No towing from stand to take off - yet.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Esher, Surrey
Posts: 466
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No towing from stand to take off - yet.
From The Times in the UK
"It was sold to airline passengers as a bold, green initiative that would save thousands of tonnes of carbon dioxide from their flights.
But Virgin Atlantic has quietly abandoned a plan to tow Boeing 747 jumbo jets to special “starting grids” at the end of runways after the aircraft manufacturer found that pulling the landing gear would seriously weaken it.
Sir Richard Branson, the president of Virgin, has launched a series of green initiatives in the past two years in an attempt to claim the mantle of the most environmentally responsible airline. But an analysis by The Times has found that most are having little, if any, impact on the airline’s emissions.
Environmental groups argue that the initiatives are “green-wash”, accusing Virgin of promoting them for PR value without making clear that it will be many years before they will begin to deliver environmental benefits.
Virgin claimed that starting grids would save up to two tonnes of CO2 per flight because aircraft engines would not be started until ten minutes before take-off. It also said that people living near airports would benefit from “much lower noise levels and dramatically cleaner air”.
Sir Richard even persuaded Arnold Schwarzenegger, Governor of Californina, to endorse the plan in 2006. When Virgin started testing in December 2006, it suggested that many of its aircraft would be involved and that airports around the world would swiftly embrace the idea.
Now it admits that the project has been suspended indefinitely, because of the landing-gear problem and because existing facilities at airports could not accommodate the starting grids.
A Virgin spokesman confirmed there had been only six towed departures at three airports: Gatwick, Heathrow and San Francisco. Boeing revealed that it had analysed the results of the trials and found that towing an aircraft placed too much stress on the landing gear and reduced its life. A Gatwick spokesman said: “We are not building any starting grids.”
Jeff Gazzard, a board member of the Aviation Environment Federation, said: “Virgin is using bogus green initiatives in an attempt to make passengers feel less guilty about flying and persuade regulators to allow the industry to carry on growing at its present unsustainable rate.”
The Virgin spokesman said it was wrong to criticise the airline for seeking environmental solutions, claiming its rivals were doing relatively little. He said: “In a few years’ time there will be significant change.”
With other Virgin initiatives, it was found that only 1 per cent of business-class passengers took up the chance of a Heathrow Express train ticket instead of a chauffeur-driven car. And only 5 per cent of biofuel had been used instead of normal aircraft kerosene in a flight described as creating “the first airline in the world to fly on renewable fuel”.
Will this idea of towing to take off ever get adopted?
May I suggest that "the landing gear is not good / strong enough" will not go down well in goverment high places.
"It was sold to airline passengers as a bold, green initiative that would save thousands of tonnes of carbon dioxide from their flights.
But Virgin Atlantic has quietly abandoned a plan to tow Boeing 747 jumbo jets to special “starting grids” at the end of runways after the aircraft manufacturer found that pulling the landing gear would seriously weaken it.
Sir Richard Branson, the president of Virgin, has launched a series of green initiatives in the past two years in an attempt to claim the mantle of the most environmentally responsible airline. But an analysis by The Times has found that most are having little, if any, impact on the airline’s emissions.
Environmental groups argue that the initiatives are “green-wash”, accusing Virgin of promoting them for PR value without making clear that it will be many years before they will begin to deliver environmental benefits.
Virgin claimed that starting grids would save up to two tonnes of CO2 per flight because aircraft engines would not be started until ten minutes before take-off. It also said that people living near airports would benefit from “much lower noise levels and dramatically cleaner air”.
Sir Richard even persuaded Arnold Schwarzenegger, Governor of Californina, to endorse the plan in 2006. When Virgin started testing in December 2006, it suggested that many of its aircraft would be involved and that airports around the world would swiftly embrace the idea.
Now it admits that the project has been suspended indefinitely, because of the landing-gear problem and because existing facilities at airports could not accommodate the starting grids.
A Virgin spokesman confirmed there had been only six towed departures at three airports: Gatwick, Heathrow and San Francisco. Boeing revealed that it had analysed the results of the trials and found that towing an aircraft placed too much stress on the landing gear and reduced its life. A Gatwick spokesman said: “We are not building any starting grids.”
Jeff Gazzard, a board member of the Aviation Environment Federation, said: “Virgin is using bogus green initiatives in an attempt to make passengers feel less guilty about flying and persuade regulators to allow the industry to carry on growing at its present unsustainable rate.”
The Virgin spokesman said it was wrong to criticise the airline for seeking environmental solutions, claiming its rivals were doing relatively little. He said: “In a few years’ time there will be significant change.”
With other Virgin initiatives, it was found that only 1 per cent of business-class passengers took up the chance of a Heathrow Express train ticket instead of a chauffeur-driven car. And only 5 per cent of biofuel had been used instead of normal aircraft kerosene in a flight described as creating “the first airline in the world to fly on renewable fuel”.
Will this idea of towing to take off ever get adopted?
May I suggest that "the landing gear is not good / strong enough" will not go down well in goverment high places.
I had a feeling that LH was doing this in FRA years and years ago - but I can't find any evidence of it on the web, which suggests that perhaps the plan was shelved there, too.
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Canada/Ireland
Posts: 43
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nice to see them making the effort though. After all it is important. Hopfully if they keep up the brainstorming, they may just catch on to something that will work. Every little helps.
However, I can see how the landing gear of a B 747 or an A340 could be strained by being towed a longer distance than normal at MTOW. Does anybody know the MTOW of a 747or an A340? As for the idea of towing the aircraft before takeoff. How about towing them back to the terminal after landing when they are far lighter? How much stress would this cause the landing gear? Probably pritty close as, they are not designed for this kind of operation. Also you have to think about the delays this may cause other airlines while waiting for the start ups. May end up costing the same in fuel due to the knock on effects.
They will come up with something better, they always do! Can't see ground at major airports to happy with the idea of change though.
Anyways,
good night all,
Rick
However, I can see how the landing gear of a B 747 or an A340 could be strained by being towed a longer distance than normal at MTOW. Does anybody know the MTOW of a 747or an A340? As for the idea of towing the aircraft before takeoff. How about towing them back to the terminal after landing when they are far lighter? How much stress would this cause the landing gear? Probably pritty close as, they are not designed for this kind of operation. Also you have to think about the delays this may cause other airlines while waiting for the start ups. May end up costing the same in fuel due to the knock on effects.
They will come up with something better, they always do! Can't see ground at major airports to happy with the idea of change though.
Anyways,
good night all,
Rick
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Australia
Age: 72
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ricky1, not sure what you mean by "something better," but the technology here:
http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthr...t=chorus+motor
is attractive. Possibly not retro-fitable, though. Oftenfly
http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthr...t=chorus+motor
is attractive. Possibly not retro-fitable, though. Oftenfly
Would it not be better to fly great circle routes direct to destination instead of using airways designed for aircraft using VOR/DME? That might get you there quicker and save gas!! It might even be safer! Then get BAA to sort out the problem of gates and slots and you could save even more!!
Or has this been suggested before!!!!!!!!
Or has this been suggested before!!!!!!!!
Hippopotomonstrosesquipidelian title
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: is everything
Posts: 1,826
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Didn't NW tow to the runway at one time, for their somewhere-in-the-US to Beijing route, which was the longest route at that time?
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Brighton
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MTOWs :
B747-400 396,894Kg (875,000lbs)
A340-600 365,000Kg (804,687lbs)
A380-800 560,000Kg (1,234,588lbs)
As to the queueing problems, some airports (inc LGW) looked into providing enlarged hold areas, allowing other A/C to pass
B747-400 396,894Kg (875,000lbs)
A340-600 365,000Kg (804,687lbs)
A380-800 560,000Kg (1,234,588lbs)
As to the queueing problems, some airports (inc LGW) looked into providing enlarged hold areas, allowing other A/C to pass
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Germany
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by cstleon
I had a feeling that LH was doing this in FRA years and years ago
Originally Posted by newt
Would it not be better to fly great circle routes direct to destination instead of using airways designed for aircraft using VOR/DME?
Originally Posted by newt
Then get BAA to sort out the problem of gates and slots and you could save even more!!
Paxing All Over The World
Arrived at LGW this evening but our stand was not empty. So we stood for 11 minutes with both motors (DHC-8 Q400) idling all the while. What a fabulous waste of gas and increase in pollution. The airports have, almost universally, been allowed to book in more flights than they can handle. The amount of time spent in the hold and taxi to/from the active is massive but no one is going to change it.
It looks as if long haul towing will have to wait for a system that puts the motive force onto the mains, not the nose gear.
It looks as if long haul towing will have to wait for a system that puts the motive force onto the mains, not the nose gear.
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Somehwere on the planet
Posts: 372
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
People really have no clue on where the greatest fuel savings in aviation come from. here they are fretting over tugging and aircraft to the runway to save some fuel, when airlines all over the world burn tonnes of the stuff stacked up in holds at congested airports.
Ever fly through Indian airspace? They need 10 MINUTES of spacing due to lack of radar coverage, so here you have thousands of aircraft transiting through their airspace at non optimum altitudes because there is someone 200 miles ahaead of them at the same level that they wanted. That costs airlines a darn bit more fuel than they burn taxiing. Want to go green? take all the money that you want to invest and go buy India a proper, modern radar environment. Presto you just saved millions of dollars in fuel costs a year with a associated reduction in CO2 emmisions.
Its a bit harder for a non aviation person to understand however and certainly much harder to fix than a nice simple solution like tugging an aircraft, so you never hear about it in the press.
Ever fly through Indian airspace? They need 10 MINUTES of spacing due to lack of radar coverage, so here you have thousands of aircraft transiting through their airspace at non optimum altitudes because there is someone 200 miles ahaead of them at the same level that they wanted. That costs airlines a darn bit more fuel than they burn taxiing. Want to go green? take all the money that you want to invest and go buy India a proper, modern radar environment. Presto you just saved millions of dollars in fuel costs a year with a associated reduction in CO2 emmisions.
Its a bit harder for a non aviation person to understand however and certainly much harder to fix than a nice simple solution like tugging an aircraft, so you never hear about it in the press.
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Sydney
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree, at least Virgin are making the effort to do something! And - they certainly do more than most. Face the facts guys, no one is going to give up long haul travel - it is a necessity for many. All airlines can do is minimise their impact where they can.
Paxing All Over The World
Indedd tbaylx. When this topic first came up, I made reference to the Holds in the LTMA. If the UK govt wanted to cut down on emissions, they only have to get the CAA to limit holding times. That means cutting the number of flights into EGLL and so nothing will happen. The gas used in the Holds is staggering. You only have to look at the number of machines per day and the average amount of time that they spend holding. The computation would then be easy.
Your info about spacing over the sub-continent is most interesting.
Your info about spacing over the sub-continent is most interesting.
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: London (Babylon-on-Thames)
Age: 42
Posts: 6,168
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you are really getting your knickers in a twist about the amounts burned on taxi in or holding then you do NOT have an adequate perspective on the problems inherent in made made climate change.
Aviation is a small minority contributor, albeit one growing from an insignificant one to a slightly larger minority. Be intelligent and go and read about the what the MAJORITY causes are.
However that should in no way prevent uninformed wittering and shrill voices. Should you have a real problem with climate change and aviation, then why on Earth are you flying?
THIS TOWING TO THE RUNWAY FARCE WAS A PR STUNT FROM DAY ONE. ANYONE FAMILIAR WITH HEATHROW OR GATWICK KNEW THAT !
Of course the media fell for it as ever.....
Aviation is a small minority contributor, albeit one growing from an insignificant one to a slightly larger minority. Be intelligent and go and read about the what the MAJORITY causes are.
However that should in no way prevent uninformed wittering and shrill voices. Should you have a real problem with climate change and aviation, then why on Earth are you flying?
THIS TOWING TO THE RUNWAY FARCE WAS A PR STUNT FROM DAY ONE. ANYONE FAMILIAR WITH HEATHROW OR GATWICK KNEW THAT !
Of course the media fell for it as ever.....
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Esher, Surrey U.K.
Posts: 15
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I hate to mention 'the elephant in the room' but the most effective and immediate way to reduce the amount of CO2 emissions might be, I am sorry to say, to reduce the total number of flights.
Saving a relatively small amount fuel by towing aircraft out to the runway may be pointless while there are plans to build a new terminal and a new runway at both Heathrow and Stansted and air travel is forecast to double by 2035 (or before).
While I know that there are many factors producing climate change I am beginning to be persuaded by the experts at the Met Office Hadley Centre who say that Aviation may be making a major contribution. As a professional pilot with many years of flying ahead of me, I hope they are wrong.
The huge Met Office computers nowadays produce extremely accurate upper air wind and temperature charts. The same computers also produce the climate change predictions. If we accept the former data, may be the latter data might have some validity.
Saving a relatively small amount fuel by towing aircraft out to the runway may be pointless while there are plans to build a new terminal and a new runway at both Heathrow and Stansted and air travel is forecast to double by 2035 (or before).
While I know that there are many factors producing climate change I am beginning to be persuaded by the experts at the Met Office Hadley Centre who say that Aviation may be making a major contribution. As a professional pilot with many years of flying ahead of me, I hope they are wrong.
The huge Met Office computers nowadays produce extremely accurate upper air wind and temperature charts. The same computers also produce the climate change predictions. If we accept the former data, may be the latter data might have some validity.
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: West Country
Posts: 1,271
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
would it have been that much of saving of emissions? - you would have a clapped out old tug belching diesal fumes and would need to keep the APU running longer, so the total saving to the enviroment would have been negligable compared to waste identified by previous posters
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Manchester, UK
Posts: 58
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
While I know that there are many factors producing climate change I am beginning to be persuaded by the experts at the Met Office Hadley Centre who say that Aviation may be making a major contribution. As a professional pilot with many years of flying ahead of me, I hope they are wrong.
The huge Met Office computers nowadays produce extremely accurate upper air wind and temperature charts. The same computers also produce the climate change predictions. If we accept the former data, may be the latter data might have some validity.
The huge Met Office computers nowadays produce extremely accurate upper air wind and temperature charts. The same computers also produce the climate change predictions. If we accept the former data, may be the latter data might have some validity.
Well, that's me convinced. I'm off out to buy me a Prius!
http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?t=258830
(Good thread in Jet Blast on the very subject. I know, I know, but they're not all Guardian readers).
Paxing All Over The World
Skipness One Echo
Not getting my knickers in the least bit twisted. You may have noticed that I said, "If the UK govt wanted to cut down on emissions, they only have to get the CAA to limit holding times."
For myself, I consider that we have not a hope in hell of stopping mankind from trashing the planet. Human beings do not know how to stop doing things that they like doing and that make money! I expect climate change to worsen steadily and to try and enjoy as much of my time on this planet as I can. The only thing that will stop humans is when disaster starts. If an example were needed: How many folks live on the San Andreas fault? Then some people die and the rest carry on. One day LOTS of people will die but folks are not going to move out.
So I expect the govt and the pressure groups to carry on doing what they do and nothing will change ... except the climate!
If you are really getting your knickers in a twist about the amounts burned on taxi in or holding then you do NOT have an adequate perspective on the problems inherent in made made climate change.
For myself, I consider that we have not a hope in hell of stopping mankind from trashing the planet. Human beings do not know how to stop doing things that they like doing and that make money! I expect climate change to worsen steadily and to try and enjoy as much of my time on this planet as I can. The only thing that will stop humans is when disaster starts. If an example were needed: How many folks live on the San Andreas fault? Then some people die and the rest carry on. One day LOTS of people will die but folks are not going to move out.
So I expect the govt and the pressure groups to carry on doing what they do and nothing will change ... except the climate!
Join Date: May 2005
Location: The Neverlands
Posts: 28
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I should jolly well hope that there isnt any tugging going on all the way from the stand to take-off, as SLF I like to think the flight crew are concentrating on the flight ahead and would at least wait until in the cruise... 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Auckland, NZ
Posts: 26
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
On the subject of towing to the runway....
AR used to operate 747s between AKL and EZE. SOP was to fuel them to capacity, pull the CBs for the fuel overfill shutoffs and then fill them until a little bit of fuel spilled out of the vents. They would then tow the aircraft to the end of the runway, start the engines and depart with unseemly haste. Apparently there was still a window of a couple of hours in the middle of the flight when they REALLY couldn't afford to lose an engine.....
P.S. Man-made climate change is a scam! Don't believe the lies! Make the world a better place: kick an environmentalist.
P.S. Man-made climate change is a scam! Don't believe the lies! Make the world a better place: kick an environmentalist.