Gate return

[ChasenSFO]

I've "heard" of a plane pushing back, then taxiing right back to the gate before the curious rampers who just pushed the thing. They needed 1100lbs of fuel. However, instead of jumping the gun, I hear everyone just assumed dispatch gave them a new, much higher fuel load last minute and didn't question the PIC. It was a long-taxi day at a major delay ridden airport.

 

[jrh]

This is why we have checklists, and how I learned to actually read every line on the Before Start checklist.

Yep. And to expound on this, it's what I tell anyone who gives me a hard time about going "slow" with something. That extra (literally!) two or three seconds it takes to read a checklist versus just glancing at it is what it takes to trap the error.

The same principle can be applied to many things in flying. Taxiing like a bat out of hell versus a methodical, precise pace? I've timed it...the fast taxi saves approximately one minute at a large airport and virtually nothing at an outstation.

Rolling versus static engine runups? I've timed it...27 seconds.

Mumbling through the safety briefing like an auctioneer versus using understandable words? About 10-20 seconds.

Intersection departure versus full length? About 1-2 minutes, depending on circumstances.

Shutting down radios, pulling your headset off, cutting the mixtures, and rolling into the parking space with props stopped versus a "normal" shutdown? Maybe 5 seconds.

So you can either work your butt off, trying to cut every corner there is, and arrive in 48 minutes, or do things methodically "by the book" and get there in 51 minutes. I can say without a doubt, the pax don't know the difference.

Oh, and if you're running late? If you roll in 25 minutes late versus 28 minutes late, same deal...all the pax know is you're late. Rushing stuff ain't going to save you.

It might not be as fun or exciting to go slow, but I also have never taxied a perfectly steerable plane into the dirt, left without the correct paperwork, run a wingtip into a fence...or taxied away from the gate without enough fuel. Not to say anyone at my company ever has...multiple times...

 

[USMCmech]

I agree with JRH 95%. Outside of some specific aviation jobs, an extra minute or two rarely matter. Slow is smooth, smooth is fast.

Intersection departure versus full length? About 1-2 minutes, depending on circumstances.

This is the only one I'll quibble about. Depending on the situation (airport layout, traffic, time of day, ect) an intersection take off can save considerable time.

 

[TallFlyer]

I'm not arrogant enough to say it COULDN'T happen to me, but I will say that I've worked darn hard to build habit patterns to minimize the chance that an embarrassing event like that will occur. Just like landing with the wheels up.

If you have to work damn hard at your current employer to remember not to land with the wheels up, um, you're doing it wrong.

That said, I may have at one time got the gear warning horn over the threshold. Once. These days if I haven't looked at the gear indicators at least three times before touchdown I feel nervous.

 

[jrh]

This is the only one I'll quibble about. Depending on the situation (airport layout, traffic, time of day, ect) an intersection take off can save considerable time.

Oh yeah, I agree. I'm not opposed to intersection departures when it saves significant time. I just think it's dumb to cut an excellent runway down to a "ehh...it legally meets the required accel stop/go distances" runway for no reason other than to save one minute of taxiing. One of these days I'm going to have chaos break loose right at liftoff and I want as many options as possible.

But sure, if ATC tells me it'll be a ten minute delay unless I take the intersection, I'll take it.

 

[dasleben]

Shutting down radios, pulling your headset off, cutting the mixtures, and rolling into the parking space with props stopped versus a "normal" shutdown? Maybe 5 seconds.

Ghost riding the whip! I absolutely hated that. Incredibly sloppy and amateur looking to everyone but the crumb doing it.

Great post, by the way. I used to half-jokingly apologize to the check airmen on recurrent checkrides for my slow taxi speeds. I had a brake failure at a 20-25 knot taxi down in SJU one day; thankfully the taxiway was wide enough to get it sorted out before I went off-roading. Gets your attention.

Alas, I'm not cool enough to taxi anymore.

 

[Kingairer]

Maybe...but the destination and departure had been garbage all day...why not put the extra fuel in while you're sitting and waiting, knowing that if you do get a chance to launch the weather is still probably going to be dicy and you're going to want options?

Couldve also been an atc reroute that exceeded his fuel on board. That wouldve been my answer regardless of its thruthiness.

 

[Roger Roger]

Couldve also been an atc reroute that exceeded his fuel on board. That wouldve been my answer regardless of its thruthiness.

Uhh..he was VFR on a 60 NM route in a piston single.

 

[Kingairer]

Id still make one hell of a PA to those 3 Folks..."from the flight deck....

 

[ppragman]

Yep. And to expound on this, it's what I tell anyone who gives me a hard time about going "slow" with something. That extra (literally!) two or three seconds it takes to read a checklist versus just glancing at it is what it takes to trap the error.

The same principle can be applied to many things in flying. Taxiing like a bat out of hell versus a methodical, precise pace? I've timed it...the fast taxi saves approximately one minute at a large airport and virtually nothing at an outstation.

Rolling versus static engine runups? I've timed it...27 seconds.

Mumbling through the safety briefing like an auctioneer versus using understandable words? About 10-20 seconds.

Intersection departure versus full length? About 1-2 minutes, depending on circumstances.

Shutting down radios, pulling your headset off, cutting the mixtures, and rolling into the parking space with props stopped versus a "normal" shutdown? Maybe 5 seconds.

So you can either work your butt off, trying to cut every corner there is, and arrive in 48 minutes, or do things methodically "by the book" and get there in 51 minutes. I can say without a doubt, the pax don't know the difference.

Oh, and if you're running late? If you roll in 25 minutes late versus 28 minutes late, same deal...all the pax know is you're late. Rushing stuff ain't going to save you.

It might not be as fun or exciting to go slow, but I also have never taxied a perfectly steerable plane into the dirt, left without the correct paperwork, run a wingtip into a fence...or taxied away from the gate without enough fuel. Not to say anyone at my company ever has...multiple times...

This is so important. This this this this this. Seriously. Now, rolling in, I don't have a problem with that in singles, and float planes, twins it seems like a waste especially in the Navajo because you have to let the turbos cool for a while anyway, so it seems counter productive to roll in. Rolling runups are an incredibly bad idea, how can you devote an adequate amount of time to what you're supposed to be looking at if you're also trying to track centerline, listen to the radio, and do ten other things. Just stop the airplane first - it doesn't add any time.

 

[Roger Roger]

Yep. And to expound on this, it's what I tell anyone who gives me a hard time about going "slow" with something. That extra (literally!) two or three seconds it takes to read a checklist versus just glancing at it is what it takes to trap the error.

The same principle can be applied to many things in flying. Taxiing like a bat out of hell versus a methodical, precise pace? I've timed it...the fast taxi saves approximately one minute at a large airport and virtually nothing at an outstation.

Rolling versus static engine runups? I've timed it...27 seconds.

Mumbling through the safety briefing like an auctioneer versus using understandable words? About 10-20 seconds.

Intersection departure versus full length? About 1-2 minutes, depending on circumstances.

Shutting down radios, pulling your headset off, cutting the mixtures, and rolling into the parking space with props stopped versus a "normal" shutdown? Maybe 5 seconds.

So you can either work your butt off, trying to cut every corner there is, and arrive in 48 minutes, or do things methodically "by the book" and get there in 51 minutes. I can say without a doubt, the pax don't know the difference.

Oh, and if you're running late? If you roll in 25 minutes late versus 28 minutes late, same deal...all the pax know is you're late. Rushing stuff ain't going to save you.

It might not be as fun or exciting to go slow, but I also have never taxied a perfectly steerable plane into the dirt, left without the correct paperwork, run a wingtip into a fence...or taxied away from the gate without enough fuel. Not to say anyone at my company ever has...multiple times...

Yeah, you don't need to do the super slow tAAxi, but a reasonable speed is more comfortable for the pax, easier on the tires, brakes, and landing gear, and safer. The only good reasoning I've ever heard for a rolling vs. static runup is that allegedly you'll suck less sand/gravel through the prop...I guess maybe that might make a difference when you're doing a runup every 25 minutes over the 2400 hours between prop overhauls... Color me skeptical though. In a commercial aircraft I am familiar with there is so little to check on runup that I can see doing it rolling not being a big deal. I do not think it seems like a very good idea to do it in something in the 402/Navajo class of airplane though.

Good post though. I know that getting in a hurry is something I'm constantly having to fight against when I'm doing 10+ legs a day especially now that I feel like I sort of have a feel for the airplane.