Search
Notices
Endeavor Air Regional Airline

Question for Endeavor pilots

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 04-07-2014, 06:49 PM
  #1  
No longer cares
Thread Starter
 
tsquare's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Position: 767er Captain
Posts: 12,109
Default Question for Endeavor pilots

Feel free to send an answer via PM if you don't want to respond publicly, but I was curious if your FOM calls for and/or allows single engine taxi and if it is widely used or not.
tsquare is offline  
Old 04-07-2014, 07:01 PM
  #2  
Gets Weekends Off
 
mooney's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Jan 2008
Position: CL-65 captain
Posts: 2,244
Default

yes it does allow for it. Couldn't tell ya how many guys on the line do it on a regular basis though.
mooney is offline  
Old 04-07-2014, 07:29 PM
  #3  
Property of Scheduling
 
higney85's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Sep 2006
Position: Bus driver
Posts: 2,525
Default

The -200 guys seem to do it much more than the -900. The SOP on the -200 side emphasized it more in the past. Not sure why guys don't do it more on both fleets. Beyond the obvious times to not do it (short taxi or contaminated taxiways) is accounted for in the previous statement. It's not even the fuel savings from my vantage point (although I'd prefer to have the extra enroute opposed to on the ground), but it's less riding of the brakes and no difference to pax comfort. Captain decision in the end, yet the company encourages it for the obvious fuel savings.

The other side is the fact that a good number of guys are less than pleased (to say it lightly) which tends to reduce the "let's save money" mindset of many. Unfortunate for the polar bears/pandas/whales/ (or whatever we are saving now)... But it's another area where a fuel savings bonus would save the company money and make pilots more cognizant of savings... Kinda a "win-win"... But what do I know.
higney85 is offline  
Old 04-07-2014, 07:45 PM
  #4  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Nov 2011
Position: One with wings
Posts: 332
Default

Originally Posted by higney85 View Post
The -200 guys seem to do it much more than the -900. The SOP on the -200 side emphasized it more in the past. Not sure why guys don't do it more on both fleets. Beyond the obvious times to not do it (short taxi or contaminated taxiways) is accounted for in the previous statement. It's not even the fuel savings from my vantage point (although I'd prefer to have the extra enroute opposed to on the ground), but it's less riding of the brakes and no difference to pax comfort. Captain decision in the end, yet the company encourages it for the obvious fuel savings.

The other side is the fact that a good number of guys are less than pleased (to say it lightly) which tends to reduce the "let's save money" mindset of many. Unfortunate for the polar bears/pandas/whales/ (or whatever we are saving now)... But it's another area where a fuel savings bonus would save the company money and make pilots more cognizant of savings... Kinda a "win-win"... But what do I know.
Endeavor guys have ZERO incentive to SE taxi....kinda like when NWA was being put through the ringer and taxied on 2 +APU and then flew transcons at 72 or less if they could get away with it. You can only screw guys so long and not expect an adverse reaction. DAL & 9E are now reaping what they've sown. And with the joke of a 30% pass rate of the SSP don't expect them to fall for any more false carrots. The situation will only spiral downwards. The only thing that could turn it around at this point is a full on no strings attached Compass like Flow. RA sent BW over there to ckean up the mess. I'll be amazed if he can.
Erdude32 is offline  
Old 04-07-2014, 08:10 PM
  #5  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Jun 2010
Position: Just another RJ guy
Posts: 906
Default

Originally Posted by Erdude32 View Post
Endeavor guys have ZERO incentive to SE taxi....kinda like when NWA was being put through the ringer and taxied on 2 +APU and then flew transcons at 72 or less if they could get away with it. You can only screw guys so long and not expect an adverse reaction. DAL & 9E are now reaping what they've sown. And with the joke of a 30% pass rate of the SSP don't expect them to fall for any more false carrots. The situation will only spiral downwards. The only thing that could turn it around at this point is a full on no strings attached Compass like Flow. RA sent BW over there to ckean up the mess. I'll be amazed if he can.
This is the 9E I know and love (that "love" part was sarcastic)
AlaskaBound is offline  
Old 04-07-2014, 08:35 PM
  #6  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Apr 2007
Position: 320
Posts: 709
Default

Most guys I fly with do not SE taxi. I would say more legacy 9e guys do it then XJ.
tom14cat14 is offline  
Old 04-07-2014, 11:53 PM
  #7  
:-)
 
Joined APC: Feb 2007
Posts: 7,339
Default

Originally Posted by tsquare View Post
Feel free to send an answer via PM if you don't want to respond publicly, but I was curious if your FOM calls for and/or allows single engine taxi and if it is widely used or not.
Yes, the FOM calls for it. However, I usually only single engine taxi when there is more than a few minutes of taxi expected. Otherwise, it just more workload on the FO. I think it's widely used in places like NYC and ATL, but in DTW, not so much...
Mesabah is offline  
Old 04-08-2014, 03:34 AM
  #8  
Gets Weekends Off
 
dingo222's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Nov 2005
Posts: 555
Default Question for Endeavor pilots

Let's see, DAL pilots are getting 8+% profit sharing, and you get like 25 bucks and mgmt telling you no way in hell will you get a pay raise. Hmmmm..... Why in the hell would you taxi with anything less than 2 + APU? Let that dump burn
dingo222 is offline  
Old 04-08-2014, 03:57 AM
  #9  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Farmlover's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Jan 2011
Posts: 843
Default

I thought that the fo's on the 900 couldn't start the engines, so if you single engine taxi the capt must stop mid taxi and start engine. Is that still true?
Farmlover is offline  
Old 04-08-2014, 04:07 AM
  #10  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Tinpusher007's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Mar 2006
Position: 330 B
Posts: 1,610
Default

Originally Posted by Farmlover View Post
I thought that the fo's on the 900 couldn't start the engines, so if you single engine taxi the capt must stop mid taxi and start engine. Is that still true?
This is no longer the case. Legacy XJ never allowed F/Os to do engine starts at all (why, Ill never know). Legacy 9E pretty much always did as SOP. So for that reason single engine taxis were more common on the 200 and less so on the 900 due to which crews more commonly operated each type. But now F/Os are permitted specifically to start the second engine during taxi so that the captain doesnt have to stop and do it.
Tinpusher007 is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
RVSM Certified
Flight Schools and Training
22
02-27-2009 12:04 PM
USMCFLYR
Military
16
08-28-2008 09:15 PM
USMCFLYR
Hangar Talk
3
08-23-2008 08:37 PM
cargo hopeful
Cargo
21
03-05-2006 06:12 AM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



Your Privacy Choices