New tug helps aircraft movement
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 990
Likes: 0
From: Larne, UK
and just to clear up the 37 sec oops....its the headset lead, it isnt the ground power.........the GPU/FEGP is much thicker than that,god spot tho...still a potential knackered headset
nice idea, but i cant see it catching on
Last edited by tigger2k8; 27th November 2009 at 20:40.
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 1,424
Likes: 34
From: London,England
Surely it would be better if ATC Ground Movements got their collective acts together to prevent unnecessarily long delays
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 594
Likes: 0
From: 1601
your right tigger, but as with the tug "driver", if the wingman is walking out beside the kite, why not with a headset on, ??? and as for the noticing if it wasnt right....you would be VERY suprised what would need to jump up and bite some people on the ass before they would notice
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 179
Likes: 0
From: In a control room with no radar...
And what the heck happens when they get to the runway? Does the tug then detach at the holding point, requiring more safety checks and delays, then dodge all other pilot-operated tugs & plane to get to the next plane to join the conga of green-pampering failure?
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 8,266
Likes: 1
From: Berkshire, UK
Hamish and Max Angle... You guys really ought to spend a couple of hours trying to do it. We had a smart-a*se pilot in Heathrow Tower one day who thought he knew all the answers so we gave him a headset and told him to get on with it. Five minutes later he had to give up.
I just wonder if the guys who invented this new machine have ever been near a busy airfield? It would be bad enough at Gatwick or Heathrow but just imagine the carnage at some of the US airfields with 100 tugs running around the taxiways in LVPs, or even good weather for that matter. Will they be fitted with SSR?
I just wonder if the guys who invented this new machine have ever been near a busy airfield? It would be bad enough at Gatwick or Heathrow but just imagine the carnage at some of the US airfields with 100 tugs running around the taxiways in LVPs, or even good weather for that matter. Will they be fitted with SSR?
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 603
Likes: 6
From: London
From my experience of taxi times at JFK 2,000kg is probably a reasonable figure for a 747 taxiing out at peak times so that could save £1,200 with fuel at $3/gal. I think that Mr Boeing is a little concerned about stresses on his nose wheel though.
Even a 5 minute warm up would still allow savings.
Prior to the introduction of towbarless tugs aircraft were not allowed to be towed during peak hours at JFK. BA engineers would tow a 747 from a remote holding gate (presumably on two engines). I don't know if this still happens.
I've taken off from MIA where the runway is right next to the DL pier less than five minutes after the engines have been switched on, but that was with a JT8D powered aircraft.
Even a 5 minute warm up would still allow savings.
Prior to the introduction of towbarless tugs aircraft were not allowed to be towed during peak hours at JFK. BA engineers would tow a 747 from a remote holding gate (presumably on two engines). I don't know if this still happens.
I've taken off from MIA where the runway is right next to the DL pier less than five minutes after the engines have been switched on, but that was with a JT8D powered aircraft.
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 214
Likes: 8
From: 43N
Re: Sir Rick's brilliant "Green" initiative. Boeing stated their jets are not designed to be tugged for miles on a regular basis at MTOW. Nose gear rebuild costs would quickly nullify any fuel savings, idea scrapped forthwith.
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
From: UK
Sorry to dredge up a dying thread, but this is a subject along the lines of my uni dissertation work, so I have a question or two for you guys in the know!
RE the nosewheel stresses, is a TBL better than a conventional tug for this, or much the same? Also, if not, would strengthening the nose gear be such an idea-killer? Don't aircraft have their undercarriage strengthened for steep approach capabilities, and wouldn't this be along the same lines?
Also anyone have any further details on the Virgin tests?
Thanks
RE the nosewheel stresses, is a TBL better than a conventional tug for this, or much the same? Also, if not, would strengthening the nose gear be such an idea-killer? Don't aircraft have their undercarriage strengthened for steep approach capabilities, and wouldn't this be along the same lines?
Also anyone have any further details on the Virgin tests?
Thanks
Joined: Aug 1998
Aviation Qualifications: ATPL
Posts: 6,623
Likes: 847
From: Ex-pat Aussie in the UK
Conventional tugs shear the link on the tow bar if they encounter too much force.
As per this idea - sometimes it's hard enough getting a tug, without 50 of the things tied up in a queue at the runway! Not that you want to push back with a 50 aircraft queue at the runway in any case!
As per this idea - sometimes it's hard enough getting a tug, without 50 of the things tied up in a queue at the runway! Not that you want to push back with a 50 aircraft queue at the runway in any case!
Joined: Jan 2008
Aviation Qualifications: Non-Aircrew
Posts: 340
Likes: 174
From: UK
There was an accident in MAN many years ago with a TBL, the aircraft was being towed with engines running when more thrust was applied the nose wheel came loose and mounted the tug. Could have been much worse!
Tug had disconnected and moved forward while headset man signed off with flight deck & disconnected.
As headset man started to leave nosewheel area a/c commenced taxi and ran over the tug .. driver "legged it" as the a/c mounted his vehicle
