757/767-200/300

[Cptnchia]

According to some mechanics I talked to, the RRs on the 777s are junk. They seem to have all sorts of problems with them. I'll stick with the GEs, thank you. If it's good enough for my kitchen appliances, it's good enough for the plane I fly! Besides, they built some of them down the street from me. Gotta support local industry.

 

[dasleben]

According to some mechanics I talked to, the RRs on the 777s are junk. They seem to have all sorts of problems with them. I'll stick with the GEs, thank you. If it's good enough for my kitchen appliances, it's good enough for the plane I fly! Besides, they built some of them down the street from me. Gotta support local industry.

The FADEC GE motors are indeed nice.

 

[derg]

The FADEC GE motors are indeed nice.

And startup like "whoah". Very nice!

 

[dasleben]

And startup like "whoah". Very nice!

Yup, if they're not lit off by the time I hack my clock, something's wrong.

 

[Cav]

Yup, if they're not lit off by the time I hack my clock, something's wrong.

With the Pratt's you have time to check and recheck that you turned your cell phone off.

 

[dasleben]

With the Pratt's you have time to check and recheck that you turned your cell phone off.

Sounds like the Rolls. Even worse because I have, oh, about 76 whole hours in that airplane. You get used to those insta-starts!

 

[MikeD]

RB211 was pioneered on the L-1011, which was the best airliner ever made...so yes RB211 is better

The RBs definitely were doing better than Rolls' most current engine, the Trent 900.

 

[amorris311]

I worked a LOT of transcons on 767s and some 757s between JFK and SAN/LGB/LAX/SFO and they were usually quite full. Every once in a while there would be a row in the way back unoccupied, but for the most part those 767s were not empty.

Best route AA ever had was JFK-LGB. Sad they did away with that a few years ago.

 

[MQAAord]

Yeah, JFK-LGB was a 757, and those flights were typically quite full. I liked the LGB airport, very retro.

 

[Seggy]

As we have Delta Pilots talking about their ship's engines!!!

 

[amorris311]

Yeah, JFK-LGB was a 757, and those flights were typically quite full. I liked the LGB airport, very retro.

Easy airport to get in and out of and the tickets were a fraction of the price compared to LAX.

 

[derg]

As we have Delta Pilots talking about their ship's engines!!!

Doublebreasto'licious baby!

 

[Maximilian_Jenius]

Sounds like the Rolls. Even worse because I have, oh, about 76 whole hours in that airplane. You get used to those insta-starts!

Lol, so what it's "push to start"?

 

[dasleben]

Lol, so what it's "push to start"?

Not quite that easy, but pretty close. Once you pour the fuel in, the motor lights off almost instantly. The Rolls on the 757 chug along for a bit before lighting off.

Actually, I rode in the jumpseat on a company 777 not too long ago; two-engine simultaneous autostarts. Engine start selectors both to START, fuel control switches both to RUN whenever you want. Pretty slick.

 

[SurferLucas]

Not quite that easy, but pretty close. Once you pour the fuel in, the motor lights off almost instantly. The Rolls on the 757 chug along for a bit before lighting off.

Actually, I rode in the jumpseat on a company 777 not too long ago; two-engine simultaneous autostarts. Engine start selectors both to START, fuel control switches both to RUN whenever you want. Pretty slick.

First time I rode on a DL 777ER from LAX-ATL, Captain said "watch this" as they started both at the same time = full of aviation nerdiness awesome

 

[dasleben]

First time I rode on a DL 777ER from LAX-ATL, Captain said "watch this" as they started both at the same time = full of aviation nerdiness awesome

Yeah, I found from my short time jumpseating on the 777 that Boeing took everything wrong with the 767 and fixed it.

 

[Maximilian_Jenius]

Not quite that easy, but pretty close. Once you pour the fuel in, the motor lights off almost instantly. The Rolls on the 757 chug along for a bit before lighting off.

Actually, I rode in the jumpseat on a company 777 not too long ago; two-engine simultaneous autostarts. Engine start selectors both to START, fuel control switches both to RUN whenever you want. Pretty slick.

I didn't know that NA had 777.

 

[Alchemy]

Not quite that easy, but pretty close. Once you pour the fuel in, the motor lights off almost instantly. The Rolls on the 757 chug along for a bit before lighting off.

Actually, I rode in the jumpseat on a company 777 not too long ago; two-engine simultaneous autostarts. Engine start selectors both to START, fuel control switches both to RUN whenever you want. Pretty slick.

Supposedly, Northwest started all 4 simultaneously on the 744 back in the day. The APU can certainly do it, but we're only allowed two at a time these days.

But yeah, I prefer GE's over Pratts in the 744. Pratts just take way too long to start (but Alchemy, aren't we paid by the minute1!!1!?) and there's no autostart on them, which is just annoying. I don't want to have to pay attention to gauges and stuff during engine start!

Plus, the pratts have no pod strike indicators (drain masts) on the bottom of the cowlings. How're you supposed to tell if someone scraped a pod without them...?

Since walkarounds are my primary responsibility these days, I have these concerns.... more

 

[Cav]

Nothing is easier to start than the Embraers not even the Airbus.

 

[Autothrust Blue]

Nothing is easier to start than the Embraers not even the Airbus.

Stop, run for two seconds, start, then release. Ahhhh...