standard procedure?

This happened on a recent trip just before departure. There was a
delay at the gate and after awhile the pilot came on to apologize,
saying that there was a mechanical problem having to do with the
starter for one of the engines. He then went on to say that we were
going to go ahead and take off with one engine and then start the
other one from that one once we got up in the air. That resulted in
some nervous laughter and questioning looks from the passengers. Well,
we made it, but I'm just wondering if that is standard procedure...
what if the other engine had failed during takeoff? This was a large
commercial airline, BTW.

what sort of aircraft?

"lmi" wrote in message
om...
This happened on a recent trip just before departure. There was a
delay at the gate and after awhile the pilot came on to apologize,
saying that there was a mechanical problem having to do with the
starter for one of the engines. He then went on to say that we were
going to go ahead and take off with one engine and then start the
other one from that one once we got up in the air. That resulted in
some nervous laughter and questioning looks from the passengers. Well,
we made it, but I'm just wondering if that is standard procedure...
what if the other engine had failed during takeoff? This was a large
commercial airline, BTW.

lmi writes
This happened on a recent trip just before departure. There was a
delay at the gate and after awhile the pilot came on to apologize,
saying that there was a mechanical problem having to do with the
starter for one of the engines. He then went on to say that we were
going to go ahead and take off with one engine and then start the
other one from that one once we got up in the air. That resulted in
some nervous laughter and questioning looks from the passengers. Well,
we made it, but I'm just wondering if that is standard procedure...
what if the other engine had failed during takeoff? This was a large
commercial airline, BTW.

Was it a Western airline or 3rd world?

If the former, I think the captain was taking the ****. All the Western
airlines I've travelled with have delayed the flight or changed to new
equipment when an engine has failed to start on the ground.

One of my former colleagues reported something similar to the above with
a small airline in southern Africa. The situation was explained to him
before he boarded and he elected not to take the flight.

But as a non pilot I wonder if I would notice if someone decided to take
off with less than a full complement of engines, without informing the
passengers? Assuming that there were no propellers involved, of course!
--
Simon Elliott
http://www.ctsn.co.uk/

On 2 Oct 2003 13:11:19 -0700, (lmi) wrote:

This happened on a recent trip just before departure. There was a
delay at the gate and after awhile the pilot came on to apologize,
saying that there was a mechanical problem having to do with the
starter for one of the engines. He then went on to say that we were
going to go ahead and take off with one engine and then start the
other one from that one once we got up in the air. That resulted in
some nervous laughter and questioning looks from the passengers. Well,
we made it, but I'm just wondering if that is standard procedure...
what if the other engine had failed during takeoff? This was a large
commercial airline, BTW.

So are you saying that you actually took off on one engine? Or can you
be sure that they didn't fix the other and maybe you didn't know about
it? If somebody were to ask me would this ever happen, I would say
never in a regulated western country, and probably most unregulated as
well. The only time I know of aircraft taking off with dead engines
are 747s which may take off with only 3, with no passengers on board,
to get it home for repair.

MJ

On 2 Oct 2003 13:11:19 -0700, (lmi) wrote:

This happened on a recent trip just before departure. There was a
delay at the gate and after awhile the pilot came on to apologize,
saying that there was a mechanical problem having to do with the
starter for one of the engines. He then went on to say that we were
going to go ahead and take off with one engine and then start the
other one from that one once we got up in the air. That resulted in
some nervous laughter and questioning looks from the passengers. Well,
we made it, but I'm just wondering if that is standard procedure...
what if the other engine had failed during takeoff? This was a large
commercial airline, BTW.

I think there were a number of hearing-impaired on the flight....or a
marginal PA system. I've been on a few flights where the pilot came
out and said that there was a problem with the integral engine starter
(the built-in APU, I think) and that we would start one engine, be
pushed out, and the other engine would be started noisily with some
ground equipment.

"Rupert" wrote in message
...
what sort of aircraft?

American Airlines 727 I believe or md-80. Large passenger jet, anyway. The
flight had been delayed from Dallas due to mechanical problems. My
understanding was that a starter button for one of the engines was broken
(whatever that means) but that the engine itself was okay, and could be
started somehow from the other engine once airborne.

Three engines - two working just fine.

--
Alan Erskine
alanerskine(at)optusnet.com.au

Trial or release, Mr Bush, trial or release.

"lmi" wrote in message
...

"Rupert" wrote in message
...
what sort of aircraft?

American Airlines 727 I believe or md-80. Large passenger jet, anyway. The
flight had been delayed from Dallas due to mechanical problems. My
understanding was that a starter button for one of the engines was broken
(whatever that means) but that the engine itself was okay, and could be
started somehow from the other engine once airborne.

lmi wrote:

"Rupert" wrote in message
...

what sort of aircraft?


American Airlines 727 I believe or md-80. Large passenger jet, anyway. The
flight had been delayed from Dallas due to mechanical problems. My
understanding was that a starter button for one of the engines was broken
(whatever that means) but that the engine itself was okay, and could be
started somehow from the other engine once airborne.


You didn't hear him right. He wouldn't take off on one engine.
He probably was telling people they would have to bring out equipment to
start the engine.
But... for the MD80 part vs 727.. How many sears were in one row, 5 or 6?

This happened on a recent trip just before departure. There was a
delay at the gate and after awhile the pilot came on to apologize,
saying that there was a mechanical problem having to do with the
starter for one of the engines. He then went on to say that we were
going to go ahead and take off with one engine and then start the
other one from that one once we got up in the air. That resulted in
some nervous laughter and questioning looks from the passengers. Well,
we made it, but I'm just wondering if that is standard procedure...
what if the other engine had failed during takeoff? This was a large
commercial airline, BTW.



As a aircraft mechanic for a "major" airline at DFW airport, I can assure
you, that you heard wrong. No airline within the North American shores (I've
never worked anywhere else) would do this.
If it was AA, and just happened recently, it had to be a MD-80, 727's have
been gone for awhile.
What probably happened was that some portion of the starting system or apu
failed. And yes, these item's can be MEL'ed.
What we do is bring out a start cart, air unit, huffer, whatever you care to
call it.
And we start it by external means. What the pilot may have told you that after
the engine(s) are started, that if they do fail in flight they can be started
again, simply by the exsisting airflow or by diving for more airflow through
the engine.

BS (can't and won't happen) What probably happened was that they were
saying that the APU had a problem and bleed air was not available to start
the engines so they had to use a start cart and then start #2 from #1

"lmi" wrote in message
om...
This happened on a recent trip just before departure. There was a
delay at the gate and after awhile the pilot came on to apologize,
saying that there was a mechanical problem having to do with the
starter for one of the engines. He then went on to say that we were
going to go ahead and take off with one engine and then start the
other one from that one once we got up in the air. That resulted in
some nervous laughter and questioning looks from the passengers. Well,
we made it, but I'm just wondering if that is standard procedure...
what if the other engine had failed during takeoff? This was a large
commercial airline, BTW.