Hi, I’m really interested in that question… So pls figure it out :)
I argued with my friend about this)
I ask this question because I fly, according to real world procedures, up to Jeppesen charts.
2 Likes
The main reason behind this capability is that the Boeing 787 starts its engines entirely on electrical power generated by the APU’s VFSG (Variable Frequency Starter Generators) vs relying on APU bleed air to start the engines. Thus there isn’t the typical drop in pneumatic pressure caused by the pneumatic starters on regular jetliners. See 787 No-Bleed Systems for reference.
Source : Which commercial aircraft can perform a parallel engine start? - Aviation Stack Exchange
Yes, its possible. I have done it myself on X-Plane 11’s 787
5 Likes
Well one source says it possible but I think its better to see what the majority say
@phoenix006 just linked it
1 Like
why Airbus A350 can’t do that or B777?
1 Like
they use pneumatic air pressure from APU to start up while the 787 uses electrical power
3 Likes
Airbus A350 too?
But 787 have APU xD
yes ig
yes for electrical power for systems and engines
So if i start both engines at same time, it’s not unrealistic…?
Only for 787.
1 Like
yes its not unrealistic
But only for 787 ^^
1 Like
yes only 787
(even though i do it for the 737 in IF…)
2 Likes
np :)
i think ur power systems saying goodbye my love… goodbye my friend… when they saw both engines trying to start up at the same time.
2 Likes
lol 😂😂
cant do that in XP11 tho 😅
1 Like
The 777-200 Pratts and RRs can also start both engines at once, just not the GE90 powered 772s.
1 Like
Well the Magknight isn’t the most realistic plane lol
lol
Where have you seen that?
Apologies as I’m functioning on an hour of sleep, so you will have to make due with this difference training document, which states that you cannot start both simultaneously on a -300ER (thus you can on the -200/ER (P&W/RR) and the -300 non-ER.
I’ll find a better reference once I have a reasonable amount of brain capacity.
3 Likes