Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Flight Deck Forums > Tech Log
Reload this Page >

New tug helps aircraft movement

Wikiposts
Search

Notices
Tech Log The very best in practical technical discussion on the web

New tug helps aircraft movement

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 27th November 2009 | 14:39
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
15 Anniversary
 
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 467
Likes: 0
From: Esher, Surrey
New tug helps aircraft movement

An engineering company from Shoreham in West Sussex has developed a new type of vehicle which pulls aircraft from the terminal out to the runway.

A short video clip of the test vehicle.

BBC News - New tug helps aircraft movement
beamender99 is offline  
Reply
Old 27th November 2009 | 14:46
  #2 (permalink)  
15 Anniversary
 
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 147
Likes: 15
From: London
I don't understand why a new type of tug is needed for this.
Can't the existing tugs just take the aircraft to the runways as they are?
OK ... the pilots can't control them from the cockpit, but so what?
Alanwsg is offline  
Reply
Old 27th November 2009 | 14:55
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 1,078
Likes: 0
From: Ask OPS!
I wonder what the engine wear would be after just starting up the engines and immediately applying take off thrust! I would wager that putting full thrust on a cold engine would cause more wear cost than that of burning a ton or two of fuel!

You would need at least 5 minutes 'warm up', also most of the start up snags would then be 'discovered' just prior to take off whilst blocking the line up taxi way!

Quite a difficult task to get the engineers all the way out there.

Great idea, a few hurdles to overcome yet though.
wobble2plank is offline  
Reply
Old 27th November 2009 | 15:01
  #4 (permalink)  
15 Anniversary
 
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 423
Likes: 1
From: Malvern, UK
Didn't Virgin Atlantic try the idea at Heathrow and abandon it almost immediately?

The controllers certainly didn't like it.
Dont Hang Up is offline  
Reply
Old 27th November 2009 | 15:18
  #5 (permalink)  
sjm
 
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 114
Likes: 0
From: uk
2000kg of fuel is that an accurate firgure for a 747 a340 in lhr?

In ams/cdg b737 is only 150kg rarely burn more than that
sjm is offline  
Reply
Old 27th November 2009 | 15:22
  #6 (permalink)  
 
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 594
Likes: 0
From: 1601
i just dont get it, its a nice idea and all that, but whats the point in inventing a tug.....thats operated by the pilot.....and having the driver sat with his arms folded, or texting blah blah. WHY DOESNT HE JUST DRIVE ??????. Presumably this is more to the "tow em to the runway before start up to save fuel" rubbish. it just a glorified TBL with a passenger
TOWTEAMBASE is offline  
Reply
Old 27th November 2009 | 15:23
  #7 (permalink)  
 
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 55
Likes: 0
From: UK
look at video @ 37secs.........that will be the grd power lead being ripped out from the a/c !!!!!!!!!!!
PeePeerune is offline  
Reply
Old 27th November 2009 | 16:41
  #8 (permalink)  
 
Joined: Jan 2000
Posts: 469
Likes: 0
From: U K
Concorde used to use 2 tons on taxi out at CDG but I doubt if many others will come close, Typical 737 = 150 KG
BALLSOUT is offline  
Reply
Old 27th November 2009 | 16:44
  #9 (permalink)  
 
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 88
Likes: 0
From: Manchester , UK
I would't trust that !

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!
mantug01 is offline  
Reply
Old 27th November 2009 | 17:21
  #10 (permalink)  
 
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 173
Likes: 0
From: East England
Whoops at 37 secs you are right!!!!
spannersatKL is offline  
Reply
Old 27th November 2009 | 17:53
  #11 (permalink)  
15 Anniversary
 
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,486
Likes: 8
From: The No Transgression Zone
nose wheel came loose and mounted the tug

that would make an interesting love child

PA
Pugilistic Animus is offline  
Reply
Old 27th November 2009 | 18:14
  #12 (permalink)  
20 Anniversary
 
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 80
Likes: 0
From: In the mountains of Switzerland
Taxi Fuel A-340-300

The APU / taxi fuel on a A-340-300 according OM B is as follows:

APU-Fuel: 200 kg/hr
Taxiing: 30 kg/min.

A-330-200 and A330-300 are similar...
DouglasFlyer is offline  
Reply
Old 27th November 2009 | 18:37
  #13 (permalink)  
 
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 111
Likes: 0
From: LHR
Typical taxi fuel (25 mins) on the 744 from T5 to 27L/R is approx 1100Kg.

They also don't mention the need for the 5 minute warm-up required prior to application of tae-off power.

Good idea in principal though, not so great in practice.
Flap33 is offline  
Reply
Old 27th November 2009 | 18:52
  #14 (permalink)  
 
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 594
Likes: 0
From: 1601
Im still lost, why is all this talk about taxiing, surely the tug is instead of the engines running.it may be controlled by the cpt, but surely the power is coming from the tug, if it wasnt, the tug wouldnt need to be such a monster. TBL are great....right up until they start to go wrong, or even silly stuf like condensation on sensors.


REF the MAN incident..why was it being towed with engines running, was it a push back/pull forward jobby
TOWTEAMBASE is offline  
Reply
Old 27th November 2009 | 18:58
  #15 (permalink)  
 
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 594
Likes: 0
From: 1601
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
TOWTEAMBASE is offline  
Reply
Old 27th November 2009 | 19:29
  #16 (permalink)  
 
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
From: Europe
Can't help wondering about the runway safety (i.e incursion) implication of multiple vehicles operating close to busy runways

Imperator 1300
Imperator1300 is offline  
Reply
Old 27th November 2009 | 19:52
  #17 (permalink)  
 
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 88
Likes: 0
From: Manchester , UK
TOWTEAMBASE -
REF the MAN incident..why was it being towed with engines running, was it a push back/pull forward jobby
Yes it was pushing back then pulling forward...for a quite a long way
mantug01 is offline  
Reply
Old 27th November 2009 | 19:53
  #18 (permalink)  
 
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 1,546
Likes: 2
From: Oxford, UK
Don't rain on their parade, it will never happen! What would one of these gadgets cost? not a little. How many fancy pilot operated tugs would you
need to line up all the jets on the taxiway at Kennedy? And then once detached from the aircraft, you would have to construct an extra taxiway for the tug to get back for the next customer.

The only sillier idea I've ever seen are those extremely peculiar busses that somebody sold to the airport design committee at Washington Dulles....you know, the ones that go up and down and cross the active taxiways?
mary meagher is offline  
Reply
Old 27th November 2009 | 20:09
  #19 (permalink)  
 
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 429
Likes: 0
From: UK
The only sillier idea I've ever seen are those extremely peculiar busses that somebody sold to the airport design committee at Washington Dulles....you know, the ones that go up and down and cross the active taxiways?
That'll be the Mobile Lounges and PlaneMates you're thinking of... They are very peculiar, but I kinda prefer them (from an SLF perspective!) to airbridges or airstairs. Different to the norm and all that...
raffele is offline  
Reply
Old 27th November 2009 | 20:14
  #20 (permalink)  
 
Joined: Jul 2009
Posts: 130
Likes: 0
From: Surrey, UK
Surely it would be better if ATC Ground Movements got their collective acts together to prevent unnecessarily long delays between push-backs and getting to the runway? A bit of computer power and trained brains must be cheaper and more kind to the environment than fleets of new tugs at every major airport world-wide
HamishMcBush is offline  
Reply


Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.