Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Flight Deck Forums > Rumours & News
Reload this Page >

Tow truck on fire

Rumours & News Reporting Points that may affect our jobs or lives as professional pilots. Also, items that may be of interest to professional pilots.

Tow truck on fire

Old 18th Jun 2018, 13:57
  #41 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2018
Location: London/Fort Worth
Posts: 0
Originally Posted by EDML View Post


The aircraft is not modified to use the system.

Marcus
So how does the pilot on the flight deck control the steering on the tug?. And I am still not clear what the benefits are of this system - replacing the tug driver with the pilot steering the tug gains what?. The tug driver is still there the cab and the tug driver does the pushback so what do you achieve by allowing the pilot to drive in a straight line rather than the tug driver.

I get the feeling that this is a great piece of technology that is looking for a purpose.
BAengineer is offline  
Old 18th Jun 2018, 16:36
  #42 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Reading, UK
Posts: 9,920
Originally Posted by BAengineer View Post
So how does the pilot on the flight deck control the steering on the tug?.
The same way the pilot controls steering when the aircraft is taxying - with the tiller. The TaxiBot detects steering forces on the nosewheel and turns the tug accordingly.

And I am still not clear what the benefits are of this system - replacing the tug driver with the pilot steering the tug gains what?. The tug driver is still there the cab and the tug driver does the pushback so what do you achieve by allowing the pilot to drive in a straight line rather than the tug driver.
Think of it as being at about the same stage of development as autonomous cars, which are only just emerging from the stage of needing a safety driver. The two main issues, neither insurmountable, which currently prevent a driverless TaxiBot are visibility in the pushback phase and the reluctance of airport authorities to allow the tug to return to base autonomously after releasing the towed aircraft at the runway.
DaveReidUK is offline  
Old 18th Jun 2018, 17:19
  #43 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2018
Location: London/Fort Worth
Posts: 0
Originally Posted by DaveReidUK View Post
The same way the pilot controls steering when the aircraft is taxying - with the tiller. The TaxiBot detects steering forces on the nosewheel and turns the tug accordingly.

Think of it as being at about the same stage of development as autonomous cars, which are only just emerging from the stage of needing a safety driver. The two main issues, neither insurmountable, which currently prevent a driverless TaxiBot are visibility in the pushback phase and the reluctance of airport authorities to allow the tug to return to base autonomously after releasing the towed aircraft at the runway.
I just had a look at the website for this product and given that the pilot has no direct control over the tug I dont see how it would be allowed on an airport without a driver in the cab. If the tug sensing mechanism fails or gets a fault there is no way for the pilot to control the direction of travel as he cannot remotely shut down the tug. Same with the engine, the pilot has no way of stopping it except by relying on the aircraft brakes.

So we have a tug that costs probably double that of a normal tug (due to the NWS sensor technology) but still needs a driver - so no cost saving at all, in fact the opposite. I dont see any market for this until totally automated cars are mainstream - come back in 20 years.
BAengineer is offline  
Old 18th Jun 2018, 20:15
  #44 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Location: London
Posts: 35
Originally Posted by BAengineer View Post
I just had a look at the website for this product and given that the pilot has no direct control over the tug I dont see how it would be allowed on an airport without a driver in the cab. If the tug sensing mechanism fails or gets a fault there is no way for the pilot to control the direction of travel as he cannot remotely shut down the tug. Same with the engine, the pilot has no way of stopping it except by relying on the aircraft brakes.

So we have a tug that costs probably double that of a normal tug (due to the NWS sensor technology) but still needs a driver - so no cost saving at all, in fact the opposite. I dont see any market for this until totally automated cars are mainstream - come back in 20 years.
Surely the tug could never overcome the aircraft brakes, so that is the ultimate protection, unless unmanned movement is allowed.
Cynical Sid is offline  
Old 18th Jun 2018, 21:30
  #45 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Reading, UK
Posts: 9,920
Originally Posted by Cynical Sid View Post
Surely the tug could never overcome the aircraft brakes, so that is the ultimate protection, unless unmanned movement is allowed.
Nothing could be further from the truth.

In a competition between an aircraft and a tug, there is only ever going to be one winner, and it's not going to be the aircraft.
DaveReidUK is offline  
Old 18th Jun 2018, 23:50
  #46 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Northern Europe
Age: 40
Posts: 120
Originally Posted by Cynical Sid View Post
Surely the tug could never overcome the aircraft brakes, so that is the ultimate protection, unless unmanned movement is allowed.
The brakes will stop the aircraft just fine, but do brace for your landing when the tug pull away with your NLG.
I can assure you it will do that without hesitation. 😂
The Bartender is offline  
Old 19th Jun 2018, 09:21
  #47 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: On the ground too often
Age: 44
Posts: 129
Originally Posted by BAengineer View Post
So we have a tug that costs probably double that of a normal tug (due to the NWS sensor technology) but still needs a driver - so no cost saving at all, in fact the opposite. I dont see any market for this until totally automated cars are mainstream - come back in 20 years.
From the website it would seem the purpose of the design is to overcome red tape.

Aircraft not having a Pilot in Control (PIC) when towed by a normal tractor: which is unacceptable for safety, accountability and regulatory reasons
Golf-Sierra is offline  
Old 19th Jun 2018, 09:44
  #48 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Germany
Posts: 23
1. It is a regulatory problem if it is not the pilot taxiing the plane.
2. There is a driver needed to bring the tug back.

It is about saving money on big and busy airports (imagine ORD) . You save maybe 30-45min engine runtime (fuel and engine time). Of course the tug needs a lot less fuel than 2-4 big jet engines running in ground idle. Of course that is good for the environment as well.
EDML is offline  
Old 19th Jun 2018, 13:20
  #49 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2018
Location: London/Fort Worth
Posts: 0
Originally Posted by Golf-Sierra View Post
From the website it would seem the purpose of the design is to overcome red tape.
I saw that - but as currently there is no issue about tug drivers towing aircraft around airports I felt they were making rather more of it than needed.
BAengineer is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.