I suppose Airbus is going ahead with the electric taxi idea
Good idea in princliple- but I would have thought just using tugs to position for takeoff would have been cheaper than fitting every aircraft with the gear, both from a complexity and weight POV.
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Nearby SBBR and SDAM
Posts: 875
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Li Ion won´t be necessary for taxi
Hi,
Considering the motors will be powered by gennies even after landing thus not requiring the dangerous dangerous batteries
i think is a good approach that "has future".
Time will tell.
PS
Li Ion for me now is
during some time 
Considering the motors will be powered by gennies even after landing thus not requiring the dangerous dangerous batteries
i think is a good approach that "has future". Time will tell.
PS
Li Ion for me now is
during some time
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Wor Yerm
Age: 68
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Now the tough bit...
How do you convince the plonkers who refuse to shut down one engine "for elf'n'safety" reasons that shutting two engines will be OK? And will there be a reverse gear? Will the Campaign ever allow such a device (to be used economically?). How much will an airline be charged to do a DIY tow? Will it have enough grunt to get up at the (soon to be closed) taxi-bridge at TXL fully laden? Will ATC play the game and give you two three/four minutes notice of actual take-off time so you can fire up the engines?
Not withstanding the above, I think it will be good idea.
Not withstanding the above, I think it will be good idea.
How do you convince the plonkers who refuse to shut down one engine "for elf'n'safety" reasons that shutting two engines will be OK?
it will mean not taxiing using asymmetric thrust.
Paxing All Over The World
I suppose Airbus is going ahead with the electric taxi idea
(merely a pax observing through the window)
The technology and business model are nearly there. However there are some open issues for example airport infrastructure. Not all airports have the space to cope with aircraft needing to start and warm up their engines in the runway vicinity. Ultimately ways will be found, but there is some pioneer work required.
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: in the magical land of beer and chocolates
Age: 52
Posts: 506
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I suspect this will initially be used to taxi to the stand after touch down, no need to worry about reversing or space/time to start up the engines and in most cases the APU is going to have to be switched on anyway after landing, might as well make good use of it.
Later on maybe also useful before take-off, certainly at the smaller airports that mostly use open ramp space which don't really need push back anyway.
I have a vision of the pilot with his arm out of the window looking back over his shoulder ,skilfully reversing like a real trucker while at the same time hearing the all known BEEP BEEP BEEP...
, we also might have to reintroduce a real wheel again in the future iso the yoke or stick.
Later on maybe also useful before take-off, certainly at the smaller airports that mostly use open ramp space which don't really need push back anyway.
I have a vision of the pilot with his arm out of the window looking back over his shoulder ,skilfully reversing like a real trucker while at the same time hearing the all known BEEP BEEP BEEP...
, we also might have to reintroduce a real wheel again in the future iso the yoke or stick.
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: England
Age: 65
Posts: 303
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The idea behind is this is save fuel by NOT using the engines, APU powers the electric motors and engines would be started well clear of the terminal in time to complete engine checks prior to receiving take off clearance.
Safer as well as should be no ground crew near aircraft when engines are started, also no delays waiting for a tug.
Pushback would presumably have ground crew advising, although even quite modest cars have TV camera's in addition to RV mirrors, add a couple more on the wing tips and it's not quite so scary.
Some airports will give bigger cost savings than others but Airbus wouldn't have progressed with this if there wasn't a good chance of commercial success, Lo-Co carriers will probably bite their hand off as it means they can reduce airport expenditure even more
Safer as well as should be no ground crew near aircraft when engines are started, also no delays waiting for a tug.
Pushback would presumably have ground crew advising, although even quite modest cars have TV camera's in addition to RV mirrors, add a couple more on the wing tips and it's not quite so scary.
Some airports will give bigger cost savings than others but Airbus wouldn't have progressed with this if there wasn't a good chance of commercial success, Lo-Co carriers will probably bite their hand off as it means they can reduce airport expenditure even more
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Somewhere out there...
Posts: 215
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wheeltug.gi are offering a nose wheel based solution and tested it on B737 even on snow and ice. They are proposing free retrofit with the airlines splitting the savings. A320 family system in the pipeline. It will be interesting to see who will be first to market... Interesting presentations and video on the Wheeltug - it seems that the nose wheels can generate enough traction...
Good idea in principle. Who's going to tell me about a fuel leak after engine start though? Couple of years ago I had a fuel leak on engine 2 and only knew about it from the ground crew who were monitoring the start? Aircraft was AOG for a week down route.
What about tailpipe fire as well?
It would be great not having to worry about a tug for push.
What about tailpipe fire as well?
It would be great not having to worry about a tug for push.
Last edited by Stone Cold II; 29th Jan 2013 at 13:08.
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 243
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
1. Don't forget to take the blanks out before you try to start the engines
2. The departure holding point is a bit late to find out you have an engine problem during or after start
3. It isn't April 1st is it ?
4. Whatever next ... harummpphhhh
2. The departure holding point is a bit late to find out you have an engine problem during or after start
3. It isn't April 1st is it ?
4. Whatever next ... harummpphhhh
Last edited by Smudger; 29th Jan 2013 at 13:08.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Somewhere out there...
Posts: 215
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Agree to all 4, but remember that those who control the purse strings know the cost of everything and the value of nothing. If the figures stack up, then it will happen, and if it gives a commercial edge, everyone in the short haul airline business will want them. No new bit of tech is risk free, and as the benefits can be quantified they get talked up.
Last edited by Busbert; 29th Jan 2013 at 13:15.
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: china
Age: 61
Posts: 324
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you fly out of small airports and only taxi 3-5 minutes (3 minutes is CFM warmup time) then these have no use and you are carrying around extra weight. If you are flying out of busy airports and your taxi time is 15-45+ minutes these will save enormous amounts of fuel, especially on 737 and A320 sized and smaller aircraft that fly a lot of legs. Great idea.
Who is monitoring your engine start? At a busy airport, the 7 aircraft behind you. They will be eating your smoke if you have a tailpipe fire.
Who is monitoring your engine start? At a busy airport, the 7 aircraft behind you. They will be eating your smoke if you have a tailpipe fire.