Frankly, taxi thrust restrictions are ridiculous. It's incredibly frustrating watching pilots practically crawl across a runway or up a slope, all because they're strictly adhering to a low N1% limit. Here's a news flash: Exceeding that limitation on taxi isn't going to trigger an alarm. I do it almost every flight and have never had any repercussions. As for anyone behind you, their spacing is their responsibility—focus on what's in front of you.

 

i would say it’s important to adhere to on ramps with ops pages stating use min taxi thrust near the gates and in alleyways; which exist at a lot of stations… but hey you do whatever you want so why not stop *****ing about other guys “techniques”??

 

Yeah, I was just longwinded in saying it. My point I guess is too many bubbas just crank it ASAP and that's not the best.

 

I’ll crank it ASAP in the summer in order to switch to the APU bleed for cooling during a 20 minute taxi in into DFW.

 

This is the way. Shut one down, APU bleed.

 

I'm fairly certain that's even in the book. A large number of pilots reject it because then after you park and shutdown you can smell a little exhaust getting sucked into the APU inlet.

I think that's somewhat silly since we're getting exhaust from other aircraft as we taxi around but it seems to be the primary objection. It's also critical to distinguish between fume events (your own burning, atomized oil) and just stinky exhaust. One is a major health hazard and the other is just an olfactory annoyance.

 

My technique at shut down is to deselect the APU bleed for about 2 minutes to minimize the smell and then select it on again. Works well, if it's too hot then we deal with the smell

 

Decent tailwind will blow engine #2's exhaust into the inlet on the 737.

When that happens, I do switch back to normal config and opt for 30% N1 when possible.

But I don't outright object to taxiing out or in on the APU bleed. Will give it a shot and if we start to smell exhaust, go to Plan B. But APU bleed taxi is always Plan A in hot temps.

Solution is obviously shut down number 2 if you decide to SET, but depending on which way you turn for the gate, can make your job fun by always electing to shut down #2.

I am not against SET. I have toyed around with it on the NG. Obviously it is no issue on the Max even when heavy( I have set a Max at 170,000 lb. and it was easy on flat ground at least). Only issue with the Max is just timing the other engine given how long it takes to start the LEAP's. When I had that 50 minute taxi in ORD in an NG, it was a pain to SET. Getting it moving from a standstill required ~50% N1 on the running engine and it was slow to accelerate. Can't recall the weight, but it was less than 155,000 lb. as that is my cutoff on whether I SET at all through my playing around. And as stated the CEFA app stated it only saved 100 lb. Didn't really prevent a RTG or diversion. Now again 2000 flights saving 100 lb on taxi adds up for the company. But just looking at my flight, it was nothing.

When the NG is below 140,000 lb. does it seem happy to SET. 140,000-150,000 lb depends on how flat it is. Even taxing on Kilo on the echo echo route can require 35-45% N1 on the running engine to maintain speed.

 

Agree, but also...Bid Avoid DFW May-Sep

 

Additional cooling procedures in the 737 work great. Huge difference in the blasting heat.