Narrative:

Aircraft arrived with an inoperative APU bleed. Temp at this airport exceeded 100 degrees. Already poor decisions made to send aircraft here with those temps. [We] started left engine at gate with no issues; decided to start right engine at gate also using start cart due to prohibition of cross-bleed starts on ramp at this airport. During right engine start; egt slowly climbed and reached start limit. Since the aborted engine start is not a memory item; we let it continue and I called for the QRH. The first officer could not locate the proper checklist in new QRH. I finally decided to move fuel control switch to cutoff. Found proper checklist after 2 minutes and completed it. Contacted maintenance and 2nd engine start using cross bleed was successful. Reason for this report is that the flight manual provides conflicting information regarding memory items and this needs to be fixed. There are numerous places in fom regarding QRH usage where it says this is a read and do process. There also is one place where it says that the captain should do whatever need be using system knowledge to avoid limit exceedences. In the case of a hot start; this is very conflicting. I understand that the QRH cannot encompass every situation possible; however; pilots have been doing; practicing; and trained on hot starts since the 1st jet engine was mounted on a B-707. This QRH needs to have a memory item for 'fuel control---cutoff' for an aborted engine start. Not only is this QRH poorly (at best) designed; it is confusing when the fom that supports it gives conflicting information; the training given to pilots on how to use this checklist was terrible. In fact there was no training on this at all. No training from instructors; no checking from standards people; and no opportunity to apply the checklist in a simulator environment at all. I am amazed that anyone at the FAA would approve this QRH in its current form. If you follow the verbiage in the fom; this checklist is clearly a read and do checklist unless you are using one of the memory item checklists. The fom describes 3 different types of QRH checklists; but it fails to identify which checklists is which type; or how to identify which type any particular checklist is. This engine probably went 30 degrees higher in temp due to this poor QRH design; and although the engine was allowed to continue in service; no one can quantify the cost to this air carrier for the decreased engine life to this motor because of this QRH design. I know someone will say that any pilot should know to cut-off the fuel if the engine has a hot start without a checklist; then could one apply the same logic for say a rapid cabin depressurization for O2 masks; which is a memory item. If this was a transition carryover; then this is clearly a case of using the worst combined practices when deciding to combine work procedures. I strongly suggest adding this one memory item to the front page of the QRH for aborted engine start.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: A B757 Captain reported an EGT exceedence during start because the new transitional checklist does not allow memory items and the crew could not find the Engine Start abort Checklist.

Narrative: Aircraft arrived with an inoperative APU bleed. Temp at this airport exceeded 100 degrees. Already poor decisions made to send aircraft here with those temps. [We] started left engine at gate with no issues; decided to start right engine at gate also using start cart due to prohibition of cross-bleed starts on ramp at this airport. During right engine start; EGT slowly climbed and reached start limit. Since the aborted engine start is not a memory item; we let it continue and I called for the QRH. The First Officer could not locate the proper checklist in new QRH. I finally decided to move Fuel Control Switch to CUTOFF. Found proper checklist after 2 minutes and completed it. Contacted Maintenance and 2nd engine start using cross bleed was successful. Reason for this report is that the Flight Manual provides conflicting information regarding memory items and this needs to be fixed. There are numerous places in FOM regarding QRH usage where it says this is a read and do process. There also is one place where it says that the Captain should do whatever need be using system knowledge to avoid limit exceedences. In the case of a hot start; this is very conflicting. I understand that the QRH cannot encompass every situation possible; however; pilots have been doing; practicing; and trained on hot starts since the 1st jet engine was mounted on a B-707. This QRH needs to have a memory item for 'FUEL CONTROL---CUTOFF' for an aborted engine start. Not only is this QRH poorly (at best) designed; it is confusing when the FOM that supports it gives conflicting information; the training given to pilots on how to use this checklist was terrible. In fact there was no training on this at all. No training from instructors; no checking from standards people; and no opportunity to apply the checklist in a simulator environment at all. I am amazed that anyone at the FAA would approve this QRH in its current form. If you follow the verbiage in the FOM; this Checklist is clearly a read and do Checklist unless you are using one of the memory item checklists. The FOM describes 3 different types of QRH checklists; but it fails to identify which checklists is which type; or how to identify which type any particular checklist is. This engine probably went 30 degrees higher in temp due to this poor QRH design; and although the engine was allowed to continue in service; no one can quantify the cost to this air carrier for the decreased engine life to this motor because of this QRH design. I know someone will say that any pilot should know to cut-off the fuel if the engine has a hot start without a checklist; then could one apply the same logic for say a rapid cabin depressurization for O2 masks; which is a memory item. If this was a transition carryover; then this is clearly a case of using the worst combined practices when deciding to combine work procedures. I strongly suggest adding this one memory item to the front page of the QRH for aborted engine start.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of April 2012 and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.