Sponsor Message:
Aviation Technical / Operations Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
LH 320 E-taxi (Electric Motors On MLGs)  
User currently offlineTK773 From Turkey, joined Apr 2013, 19 posts, RR: 0
Posted (1 year 3 months 1 week 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 5039 times:

Hello all,

I am a new member to Airliners.net, and this is my first post. I did a search on the past forums, with no avail on this topic. I thought it would be interesting to share.

Though the article is old (dated December, 2011) I was wondering if there are any updates on this project? With airlines squeezed by ever-rising fuel prices, could this soon be a possible solution to taxi to the runway in order to save on fuel? Can it justify the cost-beneficiaries of the added weight of electric motors? From the tests conducted, it seems as though the pilots were very happy with its responsiveness.

Here is the link:

http://www.flightglobal.com/news/art...g-with-e-taxi-demonstrator-365815/


Enjoy!

TK773

9 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineglbltrvlr From United States of America, joined Oct 2007, 699 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (1 year 3 months 1 week 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 4889 times:

You can find a reasonably current summary of e-taxi developments here: http://www.airtrafficmanagement.net/2013/03/hail-and-ride/

The biggest problem is economics. As you've noted, the weight and cost of fitting such a system is a pretty severe penalty. Engines require a minimum run time in the neighborhood of 3 minutes prior to takeoff which limits the situations where etaxi helps, plus the extra weight applies to all flight time, which means extra fuel burn.

From a purely economic perspective, it would seem that a battery powered tug, possibly remote controlled from the cockpit would make the most sense, but there are other factors that come into play.


User currently offlineFlyDeltaJets From United States of America, joined Feb 2006, 1847 posts, RR: 2
Reply 2, posted (1 year 3 months 1 week 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 4448 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting glbltrvlr (Reply 1):
takeoff which limits the situations where etaxi helps

I don't think it would be that limited. More than half of JetBlue flights would surely benefit from a no-engine taxi in the JFK conga line.



The only valid opinions are those based in facts
User currently offlineTK773 From Turkey, joined Apr 2013, 19 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (1 year 3 months 1 week 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 4233 times:

Quoting glbltrvlr (Reply 1):

Thank you for your link and ideas glbltrvlr  


User currently offlineEMBQA From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 9364 posts, RR: 11
Reply 4, posted (1 year 3 months 1 week 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 4170 times:

No it would not work. The added weight of the motors alone would be astronomical.


"It's not the size of the dog in the fight, but the size of the fight in the dog"
User currently offlineIFixPlanes From Germany, joined Feb 2005, 239 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (1 year 3 months 1 week 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 3907 times:

There is a difference between these 2 versions.
The system installed at the Germania A/C only replace the tug. No other function - so it is additional weight.
The system Lufthansa (together with L-3) is going to develop - 2 regular brakes are replaced by 2 electric motors which can be used to replace the tug during ground maneuvers AND they will be used as a brake during landing.



never tell an engineer he is wrong ;-)
User currently offlineB6JFKH81 From United States of America, joined Mar 2006, 2873 posts, RR: 7
Reply 6, posted (1 year 3 months 1 week 20 hours ago) and read 3789 times:

Quoting FlyDeltaJets (Reply 2):
More than half of JetBlue flights would surely benefit from a no-engine taxi in the JFK conga line.

Not as much anymore. With the way things have changed at JFK, you don't even push back from the gate to get into the "conga line" that often anymore....even in IROPS. The last flight I had to take was during really nasty weather and departing during the morning rush at JFK, we were held at the gate for 20 minutes after boarding was completely done (no technical issue or anything, it was just a gate hold). When we pushed back and started up, I was surprised to hear both engines crank. It was a 3 minute taxi to 22R and we were off. A few years ago, it would have taken 20+ minutes in those conditions to taxi out. Now, they just hold you at the gate quite often. Last summer there were still some nasty "conga lines" when t-storms rolled through during the afternoon rush hours though...but not as bad as previous years.



"If you do not learn from history, you are doomed to repeat it"
User currently offlinecornutt From United States of America, joined Jan 2013, 338 posts, RR: 1
Reply 7, posted (1 year 3 months 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 3511 times:

How would air conditioning be provided while on electric taxi? I'd hate to be stuck in the line at ATL in July without any air conditioning.

User currently offlineB6JFKH81 From United States of America, joined Mar 2006, 2873 posts, RR: 7
Reply 8, posted (1 year 3 months 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 3453 times:

Quoting cornutt (Reply 7):
How would air conditioning be provided while on electric taxi? I'd hate to be stuck in the line at ATL in July without any air conditioning.

The same way it is provided when you are at the gate without a GPU....the APU is running to provide the power.



"If you do not learn from history, you are doomed to repeat it"
User currently offlineFlyDeltaJets From United States of America, joined Feb 2006, 1847 posts, RR: 2
Reply 9, posted (1 year 3 months 7 hours ago) and read 2960 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting B6JFKH81 (Reply 6):
Not as much anymore. With the way things have changed at JFK, you don't even push back from the gate to get into the "conga line" that often anymore....even in IROPS.

There is a conga line every night from about 7P - 9P, the morning never really had too bad of a push line until maybe around 9a and it only was for about an hour.



The only valid opinions are those based in facts
Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic LH 320 E-taxi (Electric Motors On MLGs)
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...
Electric Hum On 787 posted Mon Mar 12 2012 13:35:14 by justloveplanes
Taxi-ing Techniques On Multi Engines Such As 747 posted Fri Nov 18 2005 19:37:31 by Julesmusician
Electric Motors For Airliners! posted Mon Aug 1 2005 20:40:03 by Cfalk
Electric Motors And Torque posted Thu Jun 16 2005 03:13:04 by 2H4
Is A Taxi Light Optional On A B732 posted Thu Jan 15 2004 13:16:51 by HAWK21M
Taxi Speed Measurements On MD11 posted Sun Sep 1 2002 01:55:51 by Wardialer
Why No Spinner Painting On LH 748? posted Tue Feb 12 2013 13:47:28 by LZ129
LH MUC-YVR Nonstop On 333? posted Fri Oct 26 2012 05:22:04 by Ferroviarius
Question On A319/320 Refueling Power posted Wed Sep 19 2012 18:05:09 by jim
Electric Wheel Drive On Planes posted Sat Dec 10 2011 15:15:01 by tommytoyz

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format