Sponsor Message:
Aviation Technical / Operations Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Engine Revving On Taxiway?  
User currently offlineDano1977 From British Indian Ocean Territory, joined Jun 2008, 481 posts, RR: 0
Posted (9 months 8 hours ago) and read 5238 times:

A few hours ago, I flew on Monarch Flight ZB7253 from Venice to London Gatwick.

G-OZBE - Built 2002
Airbus A321-231
IAE V2533-A5


After pushback and engine start we held on the taxiway for a few minutes, then the engines spooled up to whatever power setting and you could feel the Airbus being held against the brakes for a sustained period of about 30-45 seconds. This happened twice.

Then instead of going along the taxiway, we backtracked along rwy 22R/04L (The active rwy) again with what seemed like the engines being spooled up to higher than normal taxi speed settings.

By backtracking the active, we made a Delta 767 wait at the holding point for rwy04L and a couple of other aircraft.


Take off and the flight were normal and we landed on time.


Just curious as to why.


Children should only be allowed on aircraft if 1. Muzzled and heavily sedated 2. Go as freight
14 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineEGGD From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2001, 12443 posts, RR: 35
Reply 1, posted (9 months 8 hours ago) and read 5230 times:

It is quite difficult to say with any authority why this would happen. The most obvious situation where more thrust than usual is used whilst not on the runway is whilst performing a crossbleed engine start. This is where the aircraft has no Auxiliary Power Unit to provide air to the engines for the normal start sequence. In this instance, the first engine is started with a pneumatic ground unit attached to the aircraft and once the engine is started, the aircraft is pushed back. Once on the taxiway, the running engine is advanced to a certain thrust level and the bleed air from that engine is used to start the second engine. This would be the most likely scenario in my opinion, the extended taxi for departure I cannot link to this explanation but it could be completely unrelated, a taxiway closure/blockage or traffic flow control (I have never flown to Venice).

User currently offlineLittleFokker From United States of America, joined Sep 2013, 251 posts, RR: 1
Reply 2, posted (9 months 8 hours ago) and read 5198 times:

Quoting Dano1977 (Thread starter):
Then instead of going along the taxiway, we backtracked along rwy 22R/04L (The active rwy) again with what seemed like the engines being spooled up to higher than normal taxi speed settings.

By backtracking the active, we made a Delta 767 wait at the holding point for rwy04L and a couple of other aircraft.

Is it possible that LGW was in some kind of ground delay program, and your flight's wheels up time had been moved up, so VCE ATC moved your flight to the front of the line to expedite departure? That's the most plausable scenario I can come up with.



"Toughest wind I ever played in....straight down!" - W. C. Fields
User currently offlineDano1977 From British Indian Ocean Territory, joined Jun 2008, 481 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (9 months 7 hours ago) and read 5178 times:

Quoting EGGD (Reply 1):

Nope we definitely started both engines on the pushback - heard the PTU (barking dog sound) come on then go off as the second engine was started/completed start.




Quoting LittleFokker (Reply 2):

We left on time, which was amazing due to the chaos that Venice airport is on Cruise ship change over day....



Children should only be allowed on aircraft if 1. Muzzled and heavily sedated 2. Go as freight
User currently offlineLittleFokker From United States of America, joined Sep 2013, 251 posts, RR: 1
Reply 4, posted (9 months 7 hours ago) and read 5172 times:

Quoting Dano1977 (Reply 3):
We left on time, which was amazing due to the chaos that Venice airport is on Cruise ship change over day....

That might actually support my theory. Perhaps, initially, your flight was given a delayed time (~30 minutes, perhaps) to space out arrivals into LGW. However, if there were lots of connections to other ZB destinations (or the aircraft's next flight may have been a high on time priority flight), maybe the flight's priority was higher than usual, and the wheels up time was moved up to an on-time slot. Hard to say without being in ZB's operations headquarters, but it's very possible that's what occured.



"Toughest wind I ever played in....straight down!" - W. C. Fields
User currently offlinemjgbtv From United States of America, joined Jan 2008, 795 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (9 months 7 hours ago) and read 5134 times:

Burning excess fuel?

User currently offlinePGNCS From United States of America, joined Apr 2007, 2814 posts, RR: 45
Reply 6, posted (9 months 6 hours ago) and read 5133 times:

Quoting Dano1977 (Thread starter):
Just curious as to why.

Unless one of the two pilots operating the flight is reading this posting, there is no way anyone here can answer without it being pure speculation. Which begs the question why didn't you ask the crew when you got off the plane? They could have actually given you a genuinely informed answer.


User currently offlineDano1977 From British Indian Ocean Territory, joined Jun 2008, 481 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (9 months 5 hours ago) and read 5058 times:

Quoting PGNCS (Reply 6):

I wish I had of done now.

But there was no announcement from the flight deck, So i assumed it may be some procedural check that may happen from time to time or due to the short taxi time to the runway, I think either the CFM or IAE need a minimum warm up time before take off power is applied.

But I will say one thing... It's the first time on an A321 that I have ever been forced into the back of my seat on the take off roll...



Children should only be allowed on aircraft if 1. Muzzled and heavily sedated 2. Go as freight
User currently offlineprok From Netherlands, joined May 2005, 36 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (8 months 4 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 4834 times:

As PGNCS already said, we'll never know what happened.
What comes to mind is a bleed air valve fault (stuck). Sometimes by adding some power you can easily resolve such issues.
Normally 04L is used as taxiway only at VCE and you taxi the last part of 04L to 04R which is the standard rwy for arrival and departure.
Full thrust takeoff makes sense to gain some attitude as there are some climb restrictions for crossing the Alps.
Hope this helps!


User currently offlinedarksnowynight From United States of America, joined Jan 2012, 1340 posts, RR: 3
Reply 9, posted (8 months 4 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 4779 times:

Quoting Dano1977 (Thread starter):
Just curious as to why.

Fueling overshot.

Of course I don't know that with any certainty, but I've seen it happen enough times. If they're trying to just smoke off a few hundred pounds to get close to dispatch TOW again, this will save a lot of time rather than de-fueling.

If they elect OTOH to defuel, there a few huge problems. First, the fueling company can only take fuel off a plane into a tanker specifically dedicated to that airline (at least for that day/shift/etc). It cannot be put back into a general pool or into the pit (per both FAA & EASA regs). Most fueling companies don't actually have tankers standing by for this purpose, so they'd be real lucky to find one.

Secondly, de-fueling is a much slower process than fueling, as the PSI alottment for this is quite a bit less than fueling ops, and of course you still have the same set up times, etc.

Those both will cause a delay that nobody wants. So, better to just burn it off if we're talking about a discrepancy of anything less than a few thousand pounds.

Quoting PGNCS (Reply 6):
Unless one of the two pilots operating the flight is reading this posting, there is no way anyone here can answer without it being pure speculation.

Yup. I had my theory above, but I'm sure it could have been a few other things too.



Posting without Knowledge is simply Tolerated Vandalism... We are the Vandals.
User currently offlineDano1977 From British Indian Ocean Territory, joined Jun 2008, 481 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (8 months 4 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 4743 times:

Quoting prok (Reply 8):

Yeah I noticed we circled round the airport while climbing out, and there wasn't the usual throttle back/Noise abatement and assumed it was because of the Alps/Dolimites(sp?)


Thanks for the answers.

Dano1977



Children should only be allowed on aircraft if 1. Muzzled and heavily sedated 2. Go as freight
User currently offlinemcdu From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 1448 posts, RR: 17
Reply 11, posted (8 months 4 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 4716 times:

Was it chilly and first flight of the day. Engine oil temps need to come up or lest you wait. Something above idle will expedite the process. Airbus has a NO TAKEOFF oil temp ECAM alert that is tied to oil temp

User currently offlineDano1977 From British Indian Ocean Territory, joined Jun 2008, 481 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (8 months 4 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 4411 times:

Quoting mcdu (Reply 11):

The flight had arrived from London Gatwick - and had a turn around time of about 1hr 20mins

the temp was around 11/12 degrees centigrade or 53 Fahrenheit



Children should only be allowed on aircraft if 1. Muzzled and heavily sedated 2. Go as freight
User currently offlinemusang From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2001, 861 posts, RR: 7
Reply 13, posted (8 months 3 weeks 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 4164 times:

Quoting prok (Reply 8):
Full thrust takeoff makes sense to gain some attitude as there are some climb restrictions for crossing the Alps.

Can't imagine the 321 is that weak. Even if you get an immediate left turn towards Vicenza (where you would end up if going to London) there is no rush to climb. There is no emergency turn procedure (engine failure scenario) for the 737s I fly to VCE, which means no terrain close enough to matter, and we never have to worry about sufficient altitude to clear the Alps. Perhaps a heavy 321 is different.

Quoting Dano1977 (Reply 10):
Yeah I noticed we circled round the airport while climbing out, and there wasn't the usual throttle back/Noise abatement and assumed it was because of the Alps/Dolimites(sp?)

Some of the standard departures involve a long right turn from the north west runway, back to just south of the overhead.

About the thrust reduction after take-off - this isn't inevitable, and there's another thread about it. Take-off thrust is usually higher than climb thrust, but if it takes off with reduced thrust, as it might with a long runway (like VCE) and lower than max weight, there may be little thrust reduction to notice.

Perhaps an Airbus driver can comment, but there is probably an option to over-ride the thrust reduction after take-off like there is on the 737. A nervous crew might have taken this option with the Alps in mind, but I find that difficult to imagine based on how distant they are from VCE. I'd go with my theory that they took off with thrust reduced so much that there was hardly any further reduction to climb thrust.

No idea why it would be spooling them up on the taxiway though. We'd do this to shed ice from the fan blades in icing conditions, but not in the ramp, and one engine at a time.

Regards - musang


User currently offlineFabo From Slovakia, joined Aug 2005, 1219 posts, RR: 1
Reply 14, posted (8 months 3 weeks 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 4117 times:

Quoting musang (Reply 13):
Perhaps an Airbus driver can comment, but there is probably an option to over-ride the thrust reduction after take-off like there is on the 737.

You would physically move the levers to a lower detent on reduction. Or in case you wanted for some reason to keep TOGA power, you would not move the levers.

Quoting musang (Reply 13):
I'd go with my theory that they took off with thrust reduced so much that there was hardly any further reduction to climb thrust.

More likely.

Quoting musang (Reply 13):
No idea why it would be spooling them up on the taxiway though. We'd do this to shed ice from the fan blades in icing conditions, but not in the ramp, and one engine at a time.

I suppose the "burn excess fuel" theory makes some sense. If they were near MTOW... I don't really know how close the MZFW-MTOW gap is to TO fuel for VCE-LON run, but I can imagine that taxi fuel was lower than anticipated, especially as they went ahead of queue.



The light at the end of tunnel turn out to be a lighted sing saying NO EXIT
Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic Engine Revving On Taxiway?
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
Add Images Add SmiliesPosting Help

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


Similar topics:More similar topics...
Reversers On Taxiway posted Sat Jan 12 2013 12:42:26 by jodoloy
Engine Failure On Take Off And ATC posted Mon Sep 24 2012 10:57:00 by smartt1982
Engine Placement On 4 Engine Airplanes posted Thu Feb 9 2012 23:40:42 by geezer
Engine Mounted On Tail Fin posted Wed Sep 21 2011 22:09:14 by voiceofgoa
GE Engine Pictures On Instagram posted Thu Sep 1 2011 19:32:52 by murchmo
Question - Changing Engine Types On Aircraft posted Sat Dec 18 2010 22:31:37 by Plainplane
Single-Engine Ferry On Twin-Engine Airliners posted Fri Oct 15 2010 18:01:33 by tdscanuck
Engine Smoke On Startup posted Thu Apr 15 2010 19:46:48 by MadDogJT8D
Cookie-Cutter Engine Design On The 787,748 posted Tue Feb 9 2010 18:59:12 by C5LOAD
Loud Engine Noise On CX 744 posted Fri Oct 10 2008 11:29:32 by 744

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format