Timeline for What's the shortest amount of time a commercial airplane will be on the ground in between flights?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
5 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 18, 2016 at 20:48 | comment | added | Terry | @PeteBecker Leaving one engine running removed the need to position and connect a ground power unit and then disconnect and get it out of the way after starting. And, since the Garrett engines were direct-drive (a single solid shaft) they took more time both to shutdown and start than, say, PT-6s with two shafts rotating independently, so leaving one running saved you the time for that engine. They also had to have the prop rotated shortly after shutdown, so you saved that time as well. Ground crews were minimal at out-stations, often only two people, and sometimes just one. | |
| Dec 18, 2016 at 20:06 | comment | added | Terry | @leftaroundabout Metroliners were powered by Garrett TPE331 turboprop engines. They had electric starters, not pneumatic starters. Interestingly, this same engine was the APU in the 747 and other Boeing designs. | |
| Dec 18, 2016 at 19:24 | comment | added | Pete Becker | Why does leaving one engine running shorten the turnaround time? | |
| Dec 18, 2016 at 10:40 | comment | added | leftaroundabout | How much faster do you actually get the second engine running again when you can directly tap on bleed air from the other? | |
| Dec 18, 2016 at 3:22 | history | answered | Terry | CC BY-SA 3.0 |