Community
Wiki Posts
Search

Non functioning APU on A380 [in SIN]

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Sep 3, 2019, 3:26 am
  #16  
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Programs: LH M&M, BA EC, DL SM
Posts: 5,724
Originally Posted by skywardhunter
APU is rarely used for air conditioning on stand and often only powered up shortly before push-back to bridge the power gap until engines are started. It's not a critical item that is required and aircraft can fly without it
As I said above, it depends on the plane and the route. On a two-holer in ETOPS conditions, the APU is not MELable.

On an A380 from FRA to SIN, the APUs is almost completely unnecessary.
skywardhunter and nancypants like this.
worldclubber is offline  
Old Sep 3, 2019, 3:30 am
  #17  
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Programs: LH M&M, BA EC, DL SM
Posts: 5,724
Originally Posted by nancypants
indeed it’s required for etops but SIN-FRA or whatever is not an etops route

presumably the planes with working APUs are therefore more likely to be routed to SIN and the like as otherwise an etops route would be cancelled
That's what I said: it depends.

You probably meant "without", then I fully agree.

PS: nobody mentioned Sully.
worldclubber is offline  
Old Sep 3, 2019, 3:35 am
  #18  
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: NT Australia
Programs: QF WP
Posts: 4,160
Originally Posted by worldclubber
That's what I said: it depends.

You probably meant "without", then I fully agree.
Yeah sorry my bad, typo, OP corrected

PS: nobody mentioned Sully.
Someone did but I think they got away with it...

Originally Posted by chris63
The Captain told F pax that APU was not necessary, he ought to try telling that to Cpt Sullenberger of US1549 .... & it didn’t go down with pax about to faint from the heat
worldclubber likes this.

Last edited by nancypants; Sep 3, 2019 at 3:41 am
nancypants is offline  
Old Sep 3, 2019, 3:42 am
  #19  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 11,581
Oh, without APU on US1549 it would have crashed and burned? The RAT wouldn't have managed?

At least you also had the rafts on the A380!
hugolover is offline  
Old Sep 3, 2019, 4:05 am
  #20  
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Programs: LH M&M, BA EC, DL SM
Posts: 5,724
So the main issue seem to be that they shouldn't have boarded pax so early, if they knew about the delay.

The APU wouldn't have helped them on the ground. Surprises me that an airport such as SIN has weak ground a/c for planes.
worldclubber is offline  
Old Sep 3, 2019, 4:30 am
  #21  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Stoke on Trent, UK (MAN ), BUE, BKK, DBV
Programs: LH HON***,UA,BA.EK Gold,AV.
Posts: 11,640
Originally Posted by worldclubber
So the main issue seem to be that they shouldn't have boarded pax so early, if they knew about the delay.

The APU wouldn't have helped them on the ground. Surprises me that an airport such as SIN has weak ground a/c for planes.
Not exactly, boarding time was normal for SIN, they tend to board quite early yet they already knew about the excessive heat onboard.....

Captain said they would have used the APU & then there would have been no heat issue but it was ‘out of order’
chris63 is offline  
Old Sep 3, 2019, 4:32 am
  #22  
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: next to HAM
Programs: LH M+M
Posts: 960
Absolutely baffled that APU isn't on the MEL.
PAX_fips is offline  
Old Sep 3, 2019, 4:45 am
  #23  
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: NT Australia
Programs: QF WP
Posts: 4,160
Originally Posted by PAX_fips
Absolutely baffled that APU isn't on the MEL.
why? There’s plenty of commercial aircraft that don’t even have an APU
downinit likes this.
nancypants is offline  
Old Sep 3, 2019, 4:55 am
  #24  
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Programs: LH M&M, BA EC, DL SM
Posts: 5,724
Originally Posted by chris63
Not exactly, boarding time was normal for SIN, they tend to board quite early yet they already knew about the excessive heat onboard.....

Captain said they would have used the APU & then there would have been no heat issue but it was ‘out of order’
Not sure SIN would have let them use the APU. But he needed an excuse ...

I kind of understand both sides: they probably should have sent people back into the terminal but feared they would miss their (late) slot. Not a great situation. Hope nobody was seriously harmed.
chris63 and nancypants like this.
worldclubber is offline  
Old Sep 3, 2019, 5:03 am
  #25  
Moderator: Lufthansa Miles & More, India based airlines, India, External Miles & Points Resources
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: MUC
Programs: LH SEN
Posts: 48,168
Sometimes you can only get the final confirmation to a slot over the very congested AfPak or Erbil airspace when you are ready to push back and request the engine startup time from ATC. It usually makes sense to board the passengers and be ready to push back, especially when you are talking about 400+ pax that could potentially be all over the very nice Changi terminal(s).
nancypants likes this.
oliver2002 is offline  
Old Sep 3, 2019, 6:38 am
  #26  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Stoke on Trent, UK (MAN ), BUE, BKK, DBV
Programs: LH HON***,UA,BA.EK Gold,AV.
Posts: 11,640
Originally Posted by oliver2002
Sometimes you can only get the final confirmation to a slot over the very congested AfPak or Erbil airspace when you are ready to push back and request the engine startup time from ATC. It usually makes sense to board the passengers and be ready to push back, especially when you are talking about 400+ pax that could potentially be all over the very nice Changi terminal(s).
Understood but in the case of Changi, pax had done gate security & were all there for boarding & would not have been allowed back to roam the airport, so submitting them to early boarding into those conditions was unwise
chris63 is offline  
Old Sep 3, 2019, 6:44 am
  #27  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Stoke on Trent, UK (MAN ), BUE, BKK, DBV
Programs: LH HON***,UA,BA.EK Gold,AV.
Posts: 11,640
Originally Posted by worldclubber
Not sure SIN would have let them use the APU. But he needed an excuse ...

I kind of understand both sides: they probably should have sent people back into the terminal but feared they would miss their (late) slot. Not a great situation. Hope nobody was seriously harmed.
Seriously, something bad could have happened to vulnerable pax in those conditions, I think LH are lucky that didn’t happen.

For F pax, it was madness to escort us from the lounge & board us early but for sure we had more air to breathe than the other pax... & another thing that wasn’t working was a Urinal, all taped up, must be no plumbers in Changi either
chris63 is offline  
Old Sep 3, 2019, 6:48 am
  #28  
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: YVR
Programs: OZ Diamond, Jiffypark Manhattan Gold
Posts: 4,485
Originally Posted by chris63

The Pilot then had the nerve to blame Changi airport that their supplied air conditioning was not good.... since when were they responsible for LH maintenance failings.....
I don't think the pilot is blaming SIN for LH maintenance issues. He is however accusing them of having insufficient PCA. I work at YVR, we don't use PCA THAT much during the year and the only 380 we get is BA, who doesn't use it, so I can't speak to its ability to cool an aircraft that size.

Originally Posted by nancypants
APU is obviously MELable on LH (which doesn’t surprise me)

choose your poison- both flights severely delayed and/or cancelled, or climate control issues at boarding
I don't wanna speak out of turn, but APUs are left "broken" constantly. I'm not sure if it's airline by airline, or aircraft type by aircraft type. We do airstarts on 737s and ERJs all the time. But doing an airstart on a 777 happens once a year or once every handful of months. Honestly, I wish pilots wouldn't mention it, with most people's lack of knowledge about aircrafts, saying anything is wrong just causes confusion/panic.
drvannostren is offline  
Old Sep 3, 2019, 7:02 am
  #29  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Stoke on Trent, UK (MAN ), BUE, BKK, DBV
Programs: LH HON***,UA,BA.EK Gold,AV.
Posts: 11,640
Originally Posted by drvannostren
I don't think the pilot is blaming SIN for LH maintenance issues. He is however accusing them of having insufficient PCA. I work at YVR, we don't use PCA THAT much during the year and the only 380 we get is BA, who doesn't use it, so I can't speak to its ability to cool an aircraft that size.
I hope he’s better at flying than communicating

So how do you think BA keep their A380 cool, if they are not using PCA ?
chris63 is offline  
Old Sep 3, 2019, 9:07 am
  #30  
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: YVR
Programs: OZ Diamond, Jiffypark Manhattan Gold
Posts: 4,485
Originally Posted by chris63


I hope he’s better at flying than communicating

So how do you think BA keep their A380 cool, if they are not using PCA ?
Sadly, they run the APU. At YVR a while back no one used PCA, for YEARS not a single WS plane ever took PCA. Air Canada has always done their own thing. They're odd though, in fact there's times where the PCA on the gate works, but they use their portable unit out of convenience (I suppose).

BA is on the ground for just under 2 hours, they don't take PCA, CX same, some of the US carriers will try and get that PCA regardless of turn time. A huge pain since it takes 1 person away for like a solid 5-10 minutes between hooking up and taking down. The longer turns all take it, BR, CI, MU, PR etc.
drvannostren is offline  


Contact Us - Manage Preferences - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.