Taxiing a 747 on Two Engines: A UK Insight

A fascinating spectacle for any aviation enthusiast is observing a colossal aircraft like the Boeing 747 – often dubbed the "Queen of the Skies" – gracefully navigating the intricate network of taxiways at a busy airport. What might surprise many, however, is that these magnificent four-engined giants, along with other multi-engine jets, frequently conduct their ground movements using fewer than all their engines. This practice, known as reduced engine taxi (RET) or single-engine taxi (SET) for twin-engine aircraft, is a sophisticated operational decision driven by a complex interplay of economic, environmental, and safety considerations. It’s a testament to modern aviation’s relentless pursuit of efficiency without compromising operational safety.

The question of how a massive quad-jet like the 747 can be taxied on just two engines, or indeed, if multi-engine jets shut off engines whilst taxiing, delves into the very core of airline operational policy and aircraft design. It's not a universal practice, nor is it a simple flick of a switch. The decision hinges on various factors, including the specific aircraft type, the airline's standard operating procedures, and prevailing environmental conditions such as taxiway slope, surface contamination (like ice or snow), and the aircraft's weight.

The Drive for Efficiency: Why Less Can Be More

At the heart of the reduced engine taxi strategy lies the compelling desire to minimise operational costs and environmental impact. Jet fuel, whilst essential, is a significant expense for airlines, and even small savings accumulate rapidly over thousands of flights. Ground operations, including taxiing, can consume a surprising amount of fuel, especially at large, congested airports where taxi times can extend to 30 minutes or more.

Industry data, such as that compiled by Eurocontrol, suggests that shutting down engines during taxi can result in substantial fuel savings, typically ranging from 4 to 8 kilograms of fuel per minute. For a major airline operating hundreds of flights daily, these seemingly modest per-minute savings translate into millions of pounds saved annually. Beyond the financial benefits, there are significant environmental advantages. Fewer operating engines mean reduced emissions of greenhouse gases and other pollutants during ground movement, contributing to a smaller carbon footprint and improved air quality around airports. Furthermore, operating fewer engines during taxiing can also reduce overall engine wear and tear, potentially extending the lifespan of components and reducing maintenance costs in the long run.

The Mechanics of Movement: How It's Done

For a large aircraft like the Boeing 747 or the Airbus A380, which are designed with four engines, the practice of reduced engine taxi usually involves operating on a symmetrical pair of engines. This means that two engines are running whilst the other two are shut down. Typically, this would involve either the two outboard engines (engines 1 and 4) or the two inboard engines (engines 2 and 3). The choice often depends on the aircraft's hydraulic and electrical systems, as specific engines might be primary providers of power for critical systems like steering and braking. Maintaining symmetry is crucial to ensure balanced thrust and ease of control during ground manoeuvres. Without symmetrical power, the aircraft would constantly be trying to turn, requiring greater control inputs from the pilots, increasing workload and potentially leading to less precise taxiing.

The procedure for reduced engine taxi is meticulously planned and executed by the flight crew. Before taxiing out for departure, or after landing and clearing the runway, the crew will follow specific checklists. If departing, they might start only two engines initially, saving the other two for later. If arriving, they might shut down two engines once clear of the active runway and on a suitable taxiway. This involves careful monitoring of engine parameters, hydraulic pressure, and other system indications to ensure the aircraft remains fully controllable and safe.

Quad-Jets vs. Twin-Jets: A Tale of Two Strategies

The feasibility and commonality of reduced engine taxi vary significantly between different aircraft types, primarily depending on their aircraft design and the number of engines.

As highlighted in the table, twin-engine aircraft like the Boeing 777 present a different scenario. For the 777, taxiing with an engine shut down for the purpose of fuel saving is explicitly not allowed by Boeing's Flight Crew Operating Manual (FCOM). The reasons cited include additional operational procedural requirements and increased crew workload. Furthermore, high bypass engines, typical of modern airliners, require a period of warm-up before applying takeoff thrust and a cool-down period before being shut down. If an engine has been shut down for several hours, it's desirable to operate it at a low thrust setting for several minutes prior to takeoff. However, it's important to note the distinction: single-engine taxi with an inoperative engine (i.e., one that has failed or is unserviceable) is authorised, consistent with good judgment, as it becomes a safety procedure rather than an economic one. This nuance underscores the importance of airline policy and manufacturer guidelines.

For twin-engine aircraft like the Airbus A320, single-engine taxi is a common practice. However, this also comes with its own set of risks if not executed precisely. A notable incident on August 23, 2001, involving an A320, demonstrated what can go wrong when the aircraft is in the wrong configuration. In that case, the ground engineer had no steering or braking capability, leading the aircraft to end up in a ditch. This incident serves as a stark reminder that while efficiency is paramount, it must never supersede the rigorous protocols designed to ensure safety.

Safety First: Risks and Mitigations

Whilst the benefits of reduced engine taxi are clear, the practice is not without its challenges and potential risks. These are meticulously managed through stringent pilot training, sophisticated aircraft systems, and comprehensive standard operating procedures.

One primary concern relates to hydraulic and electrical power. Modern aircraft systems are often powered by hydraulic pumps driven by the engines. If an engine providing critical hydraulic power for steering (nose wheel steering) or braking is shut down, alternative systems must be fully operational, or the aircraft's manoeuvrability could be compromised. The A320 incident mentioned earlier is a vivid example of this. Pilots must ensure that the remaining operating engines provide sufficient power to all necessary aircraft systems.

Another consideration is the potential for increased wear on the operating engines. Whilst the overall engine usage might be reduced, the remaining engines are working harder during taxi, potentially leading to localised wear. However, this is typically factored into maintenance schedules and engine life predictions.

The possibility of needing to restart a shut-down engine rapidly is also a factor. In unexpected situations, such as a sudden need for more thrust or a change in taxi instructions, pilots must be able to bring the dormant engines back online quickly and safely. This requires a thorough understanding of engine start procedures and system responsiveness.

Furthermore, taxiing on reduced power, especially with asymmetrical thrust, can be more challenging on contaminated surfaces like ice or snow, or on sloped taxiways. In such conditions, the full complement of engines might be necessary to ensure adequate traction, control, and thrust to overcome resistance. Pilot expertise and judgment are therefore critical in deciding whether reduced engine taxi is appropriate for the given conditions.

The Numbers Game: Fuel Savings and Beyond

To fully appreciate the impact of reduced engine taxi, it's worth reiterating the financial and environmental aspects. Imagine a large airline with a fleet of 50 Boeing 747s. If each aircraft saves an average of 6 kg of fuel per minute during taxi, and each flight involves 15 minutes of reduced engine taxi, that's 90 kg of fuel saved per flight. Over 300 days a year of operation, with perhaps 2 flights per day per aircraft, this amounts to:

• 50 aircraft * 90 kg/flight * 2 flights/day * 300 days/year = 2,700,000 kg of fuel saved annually.

That's 2,700 tonnes of fuel, translating to millions of pounds in cost savings and a significant reduction in CO2 emissions. This scale of saving is why airlines invest heavily in optimising every aspect of their operations, including seemingly minor ground procedures. It's a continuous balancing act between the desire for economic efficiency and the unwavering commitment to safety.

Common Queries About Reduced Engine Taxi

Is it safe to taxi a large jet on fewer than all its engines?
Yes, when performed according to stringent manufacturer guidelines and airline standard operating procedures, and under suitable conditions, reduced engine taxi is considered a safe practice. Pilots are extensively trained to manage the aircraft in this configuration, ensuring all critical systems remain operational.

Why don't all multi-engine planes do it, then?
The feasibility largely depends on the aircraft's design and its systems. As seen with the Boeing 777, some aircraft types are not designed for routine reduced engine taxi for fuel saving due to specific operational requirements, increased crew workload, or engine characteristics (e.g., warm-up/cool-down times). Airline policy also plays a crucial role.

How much fuel is actually saved?
As discussed, estimates from organisations like Eurocontrol suggest savings of approximately 4-8 kilograms of fuel per minute of reduced engine taxi. This adds up to substantial amounts over the lifetime of an aircraft fleet.

Does it make taxiing take longer?
Not necessarily. The speed of taxiing is primarily dictated by air traffic control instructions, airport congestion, and safety considerations, not directly by the number of engines operating, as long as sufficient thrust is available for manoeuvring. The primary goal is fuel efficiency, not speed reduction.

What happens if an engine fails whilst taxiing on reduced power?
Aircraft are designed with redundancies. If an engine fails whilst taxiing on reduced power, the remaining operational engines (if any) would provide power, and the crew would follow emergency procedures. In a twin-engine aircraft operating on one engine, a failure of that engine would require immediate action, potentially including a stop or a tow, but the aircraft's systems are designed to handle such contingencies safely.

In conclusion, the practice of taxiing a Boeing 747 on two engines, or any multi-engine jet on reduced power, is a complex yet highly effective strategy employed by airlines worldwide. It represents a sophisticated blend of aircraft design, operational policy, and pilot expertise, all aimed at optimising performance whilst rigorously upholding the highest standards of safety. It's a subtle but significant aspect of modern aviation that contributes to both the economic viability of air travel and its environmental responsibility, ensuring that even the largest aircraft can move efficiently and safely on the ground.

If you want to read more articles similar to Taxiing a 747 on Two Engines: A UK Insight, you can visit the Taxis category.