Fully ready to push (honest mate)
Paxing All Over The World
Tugs and Drivers are not part of BAA, nor under any form of control of ATC...
LHR info structure busting at the seams, T5 completion eagerly awaited.
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: LHR/EGLL
Age: 45
Posts: 4,392
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
PAXboy,
Why not part of BAA or why not under ATC control?
LHR infrastructure is bursting at the seams, correct, and T5 is probably the cause of much of it. BAA just don't want to spend money on anything apart from T5, Britain's newest shopping mall.
It's such a crying shame.
Why not part of BAA or why not under ATC control?
LHR infrastructure is bursting at the seams, correct, and T5 is probably the cause of much of it. BAA just don't want to spend money on anything apart from T5, Britain's newest shopping mall.
It's such a crying shame.
Nobody has spoken about the tugdrivers union,and dont mention letting the BAA run the tugs,have a look at the state of the bridges to the aircraft.Amok with litter,due to the BAA not cleaning the bloody things.But then again you need to introduce the arriving tourist to what they will see when they get outside!
Paxing All Over The World
Gonzo, on reflection of the information posted here, it would seem that only ATC really have the info. To relay that through the Carrier and the Service Agent (at least) seems silly. I suspect that the current system is one that has grown ad hoc from the earlier days and we now have the usual British mish-mash.
Originally, did each carrier do their own tug work, or was there always a pooling of tugs?
To reply to the person who mentioned 'power backs', this has been discussed in various forums on PPRuNe and the problem is that most a/c these days have low slung engine pods and the opportunity to pick up FOD is high. Further, even if they do not ingest the FOD - they are likely to throw it against/into someone.
Hhhmm, how about we line up the management of the Shopping Arcade (aka BAA) and then practice 'power backs' with a wide range of equipment?
Originally, did each carrier do their own tug work, or was there always a pooling of tugs?
To reply to the person who mentioned 'power backs', this has been discussed in various forums on PPRuNe and the problem is that most a/c these days have low slung engine pods and the opportunity to pick up FOD is high. Further, even if they do not ingest the FOD - they are likely to throw it against/into someone.
Hhhmm, how about we line up the management of the Shopping Arcade (aka BAA) and then practice 'power backs' with a wide range of equipment?
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: LHR/EGLL
Age: 45
Posts: 4,392
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
PAXboy,
The whole of Heathrow and its entire operation is a British mish-mash!
To be honest, there are only two airlines who seem to have problems with tugs (or lack of) when we get into heavy delays, and they are BAW and BMA. All the other airlines seem to manage. And lo and behold BAW and BMA provide their own tugs and crews. We already have to cope with hours worth of delay created every week because BA don't provide enough tugs in the early morning during the T4 noise restriction period. But of course, it's far more economical to add five or ten minutes on to the published flight time than employ more tug drivers. Properly maintained tugs would also be a welcome change! The number of towing movements we have to stop because they're not showing the required lighting gets ridiculous sometimes.
I believe Virgin have their own tugs, as do Air France, United and American. Other airlines use Air France, United or one of two ground handling companies, Globe Ground and Plane Handling.
The whole of Heathrow and its entire operation is a British mish-mash!
To be honest, there are only two airlines who seem to have problems with tugs (or lack of) when we get into heavy delays, and they are BAW and BMA. All the other airlines seem to manage. And lo and behold BAW and BMA provide their own tugs and crews. We already have to cope with hours worth of delay created every week because BA don't provide enough tugs in the early morning during the T4 noise restriction period. But of course, it's far more economical to add five or ten minutes on to the published flight time than employ more tug drivers. Properly maintained tugs would also be a welcome change! The number of towing movements we have to stop because they're not showing the required lighting gets ridiculous sometimes.
I believe Virgin have their own tugs, as do Air France, United and American. Other airlines use Air France, United or one of two ground handling companies, Globe Ground and Plane Handling.
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: The World, although sometimes I wonder
Posts: 388
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Always enjoy the interpretations of the English language!
Anyone tell me the difference between "ready" and "fully ready". Surely if you are ready, you are fully ready, otherwise you would not be ready?
Rather like saying "cancel in toto" when you want to say "cancel"!!!
One pilot, two pilots, one cow, two cows, one lady, two ladies, one man, two men, one fish, two fish................
Anyone tell me the difference between "ready" and "fully ready". Surely if you are ready, you are fully ready, otherwise you would not be ready?
Rather like saying "cancel in toto" when you want to say "cancel"!!!
One pilot, two pilots, one cow, two cows, one lady, two ladies, one man, two men, one fish, two fish................
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Formerly resident of Knoteatingham
Posts: 958
Received 122 Likes
on
62 Posts
Off topic, so apologies but I couldn't resist adding to the previous post:
Or you could stand in front of a closed door and, quite "correctly" enquire "Is that door open?"
Or you could stand in front of a closed door and, quite "correctly" enquire "Is that door open?"
Join Date: May 2000
Location: London
Posts: 383
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Back to my point about having some sort of feed from ATC to Airline Ops departments. Gonzo, I would think that once something like that was set up it wouldn't cost very much with all the equipment in place but I would guess NATS would want to charge Airlines a small fee for using the information?? Nothing comes for free these days!!
From an Airline Ops point of view, not allocating tugs though as someone else does that for us, it would make sense having some sort of feed so we know when our Aircraft are likely to depart during times of delay.
Would it not cut down on the workload for delivery if Airlines found out how long they were likely to have to wait from their Ops departments rather than bombarding delivery with requests like 'what number are we in the queue' etc etc.
Although would that make things more comlicated for ATC with Airline Ops departments guessing when their A/C are likely to move when ATC would have a much better idea??
From an Airline Ops point of view, not allocating tugs though as someone else does that for us, it would make sense having some sort of feed so we know when our Aircraft are likely to depart during times of delay.
Would it not cut down on the workload for delivery if Airlines found out how long they were likely to have to wait from their Ops departments rather than bombarding delivery with requests like 'what number are we in the queue' etc etc.
Although would that make things more comlicated for ATC with Airline Ops departments guessing when their A/C are likely to move when ATC would have a much better idea??
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: uk
Posts: 358
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't know if it is true, but I was told that Spanish working practices mean that BA tug people do a very small number of pushbacks per shift. Like single figures. Can anyone clarify?
And lo and behold BAW and BMA provide their own tugs and crews.
The only people who really have any idea when a particular aircraft is going to be started are ATC so they need to give the crew on the aircraft or the airline's office some idea of time and order so that we can coordinate the tugs. As I said in another post I have seen it done very effectively at times and not at others which perhaps means that some watches have got it sussed and others have not.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: London, UK
Posts: 33
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If ATC know aircraft x is ready without a tug and he will be given push in 5 mins then (the hypothetical) ‘tug central control’ should get an ATC request to send one, from the relevant agent.
We all tell ‘little white lies’ in order to get a tug and keep him, leading to aircraft further down the list having one while the guy next on the push list does not (even from the same airline).
Some of these ideas seem to be over-complicating the problem. Once the aircraft is crewed, fuelled, catered, and boarded with doors closed then ops have done there job, at least for departure and involving them in the scramble for a tug is unnecessary.
By the way, have you ever shouted for a tug, only to discover you nave a towbarless one under the nose?
We all tell ‘little white lies’ in order to get a tug and keep him, leading to aircraft further down the list having one while the guy next on the push list does not (even from the same airline).
Some of these ideas seem to be over-complicating the problem. Once the aircraft is crewed, fuelled, catered, and boarded with doors closed then ops have done there job, at least for departure and involving them in the scramble for a tug is unnecessary.
By the way, have you ever shouted for a tug, only to discover you nave a towbarless one under the nose?
