Sponsor Message:
Aviation Technical / Operations Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
My Idea For Push-Back Ops...  
User currently offlineVANGUARD737 From United States of America, joined Aug 2001, 682 posts, RR: 4
Posted (7 years 7 months 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 3046 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Tofay started thinking about my days as a ramper at ATA. Push-backs were always my favorite part of the job, but it was quite nerve-racking at times when a plane was at a tight gate or close to another aircraft. Also annoying was when a tug wouldn't fuction correctly, or when my gate didn't have one at all! Then of course there were the two times a ramper backed a plane into something.

SOO: I was thinking of new ways to pushback planes and I came up with this idea: an in-ground system at every gate similar to the wheel-locking mechanism on aircraft carriers. It would be a universal system that would grasp a plane's nosewheel and push it from the gate onto the tarmac area - fully automated, safe, and precisely every time.

Would such an arrangement be possible? It would eliminate the expense of purchasing pushback equipment and fuel for that equipment. It would reduce or eliminate pushback accidents. It would eliminate delays caused by waiting for a tug. It would eliminate pollution caused by tugs (assuming it is electric), etc.

What do you think?


320 717 722 732 733 735 737 738 744 752 753 763 772 DC9 DC10 MD80 B1900 S340 E120 ERJ CRJ CR7
22 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineLONGisland89 From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 723 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (7 years 7 months 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 3043 times:

If the main gears are not attached as well the aircraft could turn (a tug can correct for this)

User currently offlineStarlionblue From Greenland, joined Feb 2004, 16975 posts, RR: 67
Reply 2, posted (7 years 7 months 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 3036 times:

Quoting VANGUARD737 (Thread starter):

Would such an arrangement be possible?

Yes.

Quoting VANGUARD737 (Thread starter):
It would eliminate the expense of purchasing pushback equipment and fuel for that equipment.

Sure, but it would add the expense of the system.

Quoting VANGUARD737 (Thread starter):
t would reduce or eliminate pushback accidents.

Maybe.

Quoting VANGUARD737 (Thread starter):
It would eliminate delays caused by waiting for a tug.

Yes, unless the rail is broken at that time.

Quoting VANGUARD737 (Thread starter):
It would eliminate pollution caused by tugs (assuming it is electric), etc.

Local pollution. But the energy needs to be generated somewhere. Unless you're talking clean energy like hydro or wind there will be pollution.

Quoting VANGUARD737 (Thread starter):
What do you think?

I think all original ideas like this need to be looked at. Who knows, you might have something. But I'm not going to hold my breath.,



"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots."
User currently offlineLincoln From United States of America, joined Nov 2004, 3887 posts, RR: 8
Reply 3, posted (7 years 7 months 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 3025 times:

Not a bad idea in therory, but in practice I think it would be expensive and create new (not necessarially more, but different) maintenance issues.

Quoting VANGUARD737 (Thread starter):
It would eliminate pollution caused by tugs (assuming it is electric), etc.

This is just one of my little pet peeves... With the exception of some European countries generating most of their power using hydro, etc. Electricity != eliminate pollution. You're just moving pollution away from "here" to wherever the electricity is generated.

Quoting VANGUARD737 (Thread starter):
push it from the gate onto the tarmac area - fully automated, safe, and precisely every time.

 rotfl   rotfl  The only people who beleive that any machinery works percisely every time are sales people. Anything with moving parts (and most things without moving parts) will eventually break in some way. (Or maybe I'm just getting too jaded).

My concerns, other than the reliability (if one tug breaks down it's a minor inconvenience; if this system breaks down, you potentially have an entire airport that's screwed) are exactly how "universal" and "automatic" you can make it

- What about dealing with multiple aircraft types (and the associated clearences) at tight gates? I would imagine that 757-300, for example, requires a lot more room on the ground to safely turn than a DC-9

- What about non-aircraft obstructions? For example, what if someone accidentally leaves a baggage cart behind the wing or a peice of large debris was blown behind main gear?

- What if the system decides that it's time to push the aircraft back before the humans involved are ready? (I.e. while the last bags are being loaded, passengers still up and about, etc?)

Those are just my questions

Lincoln



CO Is My Airline of Choice || Baggage Claim is an airline's last chance to disappoint a customer || Next flts in profile
User currently offlineStarlionblue From Greenland, joined Feb 2004, 16975 posts, RR: 67
Reply 4, posted (7 years 7 months 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 3021 times:

Quoting Lincoln (Reply 3):
The only people who beleive that any machinery works percisely every time are sales people. Anything with moving parts (and most things without moving parts) will eventually break in some way. (Or maybe I'm just getting too jaded).

So true about the salespeople. Also, moving parts are optional. software has no moving parts but breaks down just fine in my experience. Big grin



"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots."
User currently offlineDeltaGuy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (7 years 7 months 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 3012 times:

Not to mention, pushbacks as you well know oftentimes vary....tail south....tail north....straight back.....180 degrees....goes on and on. An inground sustem couldn't compensate for all the desires of the Captain, and all of the possible scenarios at the airport.

DeltaGuy


User currently offlineVANGUARD737 From United States of America, joined Aug 2001, 682 posts, RR: 4
Reply 6, posted (7 years 7 months 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 3007 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

There are plenty of "what-ifs" here, as with EVERY new invention and idea. I think it's important to think of how these issues could be tackled rather than crap on the idea before testing it - but that's just me!  Smile


A.netter's have a habit for pecimism...granted lol



320 717 722 732 733 735 737 738 744 752 753 763 772 DC9 DC10 MD80 B1900 S340 E120 ERJ CRJ CR7
User currently offlineEx52tech From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 559 posts, RR: 1
Reply 7, posted (7 years 7 months 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 2983 times:

Quoting VANGUARD737 (Reply 6):
issues could be tackled rather than crap on the idea before testing it - but that's just me!

Your not getting sensative on us.......are ya.
The airplane would have to be lined up perfectly in order for it to be pushed back straight, or in order for the system to allign with the nose wheel tow lug. Which wouldn't be a problem for most of the "perfect" pilots that I've met. How about ice and snow? How about the people you put out of work?



"Saddest thing I ever witnessed....an airplane being scrapped"
User currently offlineHAWK21M From India, joined Jan 2001, 31660 posts, RR: 56
Reply 8, posted (7 years 7 months 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 2951 times:

What about in case of malfunction.What Back up.
regds
MEL



Think of the brighter side!
User currently offlineJetMech From Australia, joined Mar 2006, 2684 posts, RR: 53
Reply 9, posted (7 years 7 months 2 days ago) and read 2939 times:

Quoting VANGUARD737 (Thread starter):
What do you think?

I very vaguely seem to remember some sort of system similar to your idea already in operation. I think it was in Scandinavia somewhere and was being used for ground handling of DC9 / MD80 type aircraft?

Regards, JetMech



JetMech split the back of his pants. He can feel the wind in his hair.
User currently offlineTristarSteve From Sweden, joined Nov 2005, 3971 posts, RR: 34
Reply 10, posted (7 years 7 months 2 days ago) and read 2937 times:

Quoting VANGUARD737 (Thread starter):
an in-ground system at every gate similar to the wheel-locking mechanism on aircraft carriers.

There is one at ARN Terminal 2 on gate 63. It was designed to do straight pushbacks only, which are the norm here. The system was installed as a trial when the terminal was built 15 years ago, but is not in use today. Also in T2 on gate 67 is a built in Fuel dispenser. This is also not used, but is in working order. The refueller uses a magnet to raise a box from the ground hydraulically, and it contains the hoses and control panel to refuel the aircraft.
Both systems were installed by the airport authority, who wanted the handling agents to pay rent to use them. They declined, and they are not in use.
ARN T2 was built on the principle of no vehicles on the ramp. There are boxes built into the ground which are raised hydraulically and can provide water and toilet service, ground power, air conditioning, and engine start air. The engine start is supplied from an enormous tank underground, pressurised by electric compressors. It is silent in operation!!!
There were also baggage delivery conveyors to each gate, and rollers that could be pulled out so the bags went straight from check in to hold.
Unfortunately, two years after the terminal opened, SAS pulled out and it was converted from domestic to international and most systems went out of use.
But we still use the ground power, air condtioning, and water service from the underground supplies.
The designers of LHR T5 came to look at it, and were very impressed, but decided that it was too expensive and are only going to install ground power and air conditioning.


User currently offlineJetMech From Australia, joined Mar 2006, 2684 posts, RR: 53
Reply 11, posted (7 years 7 months 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 2824 times:

Quoting TristarSteve (Reply 10):
There is one at ARN Terminal 2 on gate 63. It was designed to do straight pushbacks only, which are the norm here.

Hey TristarSteve  Smile. How exactly does this system work? It sounds like a good idea but I am having trouble figuring out how any backwards movement is achieved. The only way I can think of so far to achieve a push-back is if the system pushes back by gripping the main undercarriage  Confused

Regards, JetMech



JetMech split the back of his pants. He can feel the wind in his hair.
User currently offlinePPVRA From Brazil, joined Nov 2004, 8927 posts, RR: 40
Reply 12, posted (7 years 7 months 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 2787 times:

What about extending this system all the way to the runways?

Cuts fuel consumption by a lot considering how many times I've spent over 30 minutes waiting for take-off on busy airports.

Two or three minutes before take-off (completely predictable - unless weather is the issue), the pilot fires off the engines and soon after takes-off.

Nearly all ground incidents/accidents could be avoided while saving money and pollution.



"If goods do not cross borders, soldiers will" - Frederic Bastiat
User currently offlineStarlionblue From Greenland, joined Feb 2004, 16975 posts, RR: 67
Reply 13, posted (7 years 7 months 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 2770 times:

Quoting PPVRA (Reply 12):
What about extending this system all the way to the runways?

Cuts fuel consumption by a lot considering how many times I've spent over 30 minutes waiting for take-off on busy airports.

Two or three minutes before take-off (completely predictable - unless weather is the issue), the pilot fires off the engines and soon after takes-off.

There was a thread about this. Or at least about tugs all the way. Imagine the infrastructure. And what if a plane has to turn back when it's on the rail?

Quoting PPVRA (Reply 12):

Nearly all ground incidents/accidents could be avoided while saving money and pollution.

As was stated before, unless you use clean energy you are simply moving the pollution elsewhere. As for money savings, I don't know. The investment would be huge.



"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots."
User currently offlineA346Dude From Canada, joined Nov 2004, 1276 posts, RR: 7
Reply 14, posted (7 years 7 months 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 2765 times:

Quoting Starlionblue (Reply 13):
As was stated before, unless you use clean energy you are simply moving the pollution elsewhere.

True, but as the electricity would be produced at a large generating station with higher efficiency than tugs, the net pollution should be reduced.



You know the gear is up and locked when it takes full throttle to taxi to the terminal.
User currently offlineCirrusDriver From United States of America, joined Nov 2006, 141 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (7 years 7 months 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 2719 times:

FUNNY that you should bring this up!! I work for UAL in PHX. I spoke to an engineer for the city of PHX who was out at T2. I asked him about a pushback system almost exactly like the one you mentioned, like that on an A/c carrier. His response was, "have you every seen that system below the deck of an aircraft carrier"? It would be far to expensive to build and maintain, was the point he was making. I agree with the concept though.

User currently offlineTristarSteve From Sweden, joined Nov 2005, 3971 posts, RR: 34
Reply 16, posted (7 years 7 months 21 hours ago) and read 2681 times:

Quoting JetMech (Reply 11):
Hey TristarSteve . How exactly does this system work? It sounds like a good idea but I am having trouble figuring out how any backwards movement is achieved. The only way I can think of so far to achieve a push-back is if the system pushes back by gripping the main undercarriage

No, it works on the nosewheel.
I have never seen it used, but I have seen the unit. There is a steel track down the centreline. A machine sits on this track. It looks like a box about 2mx1mx1m, and attaches to the nose gear. It moves down the track and pushes the aircraft out. The attach point moves left and right inside the box to keep the aircraft on the centreline.
Like most of the technology tried on this terminal, I think the investment is too high for the savings.


User currently offlineJetMech From Australia, joined Mar 2006, 2684 posts, RR: 53
Reply 17, posted (7 years 7 months 20 hours ago) and read 2670 times:

Quoting TristarSteve (Reply 16):
The attach point moves left and right inside the box to keep the aircraft on the centreline.

What a clever arrangement! I had vague thoughts along the lines of such a device but was not too sure if it would work. Do you know how the system senses that the plane may be getting off the centre-line?

I don't know how I recalled the existence of such a system. All I remember is that many years ago I saw some photo of a DC9 on a frosty day and the mention of some sort of automated system  scratchchin . I somehow associated it with a location in Scandinavia.

Regards, JetMech



JetMech split the back of his pants. He can feel the wind in his hair.
User currently offlineJAGflyer From Canada, joined Aug 2004, 3492 posts, RR: 4
Reply 18, posted (7 years 7 months 17 hours ago) and read 2633 times:

Wouldnt the plane have to be taxiied EXACTLY into position for it to work? I dont think this would work.


Support the beer and soda can industry, recycle old airplanes!
User currently offlineTristarSteve From Sweden, joined Nov 2005, 3971 posts, RR: 34
Reply 19, posted (7 years 7 months 15 hours ago) and read 2620 times:

Quoting JAGflyer (Reply 18):
Wouldnt the plane have to be taxiied EXACTLY into position for it to work? I dont think this would work

Yes, but our gates are all self parking with centreline and stop guidance. The aircraft are Always on the centreline within 10cm., and 99% stop on the stopline. We have jetbridges that only go in and ouit, so accurate parking is a neccessity.


User currently offlineReidYYZ From Kyrgyzstan, joined Sep 2005, 536 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (7 years 6 months 4 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 2500 times:

My first thought was problems with snow, slush, ice or freezing rain. Was it a problem in ARN before they stopped using it?

Quoting TristarSteve (Reply 10):
There is one at ARN Terminal 2 on gate 63


User currently offlineUnited767 From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 356 posts, RR: 5
Reply 21, posted (7 years 6 months 4 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 2472 times:

I thinkits a good concept, but being on the ramp aside from the 1 or 2 pushes a week that are nerve racking, it is the part of the job I enjoy the most. I would miss it.


I wish UA flew mainline to MYR, that way you wouldn't be stuck in a smelly Saturn for 12 hours.
User currently offlineRatzz From Sweden, joined Sep 1999, 198 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (7 years 6 months 2 weeks 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 2330 times:

-The fixed pushback system at ARN worked like a clockwork since the ramparea is heated so it never freezes,it just gets wet.
-The system acutally was in use as late as 1994,after wich a minor incident happend as a 40 ton Paymover accidentaly bumped into it and the unit was removed shortly after that.

-When it come to all the other equippment stowed away undernieth the ramp,all gates at terminal 2 with the exception of gate 69,has servicing pillboxes for water,waste,aircondtioning,heating,startair,ac power,and fuel.
-The only ones never used today is waste and fuel.


Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic My Idea For Push-Back Ops...
Username:
No username? Sign up now!
Password: 


Forgot Password? Be reminded.
Remember me on this computer (uses cookies)
  • Tech/Ops related posts only!
  • Not Tech/Ops related? Use the other forums
  • No adverts of any kind. This includes web pages.
  • No hostile language or criticizing of others.
  • Do not post copyright protected material.
  • Use relevant and describing topics.
  • Check if your post already been discussed.
  • Check your spelling!
  • DETAILED RULES
Add Images Add SmiliesPosting Help

Please check your spelling (press "Check Spelling" above)


Similar topics:More similar topics...
Reason For A Long Push-back? posted Tue Mar 25 2003 14:34:26 by Srilankan_340
My Apologies For My Boring Tech/Ops Topics posted Sat Jan 12 2002 10:24:44 by Lehpron
Push-back Using Main Gear?! posted Mon Apr 17 2006 21:58:05 by A342
My Proposal For Reducing Impact Of Wake Vortices posted Thu Apr 6 2006 05:20:00 by Lehpron
Push-back Mishap? posted Sat Jan 7 2006 03:46:29 by Amtrosie
Push Back Onto Runway posted Sun Nov 6 2005 08:40:03 by Kerberos
Would This Be Possible (idea For Taxi Power) posted Fri Mar 11 2005 02:56:59 by JumboJim747
Any Aircaft Use Reversers To Push Back? posted Thu May 13 2004 02:07:39 by TriJetFan1
Push Back/Towing Question posted Fri Feb 6 2004 12:59:13 by HAWK21M
Noise After Push Back posted Sat Jan 3 2004 03:02:34 by Lamyl_HHLCO

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format