I was flying MD80s, AA published an 8 minute break even cost/benefit point for APU vs. one engine idle at the gate. At that time that analysis included the cost of the added APU cycle as well as fuel use. Not sure what the numbers are now or if the S80 fleet even has a published break even number (738s do not); however, it is supposed to be AA policy to NOT operate the APU upon arrival and I suspect the crew was simply waiting for the ground power to be applied.

*NO CARRIER* -- A Naval Aviator's worst nightmare!

Iahflyr From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 4719 posts, RR: 25
Reply 6, posted (6 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 2099 times:

Quoting AAR90 (Reply 5):
however, it is supposed to be AA policy to NOT operate the APU upon arrival and I suspect the crew was simply waiting for the ground power to be applied.

Thank you very much for your insight.

Any views shared are strictly my own and do not a represent those of any former employer.

TWAL1011727 From United States of America, joined Mar 2006, 597 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (6 years 3 months 3 weeks 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 1832 times:

Most newer style (less than 20 yrs old) jetbridges have a circuit that will not allow the jetbridge to move towards the A/C if the power cable is lowered. When the power is turned on total movement of the jetbridge is inhibited.
This is so a gate agent cannot pull the jetbridge off the A/C while the power is still connected to the A/C.

Airlines that want to save cycles/fuel on the APU will leave the APU off and accept an engine running the 1-3 minutes it takes to hook up power

KD

SlamClick From United States of America, joined Nov 2003, 10062 posts, RR: 71
Reply 8, posted (6 years 3 months 3 weeks 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 1820 times:

Quoting AAR90 (Reply 5):
policy to NOT operate the APU upon arrival and I suspect the crew was simply waiting for the ground power to be applied.

That was my first thought. Coupled with this fact:

Quoting TWAL1011727 (Reply 7):
jetbridges have a circuit that will not allow the jetbridge to move towards the A/C if the power cable is lowered.

A couple other things that might be going on at some airport or other out there in the world are Union slowdowns by certain ground personnel and local airport noise regulations prohibiting the running of APUs unless ground power and air are not available.

Happiness is not seeing another trite Ste. Maarten photo all week long.

Flametech21 From United States of America, joined Sep 2006, 47 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (6 years 3 months 3 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 1622 times:

Wow, I somehow missed this one.

AAR90 is correct, we are under strict orders not to run the APU at the ramp. It is unwritten law to leave the taxi engine running until external power is hooked up. And at some airports such as IAH, that can take a few minutes.

FYI the S80's do not have a specific break even number, although there is simple equation you can use to calculate a ballpark estimate.

Sean, an AA ops eng.

They build them to a higher standard at Long Beach!

Top Of Page

Forum Index

Reply To This Topic AA Super 80 Gate Engine Shutdown Proc.

Username:	No username? Sign up now!
Password:	Forgot Password? Be reminded. Remember me on this computer (uses cookies)

Tech/Ops related posts only!
Not Tech/Ops related? Use the other forums
No adverts of any kind. This includes web pages.
No hostile language or criticizing of others.
Do not post copyright protected material.
Use relevant and describing topics.
Check if your post already been discussed.
Check your spelling!
DETAILED RULES

Check Spelling

Please check your spelling (press "Check Spelling" above)

Similar topics: