Single Engine Taxi

[Ernie Martin]

Jim's tale of the lineman reminds me of two about the Skymaster. Both happened in the Bahamas, on remote islands.

Landing at one airport, where a landing fee applied only to twins, the collector looked out at the aircraft and asked "What's that a single or a twin?" and I said (with a straight face) "It's a single -- the one in the back is a spare."

On another trip, the lineman asked "How come one engine facing one way and the other facing the other way?" and because of the way the question was posed I couldn't pass up this answer: "I use the front when going East, the back when going West."

Ernie

[jchronic]

Thanks for the responses, gentlemen. I couldn't imagine why there would be a problem, but when I found this forum, nothing like asking those with more experience. In addition to taxi-out/taxi-in, we do a fair amount of ground repostioning with our survey airplane, taxiing hangar to terminal to pick up our scientist crew in the morning and vice-versa after the mission. Seemed unnecessarily cumbersome to start both engines for that.

[Roger]

I taxi around a bit on the rear to get from the fuel depot to the hanger, etc.. Overheating hasn't ever been much of a problem. That being said, the one thing I always do is shut off my avionics master before I start/re-start the 2nd engine, just to prevent a power surge from frying something. Anyone have any thoughts on that?

It is a bit of a pain because all the radios, gps's etc.. have to come back on line

[edasmus]

I concur with you Roger. My 1973 G model has an avionics buss interupt feature that will do this automatically anytime an ignition switch is moved to the start position but I figure "why tempt fate."

Ed

[Dale Campbell]

Hi Guys,
I was taught to always start the rear engine first then the front engine and last turn on avionics. When shutting down, first turn off avionics then front engine and last the rear engine. That is what I always do. The front engine is shut down as I leave runway at small fields but at larger airports as I arive at ramp. Dale Campbell

[Ernie Martin]

My starting procedure, which I believe is based on the POH, is the reverse: front engine first. The reason for this is important, and I think this procedure has saved the day several times. The cable run from battery to starter is much shorter, probably 3 to 5 times shorter, for the front engine, so the electrical resistance and voltage drop is much lower. There have been a number of times when, after not using the aircraft for several weeks, the voltage at the front-engine starter was so low that it barely turned the engine, and it was just enough to get the engine started. At times cranking would stop after a couple of engine turns, when battery voltage dropped too low, and it was lucky that after letting it rest for a few minutes, the engine caught on the first turn of what was obviously a dying battery. In most of those instances, I believe the rear engine would not have started, and switching to the front one would not have worked because the attempts at starting the rear engine would have dropped the voltage even further.

I hope others will jump in and comment.

Ernie

[Dale Campbell]

Hi Ernie,
You are correct, the manual states front first. Again the airport I fly from is dirty so I am very sensitive to puting debrie into rear prop. I also have a battery charger/maintainance devise that is always plugged into my battery, so low battery from sitting is no longer a problem. I have had stones, screws, sticks and even a chunk of aluminum cowling hit the rear prop. The upper rear 1/2 ring cowling front of prop is in shop as we speak getting replaced with new carbon fiber because it cracked off and hit the prop. So thats why I start rear first and then the front. My rear engine always start easier then the front for some reason. That is another reason for my starting proceedure. Dale